Review

Abstract. An effective way to resolve a conflict that has arisen as a result of a criminal offense may be the use of compromise procedures in criminal proceedings, along with traditional ones, the effectiveness of which is proven by law enforcement experience in almost all progressive countries with established legal traditions. Despite the significant contribution of scientists to the development of compromise issues in criminal proceedings, a significant number of its theoretical and practical aspects have not been studied, disclosed in fragments, incompletely or have not received a clear solution. None of the scholars has fully studied the right to compromise and the forms of its implementation in criminal proceedings, the legal nature of the right to compromise and its impact on the criminal procedure. The purpose of the article is to study the legal nature of the right to compromise and its impact on the criminal procedure form through certain forms of implementation of the above right: study of the implementation of objective and subjective right to compromise in criminal proceedings; determination of holders and subjects of realization of the right to compromise; outlining approaches to the differentiation of criminal procedure; differentiation of conciliation procedures in criminal proceedings from the forms of realization of the right to compromise, etc. It is noted about the positive impact of the right to compromise in criminal proceedings on its participants, which allows to take into account their interests in resolving the criminal conflict and eliminate the negative consequences of criminal acts for the parties to the conflict and for the state and society as a whole. It is concluded that for criminal procedure law in general, and the right to compromise in particular, an important dominant and factor is individualization. Thus, the bearers of the right to compromise in criminal proceedings are the victim and the suspect (accused), as the right to compromise is a personal right. It is stated that the implementation of the right to compromise in the criminal process of Ukraine has influenced the criminal procedure, finally changing it, and led to the emergence of a new type of criminal process – pragmatic. The pragmatic type of criminal process can be traced in the norms of domestic legislation concerning the exercise of the right to compromise in the criminal justice of Ukraine, both through its private-pragmatic and public-pragmatic types. A striking example of a private-pragmatic type of process in the exercise of the right to compromise is the use of such institutions as the release of a person from criminal liability in connection with reconciliation, a reconciliation agreement between victim and suspect (accused) and we can safely say that this expression the type of process in the future will find during the application of the institution of mediation in criminal proceedings (in the case of its introduction in court). The provisions concerning the scope of the public-pragmatic type of process should include a plea agreement. It is concluded that the forms of realization of the right to compromise in the criminal process of Ukraine are release from criminal liability in connection with the reconciliation of the guilty with the victim, agreements on reconciliation and guilt, mediation. Key words: legal nature of the right to compromise, criminal procedure form, pragmatic type of process, compromise, conflict. REFERENCES LIST OF LEGAL DOCUMENTS LEGISLATION

1. Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy [Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine] Zakon Ukrainy vid 13.04.2012 № 4651-VI data zvernennia16.03.2021 [in Ukrainian].
2. Kryminalnyi kodeks Ukrainy [Criminal Code of Ukraine] Zakon Ukrainy vid 05.04.2001 № 2341-III data zvernennia 16.03.2021 [in Ukrainian].

BIBLIOGRAPHY AUTHORED BOOKS

1. Alekseev S S, Voshozhdenie k pravu. Poiski i reshenija [Climbing to the right. Searches and solutions] (Moskva, Izd-vo NORMA, 2001) 752 [in Russian].
2. Murad’jan Je M, Istina kak problema sudebnogo prava [Truth as a Problem of Judicial Law] (Moskva, Jurist’, 2004) 311 [in Russian].
3. Ojgenziht V A, Al’ternativa v grazhdanskom prave [Alternative in civil law] (Dushanbe, Irfon, 1991) 176 [in Russian].
4. Pohoretskyi M A, Kuchynska O P, Serhieieva D B ta in., Protsesualni dokumenty u kryminalnomu provadzhenni. Zrazky. Roz’iasnennia [Procedural documents in criminal proceedings. Samples. Explanation] za zah. red. M. A. Pohoretskoho, O. P. Kuchynskoi (Kyiv. Yurinkom Inter, 2014) 560 [in Ukrainian].
5. Poljakov M P, Smolin A Ju, Princip processual’noj jekonomii v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [The principle of procedural economy in criminal proceedings] (N. Novgorod: Nizhegorod. akad. MVD Rossii, 2011) 152 [in Russian].
6. Vasil’eva E G, Ugolovnyj process: dogmatiko-aksiologicheskoe issledovanie [Criminal Procedure: Dogmatic-Axiological Research] (Moskva: Jurlitinform, 2013) 584 [in Russian].
7. Vediernikov Yu A, Papirna A V, Teoriia derzhavy i prava [Theory of state and law]: navch. posib (Kyiv, Znannia, 2008) 333 data zvernennia 16.03.2021 [in Ukrainian].
8. Pohoretskyi M A, Kryminalno-protsesualni pravovidnosyny: struktura v systema [Criminal procedural legal relations: structure and system: monograph] (Kharkiv, Arsis LTD, 2002) 160 [in Ukrainian].

EDITED BOOKS

1. Koziubra M I (za zah. red.) Zahalna teoriia prava [General theory of law] (Kyiv, Vaite, 2015) 392 [in Ukrainian]. 12. Lutsyk V V, Savchenko V A, Samarin V I ta in. (za red) Suchasnyi kryminalnyi protses krain Yevropy [Modern criminal process of European countries] (Kharkiv, Pravo, 2018) 792 [in Ukrainian].

JOURNAL ARTICLES

1. Domin Yu, Instytut uhod u kryminalnomu provadzhenni: vazhlyvi aspekty pravozastosuvannia [The institution of agreements in criminal proceedings: important aspects of law enforcement] (2013) 4 Visnyk Nats. akad. prokuratury Ukrainy 11–19 [in Ukrainian].
2. Jablochkov T M, Sudebnoe reshenie i spornoe pravo [Judgment and controversial law] (1916) 7 Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava 26–62 [in Russian].
3. Nor V T, Suchasnyi naukovo-praktychnyi posibnyk «Protsesualni dokumenty u kryminalnomu provadzhenni. Zrazky. Rozʼiasnennia» [Modern scientific and practical manual «Procedural documents in criminal proceedings. Samples. Explanation «] (2015) 1 Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva 290–291 [in Ukrainian].
4. Petrunin A M, Dialog kak social’no-nravstvennaja norma v otnoshenijah opponentov [Dialogue as a social and moral norm in the relations of opponents] (2006) 10 Zakon i pravo 43–45. [in Russian].
5. Pohoretskyi M A, Kryminalno-protsesualna forma [Criminal procedural form] (2012) 2 Visnyk Zaporizkoho yurydychnoho instytutu DDUVS 145 [in Ukrainian].
6. Pohoretskyi M, Poniattia, zmist ta struktura kryminalnoho protsesu: problemy teorii ta praktyky [Concept, content and structure of the criminal process: problems of theory and practice] (2013) 11 Pravo Ukrainy 42–54 [in Ukrainian].
7. Pohoretskyi M A, Serhieieva D B, Problemni pytannia realizatsii protsesualnoho statusu poterpiloho u kryminalnomu provadzhenni [Problematic issues of implementing the procedural status of the victim in criminal proceedings] (2017) 46 (2) Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universytetu Seriia «Pravo» 118–123 [in Ukrainian].
8. Pohoretskyi M A, Poniattia kryminalno-protsesualnykh harantii [The concept of criminal procedural guarantees] (2014) 2 (10) Chasopys Natsionalnoho universytetu «Ostrozka akademiia». Seriia: Pravo data zvernennia: 16.05.2021 [in Ukrainian].
9. Pohoretskyi M A, Mekhanizm zabezpechennia prav uchasnykiv kryminalnoho protsesu [The mechanism for ensuring the rights of participants in the criminal process] (2012) 4 Visnyk Zaporizkoho yurydychnoho instytutu DDUVS 93–101 [in Ukrainian].
10. Pohoretskyi M A, Novyi KPK Ukrainy: politychni, teoretychni ta yurydychni pytannia [The new Communist Party of Ukraine: political, theoretical and legal issues] (2009) 2 Pravo Ukrainy 29–35 [in Ukrainian].

DISSERTATIONS

1. Kozhokar’ I P, Pravovoj konsensus: obshheteoreticheskij analіz [Legal consensus: general theoretical analiz] (dis.kand. jurid. nauk: 12.00.01. Saratov, 2005) 223 [in Russian].
2. Manova N S, Teoreticheskie problemy ugolovno-processual’nyh proizvodstv i differenciacii ih form [Theoretical problems of criminal procedural proceedings and differentiation of their forms] (dis. d-ra jurid. nauk: 12.00.09. Moskva, 2005) 443 [in Russian].
3. Stojko N G, Ugolovnyj process zapadnyh gosudarstv i Rossii: sravnitel’noe teoretiko-pravovoe issledovanie anglo-amerikanskoj i romano-germanskoj pravovyh sistem [Criminal Procedure of Western States and Russia: A Comparative Legal Theoretical Study of the Anglo-American and Romano-Germanic Legal Systems] (dis. dokt. jurid. nauk. SPb., 2009) 374 [in Russian].
4. Trofymenko V M, Teoretychni ta pravovi osnovy dyferentsiatsii kryminalnoho protsesu Ukrainy [Theoretical and legal bases of differentiation of criminal process of Ukraine] (dys. d-ra yuryd. nauk: 12.00.09. Nats. yuryd. un. – t im. Ya. Mudroho Kharkiv, 2017) 415 [in Ukrainian].

BLOGS 27. Antoniuk N, Zahalni vydy zvilnennia vid kryminalnoi vidpovidalnosti u sudovii praktytsi [General types of exemption from criminal liability in judicial practice] (2020) Sudebno-iurydycheskaia hazeta. 2020 data zvernennia16.03.2021 [in Ukrainian].