Review

The article is devoted to comparative and legal research of models of pre-trial investigation of France and Ukraine. The current model of pre-trial investigation in Ukraine continues to show its inadequate efficiency in determining the actual circumstances of the case, impartial investigation, numerous violations of human rights and citizen. The purpose of this article is to develop further proposals to create a real, efficient, economic model of pre-trial investigation in guaranteeing of human and civil rights and freedoms in Ukraine.

This article describes and compares the powers of judicial police France during inquests and operative units of Ukraine. Making a comparative analysis of powers in the field of operational subdivisions of Ukraine and governmental inquests France be traced a certain resemblance between them. However, it is made a conclusion that the judicial police France has more rights during inquests, unlike the operative units of Ukraine. In addition, are considered and compares the powers of public prosecutor offices France and Ukraine. In addition, the powers of the prosecutor’s office of France and Ukraine are reviewed and compared. It is concluded that the Office of the Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine is simultaneously entrusted with the authority to organize, supervise, conduct pre-trial investigation, as well as form and maintain a prosecution in court, which testifies to the inconsistency and incompatibility of the procedural powers of the prosecutor’s office in Ukraine. In contrast to the French investigating magistrate, it is possible to point out that, unlike the Ukrainian investigator, he is an uninterested objective arbiter, whereas the investigator in Ukraine, has been charged to the party of charges and is characterized by an indictment of authority.

The main drawback of pre-trial investigation in Ukraine should be regarded as his accusatory line with a combination of incompatible functions investigator for investigating accusations and protection. Submitted a proposal on the necessity of creating an independent, impartial trial investigation of his belonging to the court, depriving the prosecutor’s office of the procedural guidance for the pre-trial. investigation. Operational-search activity, which was inherited from the Soviet model of pre-trial investigation, should be eliminated with the further creation of a single police inquiry under the direction of the prosecutor’s office.

References

1. 1. Kryminalno-protsesualnyi kodeks Frantsii [French Code of Criminal Procedure] vid 02.03.2015 accessed 27.02.2018 (in French).
2. Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy [The Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy vid 13.04.2012 № 4651–17. Baza danykh «Zakonodavstvo Ukrainy» / VR Ukrainy data zvernennia 27.02.2018 (in Ukrainian).
3. Pro operatyvno-rozshukovu diialnist [On Operative Investigation Activities]: Zakon Ukrainy [law of Ukraine] vid 18.02.1992 № 2135–12 data zvernennia 27.02.2018 (in Ukrainian).
4. Ambroise-Casterot C, Bonfils P, Prosedure penale (Paris 2011) 71 (in French).
5. Barabanov P K, Ugolovnyiy protsess Frantsii [The criminal process in France] (Sputnik 2016) 25 (in Russia).
6. Desportes F, Lazerges-Cousquer L, (Traité de procédure pénale 2012) 995 (in French).
7. Fourment F, Procedure penale. Bruxelles (2012) 223 (in French).
8. Hroshevyi Yu. M, ta inshi, Kryminalnyi protses [Criminal proceedings] (Pravo 2014) 824 (in Ukrainian).
9. Pradel J, Procedure penale (Paris 2010) 557 (in French).
10. Terrill R J, World criminal justice systems (Waltham 2013) 167 (in French).
11. Derishev Y, ’Predvaritel’noe sledstvie: isledovanie ili presledovanie?’ [Preliminary investigation: investigation or prosecution?] (2002) 1 Rossijskaya yusticiya 34–35 (in Russian).
12. Holovko L V, ’Formyi doznaniya v ugolovnom protsesse Frantsii’ [Forms in the criminal process of France] (1994) 1 Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta 64–70 (in Russian).
13. Pohoretskyi M A, ’Poniattia, zmist ta struktura kryminalnoho protsesu: problemy teorii ta praktyky’ [Concept, content and structure of the criminal process: problems of theory and practice] (2013) 13 Pravo Ukrainy 42–54 (in Ukrainian).
14. Sheyfer S A, ’Pravovoj Mekhanizm rasledovaniya prestuplenij v Rossii: vchera, segodnya, zavtra’ [The Legal Mechanism for Investigating Crimes in Russia: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow] (2011) 5 Gosudarstvo i pravo 44–51 (in Russian).
15. Siryi M I, ’Reforma pravookhoronnykh orhaniv u Yevropi ta Ukraini’ [Reform of law enforcement agencies in Europe and Ukraine] (2006) 8 Visnyk Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy 24–30 (in Ukrainian).
16. 1 Ю Деришев, ’Предварительное следствие: иследование или преследование?’ (2002) 10 Российская юстиция 35.
17. Berova D M, ’Osnovyi teorii funktsionalizma v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve’ [Fundamentals of Functionalism Theory in Criminal Proceedings] (avtoref dys dokt yur nauk 2011) 48 (in Russian).