- Journal Issues
- № 2 2016 Procedural, criminalistic and organizational and legal problems of advocate activity
- Actual issues of participation advokat in criminal process: problems of theory and practice
- Challenging illegal apprehension of a person: theoretical and practical problems
Challenging illegal apprehension of a person: theoretical and practical problems
Review
The article addresses features of the actual moments related with the implementation of the right of challenge illegal apprehension of a suspect by the defense in the criminal proceedings. Author has considered theoretical and practical moments arising while implementing defense function in the course of challenging the apprehension. In the article author has stated that the criminal procedure law of Ukraine does not stipulate the effective and efficient procedure of challenging apprehension of a suspect. Author has emphasized that the right of a detainee to request the prosecutor to verify validity of the apprehension does not correspond to provisions of the Convention for protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms concerning exceptionally judicial control of apprehension legality.
To improve suspect’s rights defence procedure in the Criminal procedure code of Ukraine author has offered effective procedure of judicial challenging of criminal procedure apprehension.
Author has offered the amendments to enforceable criminal procedure law of Ukraine aimed at judicial challenging apprehension efficiency upgrading.
Proposed appropriate to lay ch. 4. 206 CPC read as follows: «If the delivery of prisoners to the investigating judge or prosecutor investigating in coordination with the prosecutor with a request to appeal a preventive measure, consideration of such an application is made simultaneously with the determination of the legality of detention or remand her in custody. Investigative judge denies a preventive measure if it determines that the person has been detained illegally».
It is concluded that Art. 206 CPC should provide a period during which the investigating judge is required to decide on the legality of deprivation of liberty. Reasonable period will be in the form of 24 hours of receiving information about illegal deprivation of liberty.
Keywords: defense, defense counsel, apprehension, challenging, investigating judge, criminal proceedings, pre-trial investigation, rights of suspect.