One of the components of the judge status is its independence and immunity, which predetermines the appointment of a judge to a particular category of persons, whose criminal proceedings are carried out in a special procedure, including a report of the judge on suspicion. At the same time, the results of our analysis the norms of current CPC of Ukraine, which regulate this procedure, as well as more than 5 years of practice of their application, highlight a number of problematic issues that require urgent solution at the theoretical, legal and law enforcement levels, which updates their scientific research. The purpose of the article is to study the issue of the suspicion of a judge in criminal proceedings and to provide scientifically substantiated proposals for their solution, taking into account the recent domestic jurisprudence of recent years and the practice of the ECtHR. The article highlights main approaches of doctrinal interpretation by the lawyers of the Art. 481 CPC of Ukraine regarding the subject of drafting, signing and delivery of suspicion reports to certain categories of persons, including judges. The jurisprudence, including the highest judicial authorities, is presented and analyzed, as to the procedural order of notification of a suspect to a judge. It is proved that the legal regulation of the notification of a judge’s suspicion in Art. 481 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine provides for the legislator to distinguish between the terms «drawing up», «handing out» the suspicion message and «a written notification of suspicion carried out …». It is noted that the notification of suspicion is a complex of procedural actions, which includes the compilation and delivery of a statement of suspicion, clarification the procedural rights of the suspect, the nature of the suspicion, the introduction of relevant information to the ORPI. If the suspect is notified by an investigator, this complex of procedural actions includes: drafting a notification of suspicion, agreeing it with the prosecutor, giving notification of suspicion, clarification the procedural rights of the suspect, the nature of the suspicion, making relevant information to the ORPI. Only the General Prosecutor or his deputy is authorized to make a written notification to the judge of the suspicion. The powers of the General Prosecutor or his deputy are exclusive and can not be reassigned to other prosecutors or investigators. In order to exercise this power, the General Prosecutor and his deputy shall not conduct procedural guidance for a criminal proceeding against a judge. Violation of the established procedure for handing a judge a written notice of suspicion does not preclude him from obtaining the status of a suspect. In order to eliminate the unclear interpretation of the provisions of the current CPC of Ukraine regarding the notification of a judge’s suspicion, it is proposed in Art. 481 CPC of Ukraine to recast in the new wording

Author Name: Pohoretskyi M., Hryniuk V

URL: View PDF

Keywords: suspicion message, judge, prosecution party, pre-trial investigation, criminal proceedings

ISSN: 2413-5372

EISSN: 2415-3214

EOI/DOI:

Add Citation Views: 1

---