Review

The article presents a comprehensive study of the legal nature, content, and procedural features of the conclusion and judicial review of an agreement in criminal proceedings concerning the application of criminal-law measures to a legal entity under the special procedure provided for in Chapter 37–1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. Based on the analysis of the updated legislation, particularly Law of Ukraine No. 4111-IX of December 4, 2024, it is substantiated that the newly introduced form of agreement constitutes an important component of modern procedural compromise in criminal justice. However, its implementation requires a proper balance between the public interest and the protection of business entities’ rights.

The article pays special attention to the procedural status of the legal entity as a party to the agreement, elaborating its right to representation, right to defense, and procedural autonomy, as well as delineating the powers of the representative and defense counsel, emphasizing the importance of voluntariness in the legal entity’s expression of will when concluding the agreement. It is established that the absence of clear guarantees in the current edition of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the participation of defense counsel at certain stages of the proceedings, restrictions on access to case materials, and the possibility for the prosecutor to conclude an agreement based solely on the formal presence of a «representative» of the legal entity, pose risks of formalized approval of sanctions without proper legal assessment. It is argued that effective realization of a legal entity’s right to defense requires statutory guarantees of its access to qualified legal assistance regardless of how the representative is determined.

The content of the agreement, the procedure for its initiation, and the stages of pre-trial and trial consideration are examined with an emphasis on the necessity of judicial review to ensure fairness, voluntariness, and legality. The study concludes that the lack of a legislatively defined list of grounds for the court’s refusal to approve an agreement, the insufficiently clarified meaning of the concept of «public interest,» and the vague regulation of cooperation between the legal entity and the prosecution side threaten the implementation of the principles of legal certainty and equality of arms.

Drawing on the analysis of the French model of Convention judiciaire d’intérêt public (CJIP), the Dutch transactie mechanism, and the Italian patteggiamento procedure, the article justifies the need to implement certain institutional safeguards into Ukrainian legislation that would provide a higher standard of protection for legal entities, particularly regarding mandatory participation of defense counsel, clear judicial control over the voluntariness of the agreement, and institutionalized monitoring of its implementation.

The conclusions include proposals for amending Articles 483–17, 483–18, and 483–19 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine to ensure proper normative regulation of procedural guarantees for legal entities under the special procedure.

Keywords agreement, legal entity, criminal proceedings, criminal-law measures, special procedure, representative, defense counsel, prosecutor, judicial review, public interest, Chapter 37–1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.