Підходи до оцінки законності джерела та способу отримання доказу з урахуванням вимог законодавства щодо початку досудового розслідування відносно речей та документів, доданих (наданих) особою до заяви (повідомлення) про вчинення кримінального правопорушення

Abstract

Зроблено спробу дати відповіді на запитання щодо того, чи, з огляду на процесуальні права потерпілого і заявника, є різниця у часових проміжках стосовно правомірності надання ними речей чи/та документів до своєї заяви (повідомлення) про вчинення кримінального правопорушення? Також проаналізовано підходи до оцінки законності джерела та способу отримання доказу з урахуванням вимог законодавства щодо початку досудового розслідування відносно речей і документів. Наведено позицію колегії суддів Другої судової палати Касаційного кримінального суду з означених питань і власні роздуми. The following article attempts to answer the question of whether, in view of the procedural rights of a victim and a claimant, there is a difference in time line between the legality of their attachment of items and/or documents to the statement (notifcation) on a criminal offense. Approaches to assessing the legitimacy of the source and method of obtaining evidence in compliance with the requirements of the legislation in accordance with the beginning of the pre-trial investigation regarding the items and documents are also analyzed in the article, since the judicial practice differs in this area. In particular, in investigative and judicial practice there are many cases when a person (offcial) attaches the items or documents to the statement (notifcation) in order to substantiate the presence of signs of a criminal offense and to argue such an appeal, while addressing a statement (notifcation) on a criminal offense to the investigator, prosecutor, other offcial authorized to accept and register statements and notifcations of a criminal offense. However, the judicial practice on the application of the provisions of Articles 84, 86, 214, 237 of the CPC of Ukraine in their relationship differs in terms of assessing the admissibility of evidence - the legitimacy of the source and method of obtaining evidence, in compliance with the requirements of the legislation regarding the items and documents, attached (provided) by a person to the statement (notifcation) on committing a criminal offense. According to the results of the abovementioned scientifc and practical searches, the following can be stated: – the victim may exercise his right to produce evidence to confrm his statement from the moment of entering the relevant information into the Unifed Register of Pre-trial Investigations, while the applicant has the right to produce his items and documents to the statement for confrmation both before entering information into the Unifed Register of Pre-trial Investigations, and during the pre-trial investigation stage; – the powers of the investigator, prosecutor including, among others, the conduct of an inspection in accordance with Article 237 of the CPC of Ukraine, the documents and/or items attached to the statement (notifcation) after entering the relevant information about the criminal offense in the Unifed Register of Pretrial Investigations; – the protocol drawn up by the investigator during the examination of items and/or documents must meet the requirements of Part 3 of Article 104 of the CPC of Ukraine. The protocol is also a procedural source of evidence according to the provisions of Part 2 of Article 84, paragraph 3 of Part 2 of Article 99 of the CPC of Ukraine.