en

Law Journal of the National Academy of Internal Affairs

  • Received 16.03.2023,
  • Revised 16.03.2023,
  • Accepted 16.03.2023
Download article Download article
Vol. 10, No. 2, 2020
  • special pre-trial investigation; special court proceeding, in absentia; suspect; accused; confiscation; CPC of the FRG.
  • https://doi.org/10.33270/04202002.112
  • Pages 105-116

The purpose of the article is to compare the criminal procedure legislation of the Federal Republic of Germany and Ukraine on criminal proceedings in the absence of a suspect or accused both at the stage of pre-trial investigation and trial, with the study of compliance of these laws with international documents. and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Methodology. In view of the set aim, specificity of the object and subject of the research, the methodological tool has been chosen. During the research, a system of methods of scientific cognition has been applied: the formal logic (abstraction, analogy, deduction, induction, synthesis) – to study the content of the matter under consideration; the theoretical approach – in the process of study of scientific, educational and methodological literature. The scientific novelty consists in a comprehensive study of the trial against a suspect or an accused in absentia in the criminal procedure legislation of the Federal Republic of Germany and Ukraine, focusing on the criminal process of the Federal Republic of Germany in order to clarify all its peculiarities for determining further ways of development of criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine. Based on the results of the conducted study, the following conclusions have been drawn: 1) The criminal procedure legislation of both the FRG and Ukraine establishes a certain procedure for carrying out trial against a suspect or an accused in absentia; 2) The CPC of the FRG does not actually envisages the possibility of conducting a pre-trial investigation against a person in absentia, and this feature significantly distinguishes it from the CPC of Ukraine which establishes the procedure for conducting a special pre-trial investigation in absentia; 3) The criminal procedure legislation of the FRG, in contrast to the CPC of Ukraine, stipulates the so-called separate proceeding, which is targeted at inducing an accused to appear before a court; 4) According to the criminal procedure legislation of the FRG, in contrast to the corresponding legislation of Ukraine, holding full substantive hearing against an accused (defendant) in absentia is possible in certain cases, subject to proper notification in the cases, the outcome of which may result in imposition of a monetary penalty; 5) The CPC of the FRG mostly meets the standards of the European Court of Human Rights; 6) The criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine is at the stage of formation and does not fully meet international standards for holding trials against a suspect or an accused in absentia, and therefore the certain legal regulations of the CPC of the FRG may be borrowed for development of the criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine as regards trials in absentia.

References

[1] Afanasiev, V.V. (2018). Problems of conformity of the special criminal proceedings (in absentia) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Yuryst Ukrainy, Lawyer of Ukraine, 1, 35-42.

[2] Börner, R. (2005). Die Vermögensbeschlagnahme nach § 290 ff. StPO. Berlin: NStZ.

[3] Deiters, M. (2015). Systematischer Kommentar zur Strafprozessordnung. A.H. Albrecht (et al.). (Eds.). (Vol 4) (5th edn.). Berlin: StPO.

[4] Diemer, H. (2013). Karlsruher Kommentar zur Strafprozessordnung (7th edn.). R. Hannisch (Ed.). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

[5] Reports of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the human rights situation in Ukraine (2016, February-May; 2016, August – 2017, May; 2017, November – 2018, February). Retrieved from http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/Ukraine_14th_HRMMU_Report_ UKRANIAN.pdf; http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/Ukraine15thReport_ukr.pdf; http:// www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/UAReport18th_UKR.pdf; https://vkksu.gov.ua/userfiles/ ReportUkraineUKR.pdf.

[6] Eisenberg, U. (2012). Sich-Entfernen bzw. Fernbleiben whrend der Hauptverhandlung. Berlin: NStZ.

[7] Gmel, D. (2013). Karlsruher Kommentar zur Strafprozessordnung (7th edn.). R. Hannisch (Ed.). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

[8] Golovnenkov, P., & Spitsa, N. (2012). Code of Criminal Procedure of the Federal Republic of Germany. Moscow: MGIUA.

[9] Gutsenko, K.F., Golovko, L.V., & Filimonov, B.A. (2002). Criminal process of Western states (2nd ed., rev.). Moscow: Zertsalo-m.

[10]Kozachenko, V.I. (2018). The principle of legality in the criminal proceedings of Ukraine and Germany, its structural components. Constitutional State, 31, 101-108.

[11]Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine. No. 4651-VI. (2012, April). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov. ua/laws/show/4651-17#n3069

[12]Lapkin, A.V. (2018). The prosecutor in a special pre-trial investigation (in absentia). Legal Horizons, 13(26), 107-111.

[13]Laue, C. (2010). Die Hauptverhandlung ohne den Angeklagten. JA. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

[14]Meyer-Goßner, L., & Schmitt, B. (2016). Strafprozessordnung (59th edn.). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

[15]Nazarov, V.V. (2019). Principles of criminal proceedings and problems of their implementation during the pre-trial investigation. Constitutional State, 34, 76-82.

[16]Omelchuk, L.V. (2019). Problematic provisions of the Institute of Special Criminal Procedure in Ukraine. International Legal Bulletin: Current Problems of Our Time (Theory and Practice), 15, 182-191.

[17]Pikh, Yu. (2019). Material truth as the purpose and principle of criminal proceedings in the Federal Republic of Germany. Bulletin of Lviv University, 69, 161-172.

[18]Popeliushko, V.O. (2015). Alternatives to absentee proceedings: in the experience of Germany. Bulletin of the Academy of Advocacy of Ukraine, 12(2(33)), 138-144.

[19]Popeliushko, V.O. (2015). Proceedings in absentia in the criminal process of Germany. Law of Ukraine, 7, 34-42. Law Journal of the National Academy of Internal Affairs, 20(2), 112-123 Kalinnikov 121

[20]Quattrocolo, S., & Ruggeri, S. (2019). Personal Participation in Criminal Proceedings. Legal Studies in International, European and Comparative Criminal Law, 2, 123-164.

[21]Recommendations № R (87) 18 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to member states on the simplification of criminal justice. (1987, October). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/ laws/show/994_339

[22]Resolution 75 (11) of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe “On the criteria governing proceedings in the absence of the accused” (1973, January). Retrieved from http://echr-base.ru/ res75_11.jsp

[23]Roxin, C., & Schünemann, B. (2018). Strafverfahrensrecht (28th edn.). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

[24]Savchenko, V.A., Solovii, Ya.I., Felyk, V.I., & Yurchyshyn, V.D. (2017). Fundamentals of the criminal process of the Federal Republic of Germany. Kharkiv: Pravo.

[25]Shyshman, D.M. (2019). The suspect's awareness of the criminal proceedings initiated as a prerequisite for a special pre-trial investigation (in absentia). Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law, 10, 179-183.

[26]Strafprozessordnung für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. (2020). Retrieved from https://www.gesetzeim-internet.de/stpo/.

[27]Trahniuk, R.R. (2018). Compliance with the guarantees of a fair trial during the special pre-trial investigation and special trial (in absentia). Lawyer of Ukraine, 2(37), 128-137.

[28]Law of Ukraine “About modification of the Criminal and Criminal procedural codes of Ukraine concerning inevitability of punishment for separate crimes against bases of national safety, public safety and corruption crimes” No. 1689-VII. (2014, October). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/ show/1689-18#Tex