Current Criminal Procedural Legislation Research Articles

The Interaction of the Investigator with the Body of Inquiry During the Investigation of Crimes in Criminal Cases of Extremism: The Problems and Ways of Their Solving

Introduction: the issues of interaction of the investigator, as the central figure in the process of investigating crimes of extremism, continue to be the object of attention of scientists and practitioners. And this is not surprising, because the state of interaction of the investigator with the body of inquiry, the representatives of other services and departments, first of all, the law enforcement agencies directly depends on the speed of solving and the completeness of the investigation of each committed extremist crime, and this, in turn, affects the prestige of law enforcement agencies among the population and, as a result, the level of criminogenic situation. Despite the large number of recommendations available in the legal and specialized literature aimed at improving certain aspects of this type of activity of the person conducting the investigation, the dynamically developing criminal procedure legislation, as well as actively changing the operational-search and investigative practice, provide new food for analyzing the current state of interaction, in order to identify those newly emerging factors that negatively affect the organization and state of interaction of the main subjects of the investigation and which, ultimately, have a negative impact on the course and results of the investigation. In this regard, the authors aim to highlight some problematic issues that arise in the course of organizing and maintaining the proper level of interaction between the investigative body and other subjects of the investigation to ensure the prompt and comprehensive establishment of all the circumstances to be proved. Tasks: to describe the areas of interaction between the investigator and the body of inquiry during the investigation of crimes in cases of extremism; to give recommendations aimed at overcoming these problems. Methods: the methodological framework for the study is a set of methods of scientific knowledge, among which the main ones are the methods of information processing and logical analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction and generalization. Results: the authors’ point of view on the problems associated with the organization of interaction between the investigator and employees of other services and departments of the law enforcement agencies in order to uncover and investigate crimes of extremism, as well as the proposed ways to solve them, based on the analysis of modern operational and investigative practice, trends in the development of the current criminal procedure legislation make it possible to use them in the practical activities of the authorized law enforcement officials in their practical activities aimed at solving and investigating crimes. Conclusions: as a result of the study, the existing problems determined by the changes in the criminal procedure legislation and operational and investigative practice are identified, and the ways to overcome them are proposed in order to inform students in the field of training “Jurisprudence”, teachers of law schools, as well as practitioners in order to better understand the specifics of the investigation of crimes of this category.

Problems of legal regulation of the procedure for extending the term of pretrial investigation

The article concentrates on the analysis of the main provisions of the criminal procedure legislation on the procedure for extending the term of pre-trial investigation. It is established that a pre-trial investigation shall be conducted within the terms set out in Article 219 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine and unjustified extension of the pre-trial investigation leads to the violation of the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of participants in criminal proceedings. It is investigated that the term of pre-trial investigation of a crime can be extended by the prosecutor – supervisor of pre-trial proceedings at the request of the investigator, which the prosecutor is obliged to consider no later than three days from the date of its receipt, but in any case before the expiration of the pre-trial investigation period. It is noted that the prosecutor’s decision to extend the pre-trial investigation or to refuse it is not subject to appeal during the pre-trial investigation. Attention is drawn to the fact that in some cases, investigators apply to the prosecutor with a request to extend the pre-trial investigation period several days before its expiration, which may result in an untimely extension of the specified period by the prosecutor. Therefore, in order to prevent missing the deadline, the investigator orders the suspension of the pre-trial investigation on various grounds, mainly due to the need to perform procedural actions within the framework of international cooperation. It is proved that in most cases, based on the results of consideration of the investigator’s request by the prosecutor, an order is issued to extend such period, while a serious disadvantage of the specified procedure for extending the period is that the prosecutor issues an order to extend the period of pre-trial investigation, which is suspended at the time of such order. It is argued that the current criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine prohibits conducting any investigative actions after the suspension of the pre-trial investigation. Proposals have been made to improve the legal regulation of the procedure for extending the term of pre-trial investigation.

Материальный и процессуальный аспекты принципа non bis in idem в производстве по делам об административных правонарушениях

The essence of the principle of one-time administrative responsibility is considered, its concept and proposals for improving the provisions of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation are formulated. The conclusions are based on the provisions of the legislation on administrative offenses, the legal positions of the highest courts of the Russian Federation, the European Court of Human Rights, a comparative analysis of the current criminal and criminal procedure legislation. The operation of the principle non bis in idem in proceedings on the cases of administrative offenses is revealed by highlighting the material and procedural elements that make up its content.

Issues of Legal Regulation of Applying Coercive Measures of Medical Nature in International and Legal Acts and Legislation of Certain Foreign Countries

The author has researched the main provisions of legal regulation in international and legal acts and national laws of some European Union countries and other foreign countries, where the possible application of coercive measures of a medical nature by courts, as well as decisions of the European Court of Human Rights on this category of criminal proceedings are regulated. The basic provisions, norms and differences of legal regulation of the application of coercive measures of medical nature in the legislation of certain foreign countries have been established. The implementation of international legal acts into national criminal, criminal procedural and other legislation has been analyzed. Based on the results of the research, the author has formulated a number of propositions and recommendations for the introduction into the legislative technique of Ukraine. Besides, the author has studied national theoretical issues of criminal law and criminal proceedings, as well as applied issues in this area of the research within law-enforcement activities of pre-trial investigation and inquiry agencies, prosecutor’s office and, in particular, procedural commissioners of pre-trial investigation. The scientific views of individual scholars and representatives of scientific schools on the researched issues have been also considered, and the relevant author’s opinions have been expressed. The author has characterized joint law-enforcement activities, problematic issues of law enforcement agencies and psychiatric medical institutions during the pre-trial investigation of criminal proceedings of this category, problematic issues and the existing system for providing psychiatric care to insane persons, as well as certain areas of cooperation in criminal and judicial proceedings. According to the results of the study, the author has suggested a number of propositions and recommendations for improving the theory of criminal law and criminal proceedings, law-enforcement activity and current criminal and criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine.

ISSUES AND PROSPECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT IN SIMPLIFYING THE PRE-TRIAL INVESTIGATION

The article deals with the problematic issues of pre-trial investigation of criminal offenses, under investigation by the units of the National Police of Ukraine, have not been studied in the scientific literature. The author of the article points out the problems of the legal status of a head of an inquest body, the author's definition of this term is given and proposed changes to the current criminal procedural legislation, which should eliminate legal gaps. Considered the inconsistencies of the current criminal procedural legislation in terms of regulating the order of attachment for seizure of the property during the pre-trial investigation of criminal offenses. Analyzed judicial practice on this issue and proposed changes to legislation according to the needs of practice, what consist release from a duty side of prosecution to apply with a solicitor about the arrest of property during pre-trial investigation of criminal misconducts. With the aim of non-admission of abuses of law enforcement authorities by the right, it offers in the head of 25 criminal procedural code of Ukraine to envisage a right for persons in that property is temporally withdrawn or such property belongs that, apply in a court with a solicitor about verification of validity of exception and storage of material proofs by the side of prosecution and to require a transmission on storage to them of such material proofs. The drawbacks are noted in establishing the terms of pre-trial investigation of criminal offenses, which are caused by the need to conduct psychiatric and other forensic examinations, it is proposed to provide in the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine for an inquiry period of 2 months from the moment a person is informed of suspicion. The author's specified legal inconsistencies in the issue of regulating the conduct of a search during an inquiry, it is indicated that there is a need to standardize Articles 234–236 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Due to fact that the activities of the inquest bodies of the National Police of Ukraine are noticeably inefficient, it is proposed to introduce a shortened inquiry procedure in order to implement the principle of economy in the criminal process and saving resources used during the pre-trial investigation.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FUNCTIONS AND POWERS OF THE PROSECUTOR AS FACTORS DETERMINING THE SPECIFICS OF PROSECUTOR's SUPERVISION IN PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDINGS

The article analyzes the opinions of scientists expressed during the scientific discussion that unfolded around the issue of criminal procedure functions of the Prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings. Provides additional arguments in favor of supervision of execution of laws as the main function of the Prosecutor under the Law on the Prosecutor determines other types of prosecutorial activities (criminal prosecution, the preliminary investigation, etc.) that are supportive in nature. These types of Prosecutor's activities are not only ways to specify Prosecutor's supervision in criminal proceedings, but also means of implementing the criminal procedure function of the prosecution, which exists according to the concept of the current criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, focused on the adversarial process, along with the function of protection and the function of resolving criminal cases. The article also addresses the issue of granting additional powers to the Prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings. It is proved that the decision to grant additional powers to the Prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings should create opportunities to maintain the necessary balance in pre-trial proceedings between Prosecutor's supervision, departmental control and judicial control. Evidence is given that the harmonious existence of Prosecutor's supervision and departmental control in pre-trial proceedings will allow us to count on overcoming existing violations of the law in the investigation of crimes, which currently remain many.

The Court as a Subject of Examination and Evaluation of Evidence in Criminal Proceedings

The reform of the criminal procedure legislation and the judicial system of Ukraine actualises the need to clarify the boundaries of the court’s activity in criminal proceedings, its role in collecting, verifying, and evaluating evidence to establish circumstances relevant to criminal proceedings. The purpose of the study is to investigate the provisions of the current criminal procedure legislation in terms of examination and evaluation of evidence by the court. A system of general scientific and special research methods was used to achieve the goals set, including dialectical, system and structural, statistical, and system analysis methods. It is proved that within the framework of judicial proceedings, a judge, as a subject of examination and evaluation of evidence, carries out certain research activities. It is proved that this activity is aimed at establishing circumstances and reproducing certain fragments of reality that prove or refute the facts, which results in the formation of an internal conviction in the judge and, ultimately, a court decision. The priority importance of such a basis of criminal proceedings as the immediacy of the examination of testimony, items, and documents is emphasised, which contributes to the full clarification of the circumstances of the proceedings and its objective solution. The study results will contribute to the development of the justice system, considering the best international practices in the context of adversarial criminal proceedings, ensuring the correct and timely consideration of criminal proceedings

TOPICAL ASPECTS OF DCFTA IMPLEMENTATION IN THE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS

The Association Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine is a new format of relations aimed at creating a deep and comprehensive free trade area (DCFTA) between Ukraine and the EU with the gradual integration of Ukraine into the internal market of the European Union. Focusing on the experience of rule-making of the EU member states, it is necessary to define and implement the legal rules and principles of the national judiciary, taking into account the rules and principles of European law (Chornomaz, 2016). In accordance with the strategy of European integration of our country, the adaptation of Ukrainian legislation is to approximate it with the modern European legal system, which will ensure the development of the political, entrepreneurial, social, cultural activity of Ukrainian citizens, economic development of the state within the EU to facilitate the increase of standards of living of the population. The implementation of the provisions of European legislation provided by the economic part of the Association Agreement (AA) is extremely important in the context of reforms, as the provisions can and should serve as a basis for a new model of socio-economic development of Ukraine. The deepening of the processes of humanization and democratization of Ukrainian society, the gradual introduction of principles and rules of European law into the national judiciary through reforms in the field of justice, inter alia, have led to qualitative updating of criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine, in particular: use of differentiated approach to legal conflicts between persons who have committed criminal offences, which do not pose a great public danger, and victims; simplification and reduction of the procedure of criminal proceedings; ensuring procedural savings; reduction of the caseload; allowing the parties of the conflict to resolve issues of exemption from criminal liability in case of reconciliation between the offender and the victim independently, the appointment of the negotiated punishment and release from serving with probation, etc. Given the specifics of the approach to improving relations with neighbouring countries on a differentiated basis, the EU seeks to identify and base on existing positive sources of sustainability, as well as to monitor and respond to weaknesses with the appropriate set of methods and resources at its disposal. The purpose of the article is to study a theoretical and practical definition of challenges of adaptation of Ukrainian legislation to the legislation of the European Union, institutional and organizational mechanisms of DCFTA implementation in the field of justice and certain norms of the current criminal procedure legislation. Ukraine is undergoing the second phase of radical reform of government structures; it has been continuing for 15 years but, unlike other countries, it is much more difficult for Ukraine to get rid of the burden of past problems. Judicial reform is also underway and domestic legislation is being significantly changed, including the transformation of the judicial proceedings. The topical issue of the development of judicial reforms is an imperfection, and sometimes a contradiction of regulations, which negatively affects the process of realization of rights and responsibilities of all subjects of public relations, slows down the development of Ukraine as a state governed by the rule of law. However, the introduction of institutions of concluding agreements, simplified proceedings, probation, and later mediation, into the criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine indicates the readiness of our state to change the concept of criminal procedure in accordance with the European standards, which will improve the situation of all parties to criminal proceedings. However, they need further completion and improvement. We are convinced that the introduction of such institutions will contribute to the legal development of society to achieve the European standards of restorative justice, which will encourage the further introduction of the latter in the legislation of Ukraine, resolving criminal conflicts by reaching a compromise between parties in cases specified by law. One of the ways to solve this problem in Ukraine is to regulate the process of adoption of regulations by the subjects of rule-making and taking into account the provision that legality as an objective property of law, in general, is the necessary condition and the main principle of the rule-making process.

Features of the appointment and implementation procedure forensic examinations under the current criminal procedural legislation

Features of the appointment and implementation procedure forensic examinations under the current criminal procedural legislation

До питання своєчасності окремих кримінальних процесуальних рішень досудового розслідування

The article is devoted to the analysis of the timeliness of the notification of suspicion and the indictment. Based onthe analysis of the characteristic features of the criminal procedural decision, it was concluded that the report of suspicioncorresponds to such features. The basis of the report on suspicion in the aspect of ensuring the timeliness of sucha procedural act was investigated. Attention is drawn to the fact that the current criminal procedure legislation in termsof consolidating the procedure for notification of suspicion needs to be improved. It is proposed to exclude paragraph 2of Part 1 of Art. 276 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The ECtHR’s approaches to determining the initialmoment of criminal prosecution are analyzed. It is proposed in order to minimize the negative consequences of a personin an uncertain state, among other things, it is necessary to take into account the practice of the ECtHR in determiningthe initiation of prosecution against a particular person. The investigator, the prosecutor must focus on the set of evidenceon the basis of which the assumption of a person’s involvement in a criminal offense can be formulated, rather thancontinue its activities to confirm it until the actual notification of the person of suspicion. The relationship between thetimeliness of the report of suspicion and the indictment was analyzed. It has been argued that delaying the notification ofsuspicion and excessive haste in bringing an indictment and sending the latter to court violates a person’s fundamentalright to defense. It is concluded that in order to assess the timeliness of the indictment, it is necessary to take into accountnot only the terms of this decision and its approval, but also the time of delivery of such a decision to the suspect andsending the indictment to court.Keywords: pre-trial investigation, criminal procedure decision, timeliness, notification of suspicion, indictment.

The problem of determining the procedural form of the accused's testimony

The problem of determining the procedural form of the accused's testimony

ПРОЦЕСУАЛЬНИЙ СТАТУС СЛІДЧОГО: ПРОБЛЕМНІ ПИТАННЯ

The article examines the problematic issues of the procedural status of the investigator, the debatable question of the relationship between the terms «procedural status of the investigator» and «competency of the investigator». The purpose of the article is to study certain problematic issues of the investigator’s procedural status and make proposals for their solution. It is substantiated that the criminal procedural competence of the investigator is the legal envelope of his criminal procedural activity, which determines his criminal procedural status, which is defined by the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. Components of the investigator’s procedural status are the investigator’s functions, the investigator’s subject matter, and the investigator’s powers. The specified elements in their totality make up the content of the concept of «criminal procedural competence of the investigator». It is proven that the scope of criminal procedural competence means its substantive and quantitative content. The limits of the investigator’s competence only outline the circle of its elements, taken together or separately from each other. At the same time, each structural element of its competence has its limit. The investigator has no right to go beyond the procedural function of prosecution. The boundary of the investigator’s authority is the circle of his rights and duties, which the investigator is entitled to use to fulfill the tasks of his criminal procedural activity. The author gives arguments for introducing in all law enforcement agencies instead of the institute of investigators, the institute of detectives. The necessity in the current criminal procedural legislation and laws of Ukraine, which determine the competence of law enforcement agencies, to combine the functions of pre-trial investigation and operational-search activity into a single function of detective activity is substantiated, which will eliminate the problems of interaction between pre-trial investigation bodies and operational units and at the same time increase the effectiveness of law enforcement agencies in implementation of pretrial investigation of criminal offenses, strengthening of guarantees of the rights of all participants in criminal proceedings.

ПРОБЛЕМНІ ПИТАННЯ ТА ПЕРСПЕКТИВИ ВДОСКОНАЛЕННЯ СПРОЩЕНОГО ДОСУДОВОГО РОЗСЛІДУВАННЯ

The article deals with the problematic issues of pre-trial investigation of criminal offenses, under investigation by the units of the National Police of Ukraine, have not been studied in the scientific literature. The author of the article points out the problems of the legal status of a head of an inquest body, the author's definition of this term is given and proposed changes to the current criminal procedural legislation, which should eliminate legal gaps. Considered the inconsistencies of the current criminal procedural legislation in terms of regulating the order of attachment for seizure of the property during the pre-trial investigation of criminal offenses. Analyzed judicial practice on this issue and proposed changes to legislation according to the needs of practice. The drawbacks are noted in establishing the terms of pre-trial investigation of criminal offenses, which are caused by the need to conduct psychiatric and other forensic examinations, it is proposed to provide in the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine for an inquiry period of 2 months from the moment a person is informed of suspicion. The author's specified legal inconsistencies in the issue of regulating the conduct of a search during an inquiry, it is indicated that there is a need to standardize Articles 234–236 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Due to fact that the activities of the inquest bodies of the National Police of Ukraine are noticeably inefficient, it is proposed to introduce a shortened inquiry procedure in order to implement the principle of economy in the criminal process and saving resources used during the pre-trial investigation.The current procedural form of criminal investigation in Ukraine provides for the need to conduct a full range of investigative and procedural actions in a short time, even for obvious criminal offenses, when the suspect unequivocally pleads guilty and compensates for the damage, which has negative consequences. The introduction of an abbreviated procedure for inquiry is possible only for a clearly defined range of criminal offenses, the legislation must approve guarantees to ensure the rights of suspects from law enforcement abuses and the criteria under which an abbreviated form of inquiry is impossible. The study of the possibility of implementing an abbreviated order of inquiry is of practical importance and is an important area for further study.

Abuse of procedural rights under the current criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine

Розумовський, О. Зловживання процесуальними правами за чинним кримінальним процесуальним законодавством України / Олександр Розумовський // Підприємництво, господарство і право. - 2021. - № 4. - С. 247-252.

РОЛЬ ПРОКУРОРА ПРИ ПРОВЕДЕННІ НЕГЛАСНИХ СЛІДЧИХ (РОЗШУКОВИХ) ДІЙ

The article stipulates that the effectiveness of the prosecutor’s establishment of the circumstances that are the subject of evidence in the pre-trial investigation is possible only if the use of an appropriate set of effective means of obtaining evidence. One such means of obtaining evidence by the prosecutor during the pretrial investigation is covert investigative actions. The purpose of the article is to study the peculiarities of the prosecutor’s use as a subject of evidence of covert investigative actions in the pre-trial investigation. Highlight the essential features of investigative action, namely: a) they are measures, ie actions or means to achieve something that have an active nature; b) provided for and regulated by the norms of the CPC; c) is part of procedural actions that have a search-cognitive and certifying nature; d) may be carried out only by authorized entities; e) their course and results are recorded in the relevant procedural documents; e) they are provided by the force of procedural coercion; e) are carried out in order to identify and consolidate factual data and information about their sources in order to obtain evidence in criminal proceedings or to verify this evidence. It is proposed to define the concept of covert investigative (investigative) actions as measures consisting of search and cognitive and identification techniques, information about the fact and methods of which are not subject to disclosure, conducted by the authorized criminal procedural law entity to identify and consolidate factual data and information about their sources for obtaining evidence in criminal proceedings and their verification. It is established that the legal basis for covert investigative actions is, firstly, the relevant articles (provisions) of current criminal procedural legislation governing both the general provisions of covert investigative actions and separately the procedure for relevant investigative actions. Secondly, the legal basis for conducting a covert investigative action is the decision of the investigator, the prosecutor to conduct a covert investigative action, which contains information under Art. 251 of the CPC of Ukraine, or the decision of the investigating judge on permission to conduct a covert investigative action, made on the basis of a request of the investigator, prosecutor (Articles 248, 249 of the CPC of Ukraine). The main reasons for the decision to refuse to grant permission to conduct covert investigative (investigative) actions are outlined.

ГАРАНТІЇ ЗАХИСТУ ЖУРНАЛІСТСЬКИХ ДЖЕРЕЛ ПРИ ЗАСТОСУВАННІ ТИМЧАСОВОГО ДОСТУПУ... ДО РЕЧЕЙ І ДОКУМЕНТІВ

The article is devoted to the study of guarantees of protection of journalistic sources when applying temporary access to things and documents in the criminal procedural law of Ukraine. Based on the analysis of the current criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine, the author defines the subject matter of journalistic secrecy, which is: 1) a source of information; 2) information which is held/received by a journalist or a media outlet with a view to its dissemination or use in their professional activities; 3) any other information (documents, records) which allow establishing a connection between a journalist and a source of information. The author establishes that the lack of proper judicial control over the legality of investigators’ claims, the formal approach to consideration of applications for temporary access to things and documents, and the impossibility of appealing against the relevant rulings on appeal create a risk of disclosure of information in the possession of a media outlet or a journalist and provided to them on condition that the authorship or source of information is not disclosed. It is proved that the use of temporary access to things and documents containing legally protected information, in particular, information in the possession of a media outlet or a journalist and provided to them on condition that the authorship or source of information is not disclosed, without a ruling of an investigating judge or a court is inadmissible. The European Court of Human Rights has determined in a number of decisions that disclosure of sources is acceptable only in exceptional cases when it comes to protecting vital interests. These include cases of sexual abuse of children, disclosure of particularly serious crimes, etc. However, the decision to disclose the source of information must be made by an independent and impartial judicial authority and must contain a detailed justification why the disclosure of journalistic «sources» of information outweighs the journalist’s right to keep them secret. It is important to emphasize the need to eliminate formalism in the consideration of motions for temporary access to things and documents, and especially in cases involving information containing legally protected secrets (in particular, the secrecy of journalistic sources). In such cases, the law requires that the investigating judge find a fair balance between the right to secure criminal proceedings for the purpose of to solve the crime and the right to keep secrets protected by law, in particular the secrecy of journalistic sources (see para. 1, part 1, Article 162, part 6, Article 163 of the CPC of Ukraine). In view of this, the practice of considering such motions within 5–5 minutes should be recognized as unacceptable. motions within 4–5 minutes, as this does not allow for a thorough familiarization with the case file, conduct an appropriate analysis, and make a reasoned decision.

Общие и специальные теории уголовного процесса

The relevance of the article can be determined on the basis of research on general theories of criminal procedure. The main theoretical provisions of the criminal procedure of continental Europe began to be developed in 1864, after the adoption of the Charter of the Criminal Proceedings of Russia. Theoretical developments included a conceptual approach that defined guarantees for the rights, freedoms and interests of participants in the procedure, basic principles, forms of evidence and proving, the procedure for investigative and judicial actions. The aim of the article is to reveal the theoretical content of the general theory of the procedure and to determine new special theories enshrined in the current legislation. If general theories of the procedure have been considered at the level of monographic research, special ones have remained outside the scope of studies. The novelty of the research consists in the disclosure of theoretical and practical aspects of general and special theories of criminal procedure on the basis of existing legislation and the practice of its application by criminal justice authorities and the collegiate court. The article considers the theoretical aspects of a special theory. Issues of the optimization and procedural economy of criminal procedure based on benchmark theory are related to the release of a person from criminal liability and the use of alternative measures. New legal definitions are proposed that establish a clear mechanism for procedural, investigative (search), judicial actions in establishing, securing, evaluating evidence of guilt or innocence of a person. The existing legal constructions of general theories provide an impetus for the application of special theories of criminal procedure, which are associated with solving the problems of criminal proceedings, its optimization, and procedural economy of applying criminal procedural repression. The current criminal procedural law does not fully define the concept of general and special theories of the procedure. The article proposes theoretical aspects and practical solutions to these emerging problematic issues. The basic concept of the article includes the analysis of general and special theories of criminal procedure, the determination of the provisions for its optimization and procedural economy on the basis of the unified content of criminal and procedural rules in establishing circumstances related to the closure of criminal proceedings, and the release of a person from criminal liability. Based on the analysis of the current criminal procedural legislation, the content of procedural repressions, which are determined on the basis of the procedural status of prosecution and the mechanism of their application with respect to a particular category of participants in criminal proceedings, is revealed.

ОСОБЛИВОСТІ ПРОЦЕСУАЛЬНОГО ПОРЯДКУ ДОСУДОВОГО РОЗСЛІДУВАННЯ У КРИМІНАЛЬНИХ ПРОВАДЖЕННЯХ ЩОДО НАРОДНИХ ДЕПУТАТІВ УКРАЇНИ

The article provides a comprehensive study of theoretical and practical problems of pre-trial investigation in criminal proceedings against people’s deputies of Ukraine, given the regulations of current criminal procedure legislation and the theory of criminal procedure law of Ukraine. It is emphasized that the current legislation of Ukraine, which regulates the activities of the People’s Deputy of Ukraine, is based on the principles of traditional law and bears the imprint of the totalitarian past, so now it can not fully ensure the effectiveness of the institution of inviolability, leading to violations of human rights and freedoms. Criminal proceedings against a People’s Deputy of Ukraine may be carried out only under the condition of the procedural guidance of the Prosecutor General (acting Prosecutor General) or the Deputy Prosecutor General – the head of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office and can be initiated only when there is sufficient evidence to indicate signs of a criminal offense, and the adequacy of the data is assessed in each case according to the internal convictions of the investigator. The main condition for the notification of suspicion against people’s deputies is the availability of sufficient evidence. The procedural procedure for summoning an investigator, prosecutor, summons during a pre-trial investigation in criminal proceedings against people’s deputies of Ukraine is a set of procedural actions to draw up a summons (another document), send and serve it in the manner prescribed by procedural law, confirm receipt of summons, meet deadlines notification of the person about the call, as well as the procedural consequences of non-appearance on the call. The procedural position of the suspect-People’s Deputy of Ukraine must be considered in accordance with the procedural conditions. The general legal basis for the application of measures to ensure criminal proceedings is the decision of the investigating judge on the basis of an agreed request for their application with the Prosecutor General (acting person of the Prosecutor General). Exceptions are certain measures to ensure criminal proceedings, which can be applied without the decision of the investigating judge. The directions of improvement of the procedural order of decision-making on the beginning of pre-trial investigation of criminal offenses committed by the People’s Deputy of Ukraine on the basis of entering information into the Unified Register of pre-trial investigations, resolving issues of jurisdiction, notification of suspicion, application of criminal proceedings.

МЕСТО И РОЛЬ ЛИЦА, ЗАКЛЮЧИВШЕГО ДОСУДЕБНОЕ СОГЛАШЕНИЕ, В СИСТЕМЕ УЧАСТНИКОВ УГОЛОВНОГО СУДОПРОИЗВОДСТВА

The issues of specifying the procedural status of a person who concluded a pre-trial cooperation agreement are currently of research and practical interest. The divergence in settling some procedural aspects (starting with identifying the place and the role of the considered participant in the criminal proceedings and finishing with the feasibility of using the received information in evidence) brings to nothing the possibility of active participation of this person in the criminal case consideration. The authors attempt to analyze the most acute problems of determining the procedural status of the named subject of criminal proceedings to identify possible directions to improve criminal procedure law. To achieve target goals, the authors both analyzed the provisions of current criminal procedure legislation and considered the most interesting suggestions of scientists-processualists and practitioners on the improvement of legislative formulations describing the status of a person concluded a pre-trial cooperation agreement. Apart from this, the authors considered the history of the origin of this subject in the current national criminal procedure, showed the inconsistency of this figure in the current configuration of competitive criminal procedure. The authors propose introducing amendments to the texts of Articles 5, 74 of the RF Code of Criminal Procedure and discuss the necessity of moving Article 56.1 of the RF Code of Criminal Procedure to another chapter of the Code. Otherwise, according to the authors’ opinion, the participation of persons who concluded a pre-trial cooperation agreement in the criminal procedure will still rouse the censure of practitioners and face just criticism of the scientists-processualists.

Features of informatization of the criminal process in the context of the pandemic: New challenges

The article analyses the features of the application of the current criminal procedural legislation in practice in the context of the new coronavirus infection (COVID-19) after recognizing it as a disease that poses a danger to others, the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of April 08, 2020 and Reviews on certain issues of judicial practice related to the application of legislation and measures to counter the spread of the new coronavirus infection in the Russian Federation of April 21, 2020 and April 30, 2020. However, the difficulties that have arisen in law enforcement practice, also assessed in the article, indicate that criminal procedural legislation will be adjusted in the near future since the number of Decisions of the Presidium and the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation are not sufficient to eliminate ambiguities and contradictions in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. In particular, the article reflects such key problems as the emerging system of procedural decisions at the pre-trial and trial stages in a pandemic, the possibility of considering not only criminal cases but also case materials using videoconferencing systems as well as the prevailing and optimal understanding by law enforcement agencies of the category “urgency” of such consideration. The authors pay special attention to the absence in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation of the concepts introduced by paragraph “m” Art. 7 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation such as “information technologies” and “digital data turnover”. The results of the study make it possible to formulate proposals for improving criminal procedural regulation in terms of the described problems.