Æóðíàë Viche 2014 ¹18

¹18, 2014

Objectivity of Examination of a Criminal Event at the Stage of Pretrial Proceedings Is Impossible without Freedom of Thought and Action of the Subject to Conduct an Investigation

The institute of pretrial proceedings under a new Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine is studied. Rules of criminal procedural legislation on a procedural form of pretrial investigation; powers of an investigator and their relationships with a prosecutor and a head of the investigative unit are analyzed. A number of irregularities of the normative regulation of social relations practically arising during pretrial investigation and relating to significant restrictions of procedural independence and autonomy of an investigator are detected. The author points out some rules of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine of 1960 which could effectively have been applied in such situations.r
Appropriate suggestions for improvement of current legislation regarding the procedural status of an investigator are made.r
Keywords: investigator, prosecutor, head of the investigative unit, pretrial investigation, investigative examination of a criminal event.r

References

1. B³lenchuk P. (2013) ‘Metodoloh³chn³ zasady naukovogo zabezpechennia krym³nalnoho provadzhennia [Methodological principles of scientific support of the criminal proceedings], Viche 14: 13­15.

2. Bobrytsky L. V. (2013) ‘Problemn³ pytannia provedennia neglasnykh sl³dchikh (rozshukovykh) d³i pry rozsl³duvann³ zlochin³v, uchinenykh organ³zovanymy ugrupuvanniamy, u kontekst³ novogo protsesualnogo zakonodavstva’ [Problematic issues on covert investigative (detective) actions while investigating crimes committed by organized groups in the context of new procedural legislation], Borotba z organ³zovanoiu zlochinn³stiu i korupts³ieiu (teor³ia i praktyka) 2 (30): 3­8.

3. Romaniuk B. V. (2011) Udoskonalennia dosudovogo provadzhennia v Ukrain³ [Improvement of pretrial proceedings in Ukraine], Kyiv: MNDTS.

4. Rudenko M. and P³vnenko V. (2013) ‘Pro sutn³st prokurorskoho protsesualnoho ker³vnytstva dosudovym rozsl³duvanniam’ [On the essence of prosecutor procedural management of pretrial investigation], Iurydychny chasopys Nats³onalnoi akademii vnutr³shn³kh sprav 1:
277­283.

5. Teplov B. M. (1961) Problemy individualnykh razlichii [Problems of individual differences], Moscow: Izd­vo APN RSFSR.

6. Tyshchenko S. (2013) ‘Subiekty vzaiemod³i storony obvynuvachennia pid chas dosudovogo rozsl³duvannia’ [Subjects of interaction of the prosecution during the preliminary investigation], Visnyk prokuratury 1: 49­54.

7. Iurchyshyn V. M. (2013) M³stse i rol prokurora v dosudovomu rozsl³duvann³ ta ikh v³dobrazhennia v teor³i, zakonodavstv³ i praktyts³: Monograf³ia [Place and role of a prosecutor in the pretrial investigation and their reflection in theory, legislation, and practice: Monograph], Chernivtsi: ‘Rodovid’.

Bohdan ROMANIUK