RЕSTRIСTIОNS AND РRОHIBITIОNS IMРОSЕD ОN THЕ AССUSЕD (SUSРЕСT) WHЕN ЕLЕСTING HОUSЕ ARRЕST AS A MЕASURЕ ОF РRЕSTRЕSSIОN

Abstract

The article provides an analysis of the restrictions and prohibitions imposed on the accused (suspect) when choosing house arrest. The problems arising during the application of this preventive measure are revealed, foreign experience is investigated, as a result of which the author proposes additions and amendments to the criminal procedure law. The measure of procedural coercion in the form of house arrest is most adequate to the socio-economic level of development of society, corresponds to the principle of individualization of the application of preventive measures, taking into account data on the personality and nature of the committed act, provides prerequisites for the lawful behavior of the subjects of criminal procedural legal relations subject to criminal prosecution. The affiliation of house arrest to preventive measures in criminal proceedings makes it dependent on the general goals of this institution. Consequently, house arrest as a preventive measure primarily ensures the proper behavior of the accused (suspect) in the criminal process. In our opinion, house arrest is a synthesis of several types of preventive measures, the origins of which should be sought in the theory of criminal procedure. A scientific analysis of the legal relations arising from the application of house arrest leads to the conclusion that it is necessary to reform not only the norm governing house arrest, but also the entire set of norms of the criminal procedure law. In this regard, the procedural procedure for the use of investigative actions – listening and recording of negotiations, interception of messages, including the procedural mechanism for transmitting the results of the interception by the contractor to the body carrying out the criminal process, are subject to improvement.