- Journal Issues
- № 3, (2018) Actual problems of criminal justice
- TO HELP THE PRACTICE LAWYER
- SCIENTIFIC AND LEGAL CONCLUSION ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF PART 4 OF ARTICLE 49 OF THE LAW OF UKRAINE “ON THE JUDICIARY AND THE STATUS OF JUDGES” OF 2 JUNE 2016 NO. 1402-VIII AND PART 1 OF ART. 481 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE OF UKRAINE
SCIENTIFIC AND LEGAL CONCLUSION ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF PART 4 OF ARTICLE 49 OF THE LAW OF UKRAINE “ON THE JUDICIARY AND THE STATUS OF JUDGES” OF 2 JUNE 2016 NO. 1402-VIII AND PART 1 OF ART. 481 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE OF UKRAINE
Authors: M. Pogoretskyi, V. Gryniuk
Pages: 167-176
Year: 2018
Location: Pravova Ednist Ltd
Дата публікації: 23.11.2018
Review
This legal opinion examines the rules for notifying a judge of criminal suspicion under Art. 49(4) of the Law “On the Judiciary and Status of Judges” and Art. 481(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. By reviewing international and constitutional protections of judicial independence, the CPC’s special procedure and domestic case law, it establishes that only the Prosecutor General or their deputy may draft and serve a written notice of suspicion on a judge. Notification by any other prosecutor or investigator violates these provisions, fails to confer suspect status, and undermines the proceeding’s legal validity.