Review

The article examines the problematic issues of defense counsel’s participation in conducting investigative (detective) actions and covert investigative (detective) actions during pre-trial investigation. is to study certain problems of defense counsel’s participation in investigative (detective) actions and covert investigative (detective) actions during pre-trial investigation and to provide scientific proposals for their solution. The author emphasizes that the current CPC of Ukraine has significantly strengthened the adversarial principles of pre-trial proceedings by providing defense counsel, as a subject of proof, with certain guarantees of his/her professional activities when using such means of proof as investigative (detective) actions and covert investigative (detective) actions. The author proves that the following guarantees of the defense counsel as a subject of proof during investigative (detective) actions in pre-trial investigation are granting the defense counsel the right to apply to the investigating judge with a petition for conducting investigative (detective) actions; assigning to the defense counsel the right to provide brief consultations during the conduct of investigative (detective) actions on his/her own initiative or at the request of the suspect; mandatory participation of the defense counsel by the investigator, prosecutor, at the request of the person whose premises are searched; regulatory definition of the obligation to indicate in the protocols of investigative (detective) actions: the date, time of the beginning and end of the investigative (detective) actions, an indication of the need to explain the rights and obligations of the participants in the investigative (detective) actions, information on the presence or absence of annexes to the protocol; recognition of evidence as inadmissible if it was obtained during the conduct of investigative (detective) actions with a significant violation of the procedure for their conduct. It is noted that the criminal procedural guarantees of defense counsel as a subject of proof during covert investigative (detective) actions in pre-trial investigation are as follows granting the defense counsel the right to apply to the investigating judge with a petition for covert investigative (detective) actions; assigning to the investigating judge the obligation to take a receipt from the defense counsel as the initiator of covert investigative (detective) actions on non-disclosure of the fact of their conduct; assigning to the investigating judge the obligation to decide on familiarizing the defense counsel with the results of covert investigative (detective) actions conducted on his or her initiative; lifting the classification of covert investigative (detective) actions, procedural decisions on the basis of which covert investigative (detective) actions were conducted, after the relevant covert investigative (detective) actions are conducted or before the criminal proceedings are disclosed to the other party. The author substantiates that the criminal procedural guarantees available to defense counsel as a subject of proof in the current CPC of Ukraine are not sufficient for the effective use of such efficient and effective means of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings at the pre-trial stage as investigative (detective) actions and covert investigative (detective) actions. Therefore, in order to strengthen the adversarial principles in pre-trial proceedings and to enhance the guarantees of protection of the rights and freedoms of participants to criminal proceedings at the pre-trial investigation, it is advisable to introduce the institute of attorney’s investigation into the current CPC of Ukraine.