Кримінально-процесуальні функції: теоретикометодологічні засади і практика реалізації: автореферат

Abstract

Дисертація є першим спеціальним комплексним дослідженням теоретичних, методологічних та практичних аспектів кримінально-процесуальних функцій на основі положень КПК України 2012 р. У дисертації сформульовано методологічні засади вчення про кримінальнопроцесуальні функції; запропоновано визначення та перелік ознак кримінальнопроцесуальної функції; співвіднесено категорію «кримінально-процесуальна функція» із суміжними категоріями кримінально-процесуальної доктрини. На основі систематизованих доктринальних підходів конституйовано систему кримінально-процесуальних функцій, визначено її рівні, здійснено класифікацію кримінально-процесуальних функцій. Розкрито зміст кожної кримінальнопроцесуальної функції основоположного (первинного), вторинного, обслуговуючого та паралельного (приєднаного) рівнів, з’ясовано проблеми реалізації зазначених функцій у кримінальному провадженні та запропоновано шляхи їх вирішення. Сформульовано науково-обґрунтовані пропозиції про внесення змін та доповнень до КПК у сфері реалізації кримінально-процесуальних функцій. The thesis is the first complex special research of the issues of theoretical, methodological and practical aspects of criminal procedural functions on the basis of Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine 2012. Methodological principles of the theory of criminal procedural functions are set up in the thesis; author suggests a definition and a list of criminal procedural function’s characteristics. The criminal procedural function is defined as particular, independent direction of a subject’s activity of criminal proceedings, determined by theirs objectives, and the function has its own objective, determines the subject’s rights and duties and realized by criminal procedural means in form which is regulated by the criminal procedural legislation. The category «criminal procedural function» is compared with related categories of criminal procedural doctrine and it’s proved to distinguish criminal procedural functions (as directions of criminal procedural action carried out by the subjects of criminal process), criminal process functions (as a system of activities, social legal institute) and functions of the criminal procedural law (as area of law). On the basis of systematic doctrinal approaches the system of criminal procedural functions is suggested. It’s made by levels: original (initial) level of criminal procedural functions (criminal prosecution, defense and justice); secondary level (investigation, prosecutor’s supervision, departmental procedural guidance of the pre-trial investigation, corrective function, court supervision, perpetuation of evidence by an investigative judge, guaranteeing the legality and validity of restriction of the rights and liberties of participants in criminal proceedings and other persons, international cooperation, law-enforcement function); attendant level (auxiliary function); parallel (joining) level (securing compensation of damage caused by a criminal offence, complaints against civil action, rehabilitation function). Classification of criminal procedural functions is proposed by: levels of the system of criminal procedural functions, measure of significance for attaining the purpose and solving the objectives of criminal proceedings; object; complexity of structure; compatibility with other criminal procedural functions; subject of realization; monosubjectivity or polysubjectivity of realization and the sphere of realization. Functional orientation of activity of court, investigative judge, prosecutor, investigator, head of the pre-trial investigation agency, operational units, victim, civil plaintiff, civil defendant, representative of legal entity under proceedings, witness, and witness’s advocacy is defined. The matter and issues of realization of every criminal procedural function of original (initial), secondary, attendant and parallel (joining) level are uncovered by such characteristics: concept and essence; objectives; subjects of realization and theirs authorities/status; temporal limits of existence; issues of realization according to the Code. The issues of realization of criminal prosecution function are emphasized: assessment of grounds to apprehend an individual; grounds and procedure of notification of suspicion; grounds and procedure for conducting investigative (detective) actions, covert investigative (detective) actions; provisional seizure of property; closing criminal proceedings; motion on releasing the person from criminal liability; proving in the trial; prosecutor’s participation in criminal proceedings based on the agreements. Author has defined some issues concerned with the defense function: difficulties in obtaining of demanded certain objects and documents; fixing the provisional access to objects and documents; reacting to not grating access to the certain objects and documents according to the procedure of provisional access to objects and documents; participation of defense in proving; ensuring participation of defense in conducting procedural actions during pre-trial proceedings and trial as well; review of records of pre-trial investigation according to the Article 221 of the CPC; defense in special criminal proceedings. The problems of realization of justice function are: defining the role of the court in criminal procedural proving; features of doing justice in special criminal proceedings; characteristics while doing justice in trial by jury; closing criminal proceedings by the court; application of measures to ensure the criminal proceedings in trial. Author makes theoretically substantiated proposals on making alterations and addendum to the Code on realization of criminal procedural functions concerning: a person’s detention, notification of suspicion, grounds and procedure of conducting investigative (detective) and covert (detective) actions; temporary arrest of property; closing criminal proceedings; relief of a person from criminal liability; proving at a trial; participation of a public prosecutor in criminal proceedings based on agreements; defense’s participation in the proving; ensuring the participation in procedural actions during pre-trial investigation and at a trial; conducting the defense during special criminal proceedings etc.