Review

After the entry into force of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine in 2012, there is an essential decrease in the number of operational procurements conducted by the units of the National Police. As a result, the effectiveness of detecting and investigating the facts of illegal sale of items which are prohibited for circulation. One of the reasons for this situation is the imperfection of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.

Purpose of the article: disclosure of disadvantages Part 3 of Art. 271 Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine and research of their influence on the state of application of operational procurements.

Taking into account the practice of The European Court of Human Rights proposed criteria for distinguishing legitimate actions of police officers during the operational procurements from illegal, when there is provocation (incitement) to commit a crime. It has been found out that it is not provocative (incitement) to show the buyer’s initiative in acquiring certain items during an operational procurement, when there are reasonable grounds to consider that the person concerned is preparing or committing a crime and it will be commit regardless of the actions of the buyer. In this case, the purpose to show a buyer’s initiative is not to incitement a person to commit illegal sale, but direction of the behavior of this person in the way of the hidden fixation of his illegal actions. Such actions can not be recognized as a violation of item 1 of Art. 6 of The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and the evidence obtained on the results of operational procurement is admissibile according to Art. 86, 87 Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.

Proved that due to the excessive accumulation separate sentences and phrases, the current version of Part 3 of Art. 271 Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine allows the possibility of a distorted interpretation of the term «provoke (incite)», which determines the expediency of its wording more clearly according to the fundamental decisions of The European Court of Human Rights.

References

1. 1. Konventsiia pro zakhyst prav liudyny i osnovopolozhnykh svobod [Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms] (1950) data zvernennia 02.05.2018 (in Ukranian).
2. Kryminalnyi kodeks Ukrainy [Criminal codex of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy vid 05.04.2001 № 2341III data zvernennia 10.05.2018 (in Ukrainian).
3. Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy [Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy vid 13.04.2012 № 4651-VI. data zvernennia 17.01.2018 (in Ukrainian).
4. Case of Khudobin v. Russia (Application no. 59696/00): Judgment of the European Court of Human rights 26.10.2006. accessed 02.05.2018 (in English).
5. Case of Ramanauskas v. Lithuania (Application no. 74420/01): Judgment of the European Court of Human rights 05.02.2008 р. accessed 02.05.2018 (in English).
6. Case of Teixeira de Castro v. Portugal (case number 44/1997/828/1034): Judgment of the European Court of Human rights 09.06.1998 р. accessed 02.05.2018(in English).
7. Case of Vanyan v. Russia (Application no. 53203/99): Judgment of the European Court of Human rights 15.12.2005 р. accessed 02.05.2018 (in English).
8. Vyrok po spravi № 521/18730/13-k, provadzhennia 1-kp/521/99/16 vid 11.07.2016 r. Yedynyi derzhavnyi reiestr sudovykh rishen. Veb-sait Derzhavnoho pidpryiemstva «Informatsiini sudovi systemy»
9. data zvernennia 02.05.2018 (in Ukrainian).
10. United States Department of Justice, Entrapment – Elements (U. S. Attorneys’Manual: 645) accessed 02.05.2018. (in English).
11. HPU, Yedynyi zvit pro kryminalni pravoporushennia za 2013–2017 rr.: statystychna informatsiia [The only report on criminal offenses for 2013–2017: statistical information] (Ofitsiinyi sait Heneralnoi prokuratury Ukrainy) data zvernennia 02.05.2018 (in Ukrainian).
12. MVS Ukrainy, Stan ta struktura zlochynnosti v Ukraini za 2007 – po 20.11.2012 rr.: statystyka MVS [Status and structure of crime in Ukraine for 2007 – for 20.11.2012: statistics of the Ministry of Internal Affairs] (Ofitsiinyi sait) data zvernennia 02.05.2018 (in Ukrainian).
13. Bazhanov M (red), Kryminalne pravo Ukrainy: Zahalna chastyna [Criminal Law of Ukraine: General part] (Iurinkom Inter-Pravo, 2001) (in Ukrainian).
14. Drozdov O M, ’Aktualni pytannia zdiisnennia zakhystu vid provokatsii (pidburiuvannia) osoby na vchynennia zlochynu u svitli praktyky Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny’ [Topical issues of protection from provocation (incitement) of a person to commit a crime in the light of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights] (2016) 2 Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva 31 (in Ukrainian).
15. Shulhin S O, ’Provokatsiia (pidburiuvannia) osoby na vchynennia zlochynu pratsivnykamy pravookhoronnoho orhanu yak pidstava dlia zakryttia kryminalnoho provadzhennia abo postanovlennia vypravduvalnoho vyroku’ [Provoking (incitement) of a person to commit a crime by law enforcement officials as a basis for closing a criminal proceeding or making an acquittal] (2017) 1 Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva 96 (in Ukrainian).