en

Law Journal of the National Academy of Internal Affairs

  • Received 20.02.2022,
  • Revised 25.05.2022,
  • Accepted 30.06.2022
Download article Download article
Volume 12, No. 2, 2022
  • pre-trial investigation; procedural head of the pre-trial investigation; supervision; powers; investigation; inquiry
  • https://doi.org/10.56215/04221202.41
  • Pages 41-47

The result of the reform of the criminal process in 2012 was the introduction of a new institute of procedural guidance for pre-trial investigations. This institute has become the object of many scientific discussions, and therefore there is a need to analyse its historical and legal genesis to clearly understand the place and role of the prosecutor in modern criminal proceedings. The purpose of the study is to examine the institute of procedural guidance in criminal proceedings and identify promising areas for improving its legal regulation. The study used dialectical, system-structural, synthesis, formal-logical, and historical methods. It is proved that the institute of procedural guidance originated quite a long time ago. From the very beginning, monarchs used civil servants to represent exclusively their interests in certain processes that were important to them. It is established that the genesis of the institute of the prosecutor’s office began to be used quite widely, up to the development of a separate structure of the relevant state bodies and assigning them the function of supervision over certain spheres of life, that is, the functions of the prosecutor’s office expanded sufficiently and representation of the interests of the state in criminal proceedings became part of the overall function of supervision. With the change in the socio-political orientation of Ukraine’s development after independence, the place and role of the prosecutor’s office in the system of state bodies have evolved under the influence of advanced European trends. The reverse process of changing the functions of the prosecutor’s office in criminal proceedings has begun, namely, the function of total prosecutor’s supervision has begun to narrow and be reduced to procedural guidance of the criminal process and representation exclusively in certain cases. As a result of the study, it was stated that the legislation regulating the legal status of the prosecutor’s office has contradictions, namely, the Law of Ukraine “On Prosecutor’s Office” imposes broader powers on the prosecutor than the Constitution of Ukraine, which undoubtedly requires legislative correction by making appropriate changes. The findings of the study can be used in rule-making and law enforcement activities.

References

[1] Ionushas, S. (2020). Trends in the constitutionalization of the institution of the Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine in the post-Soviet period. Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law, 3(6(34)), 60-65.

[2] Nazaruk, S. (2018). Some aspects of the development and formation of the prosecutor’s office. Proceedings. Series: Law, 5, 114-119.

[3] Mykhailyuk, A. (2019). Organizational and legal principles of procedural supervision over the rule of law at the stage of pre-trial investigation. Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law, 6, 281-286.

[4] Mirkovets, D. (2020). Fundamentals of methods of procedural guidance of pre-trial investigation. Juridical Science, 2(4(106)), 206-217.

[5] Shinkarenko, E. (2017). Historical and legal genesis of the interpretation of the concept of “prosecutorial supervision”. Law Forum, 5, 447-453. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1206158.

[6] Klochkov, V. (2021). Organization and procedural guidance of the prosecutor in the pre-trial investigation. Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law, 3, 260-267. doi: 10.32849/2663-5313/2021.3.43.

[7] Kostenko, I., & Ogievich, C. (2020). Historical aspects of the origin, formation and development of the system of prosecutorial bodies. Current Issues of State and Law, 7, 105-109. doi: 10.32837/apdp.v0i85.1832.

[8] Severuk, Yu. (2019). History of the origin and development of administrative and legal support for the implementation of the functions of the Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine. Law and Society, 6, 61-66. doi: 10.32842/2078-3736-2019-6-2-10.

[9] Mazurik, R. (2020). Foreign experience of administrative and legal support of the organization and activities of the regional prosecutor’s office. Education, Law, Management, 4, 75-81. doi: 10.51647/kelm.2020.4.2.15.

[10] Chudnovsky, O. (2020). Judicial reform of 1864 and the prosecutor’s office in the Ukrainian lands as part of the Russian Empire. Scientific Bulletin of Public and Private Law, 5(1), 22-28. doi: 10.32844/2618-1258.2020.5-1.4.

[11] Bugayov, J. (2021). Methods of prosecutorial oversight of compliance with laws to ensure the rights of the suspect. Bulletin of Kharkiv National UniversityVN Karazin, 31, 80-86.

[12] Institutions of judicial institutions. (1864, November). Retrieved from https://constitution.garant.ru/history/ act1600-1918/3450.

[13] Statute of criminal proceedings. (1864, November). Retrieved from http://www.um.co.ua/4/4-12/4-125165.html.

[14] Banach, S. (2020). International experience in organizing the prosecutor’s office. Bulletin of VN Karazin Kharkiv National University, 29, 276-280.