Review

Annotation. Collecting evidence, as one of the elements of criminal procedural proving, is the driving force for a complete and comprehensive determination of criminal proceeding circumstances and achievement of its objectives. Based on the obtained evidence, subjects of proof form and defend their legal positions, provide certain arguments, counterarguments and objections. In this way they realise their rights and interests in criminal proceedings, and achieve their intended procedural purposes. In the meantime, the court, as an independent and impartial arbitrator, also takes procedural decisions in accordance with collected and available case evidence. The same applies to investigative judge, who, performing the function of judicial review, evaluates collected and submitted evidence. Therefore, appropriate normative regulation of the right to collect evidence and procedure of its realisation is crucially important. However, regarding the victim, the provisions of the CPC of Ukraine are imperfect since they do not fully guarantee their right to collect copies of documents. Moreover, in certain cases collecting them is illogical according to the need of submitting to the court original documents, not their copies. Nevertheless, the victim has no ability to collect original documents (in accordance with the literal interpretation of criminal procedural law provisions). The above-mentioned and certain other problematic issues constantly concern scientists and practicing lawyers, and therefore require thorough research. The purpose of the article is: 1) to analyse current legislation, relevant conclusions of the Supreme Court, and scientific works regarding collecting copies of documents by victims; 2) to explore the problematic issues in this regard; 3) to provide scientifically-based suggestions for resolving current issues. The article analyses the provisions of the CPC of Ukraine which regulate collecting copies of documents by victims and reviews conclusions of the Supreme Court regarding peculiarities of electronic documents (videotapes) and their copies. It is concluded that the existing legal mechanism of collecting copies of documents by victims, including electronic documents, is unsatisfactory and is not accompanied by sufficient legal guarantees. The presence of collision between part 3 of Article 93 and part 3 of Article 99 of CPC of Ukraine is substantiated. Thus, the author demonstrates his own vision of the above-mentioned issues and suggests certain ways of the possible solution. Key words: victim, victims’ procedural rights, ensuring victims’ rights, guarantees of victim’s rights, copies of documents, collecting evidence, collecting copies of documents, proving process. REFERENCE LIST LIST OF LEGAL DOCUMENTS

1. Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy [Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy vid 13.04.2012 № 4651-VI data zvernennia 20.10.2020 [in Ukrainian].
2. Zakon Ukrainy «Pro sudoustrii i status suddiv» [Law of Ukraine on the judiciary and status of judges]: Zakon Ukrainy vid 02.06.2016 № 1402-VIII data zvernennia 20.10.2020 [in Ukrainian].

CASE

1. Sprava № 751/6069/19: Postanova Kasatsiinoho kryminalnoho sudu v skladi Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 10.09.2020 [Decision of Criminal Cassation Court within the Supreme Court of 10.09.2020, case № 751/6069/19] data zvernennia 20.10.2020 [in Ukrainian].

BIBLIOGRAPHY AUTHORED BOOKS

1. Elkind P, ’Tseli i sredstva ikh dostizheniya v sovetskom ugolovno-protsessualnom prave’ [Purposes and means of their achievement in Soviet criminal procedural law] (Leningrad, LSU Publishing House 1976) 143 [in Russian].
2. Mykheienko M, Nor V, Shybiko V, ’Kryminalnyi protses Ukrainy’ [Criminal process of Ukraine] (Kyiv, Lybid 1999) 536 [in Ukrainian].
3. Davydenko S, ’Poterpilyi yak subiekt kryminalno-protsesualnoho dokazuvannia’ [Victim as a subject of the criminal procedure proving process] (Kharkiv, FINN2008) 296 [in Ukrainian].

ARTICLES

1. Starenkyi O, ’Subiekty dokazuvannia v kryminalnomu provadzhenni: poniattia ta klasyfikatsiia’ [Subjects of proving in criminal proceedings: concept and classification] (2014) 12 Naukovi zapysky Lvivskoho universytetu biznesu ta prava 232–236 [in Ukrainian].
2. Starenkyi O, ’Poterpilyi yak subiekt dokazuvannia u kryminalnomu provadzhenni: problemy realizatsii zasady zmahalnosti’ [Victim as a subject of proving in criminal proceedings: issues of the adversarial principle realization] (2017) 43 Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universytetu 189–193 [in Ukrainian].
3. Vapniarchuk V, ’Subiekty kryminalnoho protsesualnoho dokazuvannia’ [Subjects of the criminal procedure proving process] (2014) 1 Visnyk Natsionalnoi akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy 160–168 [in Ukrainian].
4. Pohoretskyi M, ’Nova kontseptsiia kryminalnoho protsesualnoho dokazuvannia’ [The new concept of criminal procedural proving] (2015) 3 Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva 63–79 [in Ukrainian].
5. Slobodzian A, ’Dokument yak dzherelo dokaziv u kryminalnomu provadzhenni’ [Document as a source of evidence in criminal proceedings] (2014) 1 Naukovyi chasopys Natsionalnoi akademii prokuratury Ukrainy 184–190 [in Ukrainian].
6. Osinska O, ’Pravo poterpiloho na zbir dokaziv pid chas dosudovoho rozsliduvannia’ [The victim’s right to collect evidence during the pre-trial investigation] (2017) 1 Sudova apeliatsiia 43–49 [in Ukrainian].
7. Hloviuk I, Andrusenko S, ’Tymchasovyi dostup do rechei i dokumentiv yak zakhid zabezpechennia kryminalnoho provadzhennia, spriamovanyi na zbyrannia ta perevirku dokaziv’ [Temporary access to objects and documents as a measure to ensure the criminal proceedings, aimed at collecting and examining evidence] (2013) 3–2 Porivnialno-analitychne pravo 293–297 [in Ukrainian].
8. Slipchenko V, ’Pidstavy ta protsesualnyi poriadok vytrebuvannia rechei i dokumentiv’ [Grounds and procedure of the reclaiming objects and documents] (2014) 4 (2) Visnyk Zaporizkoho natsionalnoho universytetu 282–289 [in Ukrainian].

DISSERTATION

1. Kutskir H, ’Zasada nedotorkannosti prava vlasnosti: poniattia, zmist i realizatsiia u kryminalnomu provadzhenni’ [Principle of inviolability of ownership: concept, content and realization in criminal proceedings] (dys. … kand. yuryd. nauk, 2015) 242 [in Ukrainian].