Review

Determining the basis for the application of preventive measures in criminal proceedings in Ukraine is an important precondition for improving the existing procedure for their application.

In doing so, the article notes the difference between such basic concepts for the legal community as "principles" and " fundamentals". On this basis, it is concluded that the study of the issue of determining the rules, algorithms for the application of preventive measures is a study of “fundamentals” and not of the principles set out in Chapter 2 of Section I of the CPC of Ukraine.

Formally, devoid of individual approach to resolving the issues of election, change or cancellation of preventive measures results in violation of fundamental rights and freedoms of the participants in criminal proceedings. The repeated remarks of the European Court of Human Rights on the need for an individual approach to these issues give grounds for a conclusion that further scientific research is needed due to improvement existing criminal procedural procedures. The existence of a reasonable suspicion is an important guarantee against the arbitrary use of preventive measures. However, in practice, there are numerous cases where national courts have formally required the justification requirement, the mere fact that a written notice of suspicion has been served is sufficient.

The purpose of this article is to analyze the provisions of the current legislation of Ukraine on the application, amendment, abolition of preventive measures and to identify ways of improving existing procedures. The importance of resolving these issues is undoubted, since the fate of the participants in criminal proceedings depends on the qualifications of the subjects who make the relevant decisions.

For the purpose of this study, scientific work on the subject was used and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights was elaborated.

The main results of the study outlined in this article contain the justification for the need and suggestions for changing the existing evaluation procedure by investigative judges, judges, and the reasons for applying the precautionary measures, assessing the circumstances set out in Art. 178 of the CPC of Ukraine (which are taken into account when applying preventive measures), defining the concept of reasonable suspicion in terms of the degree of its “reasonableness”. It also analyzed how the risks identified in Art. 177 of the CPC of Ukraine.

Keywords: CCP of Ukraine, changes to the CPC of Ukraine, reasonable suspicion, preventive measure.