Chapter 36-1 of the CPC of Ukraine as a ground for closing criminal proceedings

Ihor Rohatiuk, Andrii Zapototskyi
{"title":"Chapter 36-1 of the CPC of Ukraine as a ground for closing criminal proceedings","authors":"Ihor Rohatiuk, Andrii Zapototskyi","doi":"10.56215/naia-chasopis/3.2023.09","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The emergence of a new ground for closing criminal proceedings in the current Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine – in connection with the decriminalization of an act committed by a person – has caused ambiguous assessments by scholars. The application of the new procedure in judicial practice necessitates a thorough scientific study of the problem in order to prevent violations of the law. The purpose of the study was to determine the practical feasibility of the adopted amendments for pre-trial investigation and court proceedings. To achieve this goal, the following methods were used: dialectical, systemic and structural, comparative legal, formal and logical, and modelling. The study describes the actions of participants in criminal proceedings at the stage of pre-trial investigation and in court during consideration of the said procedure. The author compares the new procedure with other existing special investigative procedures and emphasizes their differences. The author calls into question whether the legislator has singled out this procedure as a type of special procedure. The author comes to the conclusion that the subject under study is an exclusively improved basis for closing criminal proceedings or further continuation of their consideration, depending on the right of the defence to close or continue the proceedings in court. The author analyses the court practice of application of this criminal procedural institute. Attention is focused on the need for investigators, prosecutors, and judges to take into account the requirements of the new grounds for closing criminal proceedings and to prevent violations of the law, since during its consideration the suspect and the accused are granted an additional alternative right to agree or disagree with the closure of proceedings, which is a guarantee of human rights and freedoms. The author's conclusion that it is inappropriate for the legislator to classify the procedure for closing proceedings as a separate type of special procedure is justified by haste and lack of appropriate scientific research. The study provides the basis for improving the methodology of procedural actions of the prosecution during the closure of criminal proceedings and may be used by the legislator for further regulation of the criminal proceedings' procedure","PeriodicalId":334836,"journal":{"name":"Ûridičnij časopis Nacìonalʹnoï akademìï vnutrìšnìh sprav","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ûridičnij časopis Nacìonalʹnoï akademìï vnutrìšnìh sprav","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56215/naia-chasopis/3.2023.09","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The emergence of a new ground for closing criminal proceedings in the current Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine – in connection with the decriminalization of an act committed by a person – has caused ambiguous assessments by scholars. The application of the new procedure in judicial practice necessitates a thorough scientific study of the problem in order to prevent violations of the law. The purpose of the study was to determine the practical feasibility of the adopted amendments for pre-trial investigation and court proceedings. To achieve this goal, the following methods were used: dialectical, systemic and structural, comparative legal, formal and logical, and modelling. The study describes the actions of participants in criminal proceedings at the stage of pre-trial investigation and in court during consideration of the said procedure. The author compares the new procedure with other existing special investigative procedures and emphasizes their differences. The author calls into question whether the legislator has singled out this procedure as a type of special procedure. The author comes to the conclusion that the subject under study is an exclusively improved basis for closing criminal proceedings or further continuation of their consideration, depending on the right of the defence to close or continue the proceedings in court. The author analyses the court practice of application of this criminal procedural institute. Attention is focused on the need for investigators, prosecutors, and judges to take into account the requirements of the new grounds for closing criminal proceedings and to prevent violations of the law, since during its consideration the suspect and the accused are granted an additional alternative right to agree or disagree with the closure of proceedings, which is a guarantee of human rights and freedoms. The author's conclusion that it is inappropriate for the legislator to classify the procedure for closing proceedings as a separate type of special procedure is justified by haste and lack of appropriate scientific research. The study provides the basis for improving the methodology of procedural actions of the prosecution during the closure of criminal proceedings and may be used by the legislator for further regulation of the criminal proceedings' procedure
乌克兰刑事诉讼法第36-1章作为结束刑事诉讼的依据
在乌克兰现行的《刑事诉讼法》中出现了结束刑事诉讼的新理由- -即将某人所犯的行为非刑事化- -这引起了学者们模棱两可的评价。新程序在司法实践中的应用,需要对这一问题进行深入的科学研究,以防止违法行为的发生。这项研究的目的是确定所通过的修正案在审判前调查和法庭诉讼方面的实际可行性。为了实现这一目标,使用了以下方法:辩证,系统和结构,比较法律,形式和逻辑以及建模。研究报告描述了刑事诉讼参与者在审前调查阶段和在审议上述程序期间在法庭上的行动。笔者将新程序与现有的其他特殊侦查程序进行了比较,强调了它们之间的区别。作者质疑立法者是否将这一程序单独列为一种特殊程序。发件人得出的结论是,所研究的主题完全是结束刑事诉讼或进一步继续审议的改进基础,这取决于辩方在法庭上结束或继续诉讼的权利。笔者分析了该刑事诉讼制度适用的法院实践。目前的重点是,调查人员、检察官和法官必须考虑到结束刑事诉讼的新理由的要求和防止违反法律的行为,因为在审议期间,嫌疑犯和被告获得了同意或不同意结束诉讼的另一项权利,这是对人权和自由的一种保障。笔者认为,立法者将结案程序作为一种单独的特殊程序是不合适的,这一结论的理由是仓促和缺乏适当的科学研究。这项研究为在刑事诉讼结束期间改进检察机关的程序性诉讼方法提供了基础,并可供立法者用于进一步规范刑事诉讼程序
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信