Review

Abstract. The article stipulates that criminal procedural legal relations that arise when a prosecutor performs the function of accusation during the notification of suspicion are defined as relations regulated by the rules of criminal procedure, which arise, develop and terminate during the pre-trial investigation, within which the prosecutor’s powers regarding the report of suspicion. The purpose of the article is to identify problematic issues of criminal procedural legal relations that arise when the prosecutor notifies of suspicion and make suggestions for their solution. The author points out that the standard of proof «reasonable suspicion», which is used by the prosecutor in the implementation of the function of prosecution in the pre-trial investigation, in the practice of the ECtHR is characterized by the following criteria: 1) reasonable suspicion presupposes the existence of facts or information that could convince an objective observer that the person concerned could have committed an act that falls under the signs of a criminal offense, responsibility for which at the time of its commission was established by the Criminal Code; 2) a reasonable suspicion must be based on evidence obtained by the prosecutor, sufficient in its entirety to make a decision, and may not be based on assumptions; 3) the existence of a reasonable suspicion is established by national courts and reflected in court decisions by stating the content of the suspicion, the circumstances of the case and the evidence that allows a reasonable suspicion of a person in the commission of a criminal offense; 4) the burden of proving the existence of a reasonable suspicion rests with the prosecutor and cannot be transferred to the defense. Given the results of the analysis of the current criminal procedure legislation, it is concluded that the standard of proof «reasonable suspicion» is a normatively established rule that reflects the possibility of making a number of procedural decisions under criminal procedure law, only if the prosecutor proves the involvement persons before committing a criminal offense at the level necessary for the issuance of the relevant procedural decision. The paper establishes that the procedure for notifying a person of suspicion can be divided into stages: 1) making a decision on the need to notify the person of the suspicion. This stage involves checking the grounds for such notification in accordance with Part 1 of Art. 276 of the CPC, observance of procedural guarantees during the conduct of certain investigative or operational-search actions or application of precautionary measures that were taken before the moment of such notification; 2) objectification / expression of the formed internal will of the authorized official concerning the accepted decision in the external form by drawing up the text of the message on suspicion according to the requirements provided by Art. 277 of the CPC, and its signing; 3) bringing the information to the notice of the addressee in respect of whom the decision on notification of suspicion was made, by directly handing over its text to the person in accordance with Art. 278 of the CPC. At this stage, the suspect’s rights are also communicated, where if the suspect makes a request, he is obliged to explain in detail each of these rights (Part 3 of Article 276 of the CPC). Key words: prosecutor, legal relations, function of accusation, substantiated suspicion, criminal procedural evidence. REFERENCES LIST OF LEGAL DOCUMENTS LEGISLATION

1. Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy [Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy vid 13.04.2012 № 4651-VI data zvernennia 07.12.2020 [in Ukrainian].
2. Yedynyi zvit pro kryminalni pravoporushennia za sichen-zhovten 2020 roku [The only report on criminal offenses for January-October 2020] (Forma № 1) data zvernennia 07.12.2020 [in Ukrainian].

BIBLIOGRAPHY THESIS

1. O V Ivashchenko, Informuvannia uchasnykiv kryminalnoho provadzhennia [Informing participants in criminal proceedings]: avtoref. dys. na zdobuttia nauk. stupenia kand. yuryd. nauk: 12.00.09 (2013) Odesa 20 [in Ukrainian].
2. A I Paliukh, Uchast prokurora v dokazuvanni pid chas dosudovoho rozsliduvannia [Participation of the prosecutor in the evidence during the pre-trial investigation] dys…d-ra yuryd nauk 12.00.09 (2016) Lviv 114–115 [in Ukrainian].
3. Kh R Sliusarchuk, Standarty dokazuvannia u kryminalnomu provadzhenni [Standards of proof in criminal proceedings] dys. kand yuryd nauk 12.00.09, (2017) Lviv, 2017 104 [in Ukrainian].

AUTHORED BOOKS

1. М А Pohoretskyi Kryminalno-protsesualni pravovidnosyny: struktura i systema [Criminal procedural legal relations: structure and system]: monohrafiia. Kharkiv: Arsis LTD2002. S. 27 [in Ukrainian].
2. A Denysiuk, Poniattia, sut i zavdannia kryminalnoho protsesu: lektsiia [The concept, essence and objectives of the criminal process: a lecture] (1994) K.: Ukr akad vnutr sprav 15 [in Ukrainian].
3. L D Udalova, Kryminalnyi protses Ukrainy: zahalna chastyna: konspekt lektsii [Criminal process of Ukraine: general part: lecture notes] (2001) K.: NAVS15 [in Ukrainian].
4. M A Pohoretskyi, Funktsionalne pryznachennia operatyvno-rozshukovoi diialnosti u kryminalnomu protsesi [Functional purpose of operational and investigative activities in criminal proceedings]: monohrafiia (2007) Kh.: Arsis LTD240 [in Ukrainian].
5. L M Loboiko, Kryminalnyi protses: pidruchnyk (2014) K: Istyna 432 s [in Ukrainian].
6. M A Pohoretskyi, O A Mitskan, Standart dokazuvannia «obgruntovana pidozra» u praktytsi Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny: vplyv na vitchyznianu pravozastosovnu praktyku [Standard of proof «reasonable suspicion» in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights: impact on domestic law enforcement practice] 1 (2019) Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva 37–49 [in Ukrainian].

ARTICLES

1. O V Faraon, Protsesualna forma pysmovoho povidomlennia pro pidozru u kryminalnomu provadzhenni [Procedural form of written notice of suspicion in criminal proceedings] 1 (2014) Naukovyi visnyk Kharkivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu 204–207 [in Ukrainian].
2. O V Kaplina, Pidozra u kryminalnomu provadzhenni: poniattia, oznaky, sutnist [Suspicion in criminal proceedings: concept, signs, essence] 1 (2013) Yurydychnyi chasopys Natsionalnoi akademii vnutrishnikh sprav 238–242 data zvernennia 07.12.2020 [in Ukrainian].
3. I H Ivasiuk, Instytut «Povidomlennia pro pidozru» novoho kryminalnoho protsesualnoho zakonodavstva Ukrainy [Institute for Notification of Suspicion of the new criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine] 4 (88) (2013) Mytna sprava 74–79 [in Ukrainian].
4. V Hryniuk, Okremi pytannia povidomlennia osoby pro pidozru yak pochatok realizatsii funktsii obvynuvachennia [Some issues of notifying a person of suspicion as the beginning of the function of the prosecution] 11 (2013) Pravo Ukrainy 120–126 [in Ukrainian].
5. Yu P Alenin, I V Hloviuk, Povidomlennia pro pidozru: zahalna kharakterystyka ta problemy udoskonalennia [Suspicion messages: general characteristics and problems of improvement] 1 (2014) Visnyk Pivdennoho rehionalnoho tsentru Natsionalnoi akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy 161–169 [in Ukrainian].

CASES

1. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 25.11.2020 u spravi № 627/927/19 data zvernennia 07.12.2020 [in Ukrainian].
2. Postanova Velykoi Palaty Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 11 hrudnia 2019 roku u spravi № 536/2475/14-k data zvernennia 07.12.2020 [in Ukrainian].
3. Case of Fox, Campbell and Hartley v. the United Kingdom: Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights from 30 August 1990 data zvernennia 07.12.2020 [in Ukrainian].
4. Case of Cebotari v. Moldova: Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights from 13 November 2007 data zvernennia 07.12.2020 [in Ukrainian].
5. Case of Grinenko v. Ukraine: Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights from 15 November 2012 data zvernennia 07.12.2020 [in Ukrainian].
6. Case of Labita v. Italy: Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights from 6 April 2000 data zvernennia 07.12.2020 [in Ukrainian].
7. Case of Włoch v. Poland: Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights from 19 October 2000. data zvernennia 07.12.2020 [in Ukrainian].