Substantiation of the risk of absconding when applying pre-trial restriction measures related to the limitation of a constitutional person’s right

Diana Serhieieva; Elchin Іskenderov; Iryna Sukhachova; Mykola Pohoretskyi; Yelyzaveta Lysachenko

doi:10.34069/AI/2022.58.10.1

Diana Serhieieva Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1005-7046
Elchin Іskenderov Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9613-3806
Iryna Sukhachova National Academy of Internal Affairs, Kyiv, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5844-2229
Mykola Pohoretskyi National Academy of the Security Service of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2888-0911
Yelyzaveta Lysachenko National Academy of the Security Service of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0937-2110

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2022.58.10.1

Keywords: prosecutor, proving, risk of absconding, constitutional rights.

Abstract

The article examines the features of the prosecutor's substantiation of the risk of absconding from the pre-trial investigation bodies and / or the court when applying measures related to the restriction of the constitutional rights of a person. Statistical data show a trend towards an increase in the number of cases of refusals by investigating judges to approve petitions of prosecutors as subjects of proving on the use of means of criminal procedural evidence, in particular, security measures, which indicates, among other things, the low level of validity of the petitions filed. Thus, in 2018, investigating judges refused to satisfy 5,970 petitions out of a total of 37,193 petitions for the application of precautionary measures (16.5%); in 2019 - 5,733 out of 34,780 (about 16.4%); in 2020 - 5,693 out of 31,547 (18.1%); for 2021 - 5,277 out of 30,408 (17.3%); for January-March 2022 - 799 out of 4,526 (17.6%). This is due to the fact that the problems of the prosecutor's exercise of his powers in proving in the pre-trial investigation, in particular in substantiating the presence of the risk of absconding, have not yet been subjected to a comprehensive theoretical study.

The study of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights allows us to reveal the essence of the risk of absconding as a basis for the application of measures related to the restriction of the constitutional rights of a person, as well as to find out what factors should be taken into account by the prosecutor when substantiating the risk of absconding.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Diana Serhieieva, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Doctor of Science in Law, Professor, Professor of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics Department, Educational and Scientific Institute of Law, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Elchin Іskenderov, Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Doctor of Science in Law, Professor, Professor of the Department of Law Enforcement and Anti-Corruption Activities, Educational and Scientific Institute of Law, Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Iryna Sukhachova, National Academy of Internal Affairs, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Doctor of Science in Law, Researcher of the scientific laboratory on the problems of combating crime National Academy of Internal Affairs, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Mykola Pohoretskyi, National Academy of the Security Service of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Ph.D (Law), Associate Professor of the Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, National Academy of the Security Service of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Yelyzaveta Lysachenko, National Academy of the Security Service of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Ph.D (Law), Researcher of the scientific laboratory, National Academy of the Security Service of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine.

References

Case of Avraimov v. Ukraine. (Application № 71818/17) European Court of Human Rights, dated 25.03.2021. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_f72? find=1&text=%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%B8%D0%BA#w1_26 (in Ukranian).

Case of Becciev v. Moldovа (Application № 9190/03) European Court of Human Rights, dated 04.10.05. Retrieved from https://www.stradalex.eu/en/se_src_publ_jur_eur_cedh/document/echr_9190-03_001-68826 (in English).

Case of Belevetskyi v. Russia (Application № 72967/01) European Court of Human Rights, dated 01.03.2007 Retrieved from https://europeancourt.ru/resheniya-evropejskogo-suda-na-russkom-yazyke/belevickij-protiv-rossii-postanovlenie-evropejskogo-suda/ (in Russian).

Case of Boicenco v. Moldova (Application № 41088/05) European Court of Human Rights, dated 11.07.2006 Retrieved from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22002-3201%22]} (in English).

Case of Gavula v. Ukraine (Application № 52652/07) European Court of Human Rights, dated 07.10.2013 Retrieved from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/pdf/?library=ECHR&id=001-119465&filename=001-119465.pdf (in English).

Case of Kharchenko v. Ukraine (Application № 40107/02) European Court of Human Rights, dated 10.02.2011. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_662#Text (in Ukranian).

Case of Klishyn v. Ukraine (Application № 30671/04) European Court of Human Rights, dated 23.02.2012 Retrieved from https://minjust.gov.ua/m/stisli-vikladi-rishen-za-alfavitom (in Ukranian).

Case of Kobets v. Ukraine (Application № 16437/04) European Court of Human Rights, dated 14.02.2008. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_320#Text (in Ukranian).

Case of Moskalenko v. Ukraine (Application № 37466/04) European Court of Human Rights, dated 20.08.2010 Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_797#Text (in Ukranian).

Case of Olexander Makarov v. Russia (Application № 15217/07) European Court of Human Rights, dated 12.03.2009 Retrieved from https://www.hr-dp.org/contents/621 (in English).

Case of Osypenko v. Ukraine (Application № 4634/04) European Court of Human Rights, dated 09.02.2011. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_871#Text (in Ukranian).

Case of Pozvezko v. Ukraine (Application № 74297/11) European Court of Human Rights, dated 12.02.2015. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_a47#Text (in Ukranian).

Case of Shalimov v. Ukraine (Application № 20808/02) European Court of Human Rights, dated 04.06.2010. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_835#Text (in Ukranian).

Case of Strohan v. Ukraine (Application № 30198/11) European Court of Human Rights, dated 06.10.2016 Retrieved from https://khpg.org/1478333862 (in Ukranian).

Case of Temchenko v. Ukraine (Application № 30579/10) European Court of Human Rights, dated 16.10.2015 Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_a83#Text (in Ukranian).

Case of Tkachov v. Ukraine (Application № 39458/02) European Court of Human Rights, dated 13.12.2007 Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_335#Text (in Ukranian).

Case of Todorov v. Ukraine (Application № 16717/05) European Court of Human Rights, dated 12.01.2012 Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_806#Text (in Ukranian).

Case of Vierentsov v. Ukraine (Application № 20372/11) European Court of Human Rights, dated 11.07.2013. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_945#Text (in Ukranian).

Case of Yeloiev v. Ukraine (Application № 17283/02) European Court of Human Rights, dated 06.11.2008. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_433#Text (in Ukranian).

Convención Europea de Derechos Humanos (1950). Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, dated Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_004#Text (in Ukranian).

Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine № 10-рп/2011. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine dated 11.10.2011. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v010p710-11#Text (in Ukranian).

Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine № 14-рп/2003. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine dated 08.07.2003. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v014p710-03#Text (in Ukranian).

Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine № 1-р/2017. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine dated 23.11.2017 Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v001p710-17#Text (in Ukranian).

Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine № 2-рп/2016. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine dated 01.06.2016. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v002p710-16#Text (in Ukranian).

Fomina, T.G. (2018) Justification of the risk of absconding from pre-trial investigation and / or court bodies during the application of precautionary measures through the prism of ECtHR practice. Judicial and investigative practice in Ukraine, 6, 126-130 (in Ukranian).

Hablo, O. Yu. (2020) Justification of the grounds for the application of precautions: сonventional standards and domestic practice. Law and society, 4, 270-278. https://doi.org/10.32842/2078-3736/2020.4.39. (in Ukranian).

Information from the Office of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine. (2021) Reports on the work of the prosecutor's office of 2018-2021. Retrieved from https://old.gp.gov.ua/ua/file_downloader.html?_m=fslib&_t=fsfile&_c=download&file_id=215655; https://gp.gov.ua/ua/posts/statistika (in Ukranian).

Law № 4651-VI. Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine, dated 13.04.2012. Retrieved from http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/4651-17 (in Ukranian).

Mykhailenko, V. V. (2019) Implementation of the rule of law in criminal proceedings: a monograph. Kyiv: PALIVODA AV, 256 (in Ukranian).

Pohoretskyi, M., & Salenko, O. (2020) Ensuring the right of an individual to effective, real and practical legal assistance in criminal proceedings through the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. Scientific Bulletin of the International Humanitarian University. Series: Jurisprudence, 44, 180-187. DOI https://doi.org/10.32841/2307-1745.2020.44.27. (In Ukranian).

Shylo, O. G. (2014) Peculiarities of substantiation of choice of precautionary measures in criminal proceedings. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University. Series "Law", 25, 269-273 (in Ukranian).

Sukhachova, I. O. (2020) Implementation by the prosecutor of the prosecution function during subjection of suspicion. South Ukrainian Legal Journal, 4, 279-284. https://doi.org/10.32850/sulj.2020.4.47. (In Ukranian).