Is it always worth rushing slowly or some issues of urgent investigative actions

Authors

  • Іван Андрійович Тітко Полтавський юридичний інститут Національного юридичного університету імені Ярослава Мудрого, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4126-6967
  • Андрій Володимирович Скрипник Національний юридичний університет імені Ярослава Мудрого, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4979-2152

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21564/2414-990x.150.205588

Keywords:

search, emergencies, urgent application, judicial control

Abstract

The article reveals the features of the subsequent judicial control over the legality of the search and inspection in urgent cases under Part 3 of Article 233 of the CPC of Ukraine, in particular related to the requirement of immediate appeal to the investigating judge with a request.An attempt is made to look at the outlined problem through the prism of its understanding in judicial practice, addressing the needs of the achievements of criminal procedural science.

Based on the materials of practice: a) three approaches to the qualification of the urgency requirement are highlighted (the next day after the search; the next working day after the search; indefinite procedural deadline); b) the valid reasons for missing the deadline, which are recognized by the courts are distinguished (identification of the premises owner; inspection of the seized property; involvement of procedural managers in other law enforcement activities). As a result of critical comprehension of the found positions it is offered: a) not to consider the category “urgency” as procedural deadline; b) recognize the impossibility of calculating, omitting and renewing such a “deadline”; c) to perceive urgency as an evaluative concept. 

Due to the lack of a deadline for urgent appeal, it is recommended: 1) to amend the second sentence of part three of Art. 233 of the CPC, fixing the maximum period (“immediately, but not later than 24 hours”); 2) determine whether the requirement of urgency has been complied with, taking into account three criteria: a) the period that has elapsed since the urgent search before applying to the investigating judge; b) the seriousness of the reason that led to its duration. To do this, the following should be taken into account: the need to complete actions related to the proper documentation of urgent investigative action, the actual ability of the investigator or prosecutor to prepare a request; c) the opportunity to apply to the investigating judge in a shorter time; 3) refuse to satisfy the request for a search if the specified criteria indicate non-compliance with the requirement of urgency.

Author Biographies

Іван Андрійович Тітко, Полтавський юридичний інститут Національного юридичного університету імені Ярослава Мудрого

Доктор юридичних наук, професор, завідувач кафедри кримінального права та кримінально-правових дисциплін

Андрій Володимирович Скрипник, Національний юридичний університет імені Ярослава Мудрого

аспірант кафедри кримінального процесу Національного юридичного університету імені Ярослава Мудрого

References

Livius, Titus. (1989). Ystoryja Ryma ot osnovanyja ghoroda. (Vols. 1–3; Vol. 1). Moscow: Nauka [in Russian].

Bilous, O.V. (2015). Zasada nedotorkannosti zhytla chy inshogho volodinnja osoby u dosudovomu kryminaljnomu provadzhenni. Candidate’s thesis. National Academy of Internal Affairs, Kyiv [in Ukrainian].

Vegera-Izhevska, I.V. (2018). Provision of the right of inviolability of the housing or other possession of person in a criminal proceeding. Candidate’s thesis. Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, Kharkiv [in Ukrainian].

Kaplina, O.V. (2015). Problems of normative regulations and practice of prosecuting the search during the criminal legal proceedings. Journal of the National University of «Ostroh Academy». Law Series, 2 (12). URL: http://lj.oa.edu.ua/articles/2015/n2/15kovckp.pdf [in Ukrainian].

Komarova, M.V. (2019). Legal and organizational founations of the search in criminal proceedings. Candidate’s thesis. National Academy of Internal Affairs, Kyiv [in Ukrainian].

The decision of the Supreme Court of Ukraine for civil and criminal cases dated August 20, 2015, case No. 5-1735km15. URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/49234200 [in Ukrainian].

The verdict of the Smilyansky city district court of the Cherkasy region dated August 21, 2017, case No. 712/1824/16-k. URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/68383908 [in Ukrainian].

The decision of the Lychakiv district court of Lviv dated October 17, 2017, case No. 463/5108/17-k. URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/69573017 [in Ukrainian].

The decision of the October district court of Mariupol dated April 17, 2015, case No. 263/4413/15-k. URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/45499035 [in Ukrainian].

The decision of the October district court of Mariupol dated June 17, 2015, case No. 263/7122/15-k. URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/45187781 [in Ukrainian].

The decision of the Kherson city court of the Kherson region dated January 5, 2017, case No. 766/276/17-k. URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/63993045 [in Ukrainian].

The decision of the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv dated May 30, 2016, case No. 757/25813/16-k. URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/59551016 [in Ukrainian].

The decision of the Konstantinovsky city district court of Donetsk region dated December 18, 2017, case No. 233/6296/17-k. URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/71078106 [in Ukrainian].

The decision of the Vinnytsia city court of the Vinnytsia region dated February 02, 2015, case No. 127/1786/15-k. URL: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/48292136 [in Ukrainian].

Sysoienko, H.I. (2014). Procesualjni stroky za KPK 2012 r. Chasopys cyviljnogho i kryminaljnogho sudochynstva, 5, 106–113 [in Ukrainian].

Basay, V.D. (2013). Ponjattja i vydy procesualjnykh strokiv za KPK Ukrajiny ta KPK Rosijsjkoji Federaciji. Law magazine of the National academy of internal affair, 1, 204-209 [in Ukrainian].

Bilodid, I.K. (Ed.). (1977). Slovnyk ukrajinsjkoji movy. (Vols. 1–11; Vol. 8). Kyiv: Naukova dumka. [in Ukrainian].

The decision of the Kovpakivsky District Court of Sumy of November 14, 2016, case No. 592/10439/16-k. URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/62682742 [in Ukrainian].

Titko, I.A. (2010). Ocinni ponjattja u kryminaljno-procesualjnomu pravi Ukrajiny. Kharkiv: Pravo [in Ukrainian].

Bratelj, O.Gh. (2017). Procedural legal facts of civil proceedings in the context interpretation estimated temporal categories. Actual problems of native jurisprudence, 1 (1), 28–32 [in Ukrainian].

Busel, V.T. (Ed.). (2005). Velykyj tlumachnyj slovnyk suchasnoji ukrajinsjkoji movy. Kyiv, Irpinj: Perun [in Ukrainian].

Mykhajlenko, O.R. (2001). Moment jak okrema odynycja v chasovykh parametrakh kryminaljnogho procesu Ukrajiny. Visnyk prokuratury, 1, 49–53 [in Ukrainian].

The decision Rivne city court of Rivne region dated April 23, 2018, case No. 569/7423/18-k. URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73541803 [in Ukrainian].

Published

2020-09-29

How to Cite

Тітко, І. А., & Скрипник, А. В. (2020). Is it always worth rushing slowly or some issues of urgent investigative actions. Problems of Legality, (150), 187–198. https://doi.org/10.21564/2414-990x.150.205588

Issue

Section

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND СRIMINALISTICS