One of the reasons for underusing the results of covert evidence-gathering in the criminal procedural averment is the absence of procedural decisions in the materials of criminal proceedings (adjudications of investigating judges that allow to conduct covert evidence-gathering; orders requested of investigators and prosecutors on conducting of covert evidence-gathering), on the basis of which covert evidence-gathering are conducted in the criminal proceedings. The author of the article set an aim, according to the systemic analysis of scientific sources, provisions of the Ukrainian legislation currently in force and materials of the law-enforcement practice, to establish the consequences of non-disclosure of procedural decisions in the criminal procedural averment, serving the basis for carrying out of covert evidence-gathering, to substantiate and suggest viable solutions. Conclusion is made that consequences of non-disclosure of procedural decisions, on the basis of which covert evidence-gathering are conducted, in the criminal procedural averment are the following: 1) an impossibility to use the results of covert evidence-gathering as evidence in criminal proceedings due to the lack of capacity to check and evaluate: the lawfulness and justification for conducting of covert evidence-gathering; the lawfulness of restrictions on rights and freedoms of individuals, subject to covert evidence-gathering; as well as protocols of covert evidence-gathering for compliance with the admissibility, appropriateness and credibility requirements; 2) filing claims by the defense to recognize an inadmissibility of evidence obtained as a result of covert evidence-gathering; 3) recognition of unlawfulness and unsoundness of procedural decisions, adopted on the basis of relevant covert evidence-gathering.

After the entry into force of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine in 2012, there is an essential decrease in the number of operational procurements conducted by the units of the National Police. As a result, the effectiveness of detecting and investigating the facts of illegal sale of items which are prohibited for circulation. One of the reasons for this situation is the imperfection of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. Purpose of the article: disclosure of disadvantages Part 3 of Art. 271 Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine and research of their influence on the state of application of operational procurements. Taking into account the practice of The European Court of Human Rights proposed criteria for distinguishing legitimate actions of police officers during the operational procurements from illegal, when there is provocation (incitement) to commit a crime. It has been found out that it is not provocative (incitement) to show the buyer’s initiative in acquiring certain items during an operational procurement, when there are reasonable grounds to consider that the person concerned is preparing or committing a crime and it will be commit regardless of the actions of the buyer. In this case, the purpose to show a buyer’s initiative is not to incitement a person to commit illegal sale, but direction of the behavior of this person in the way of the hidden fixation of his illegal actions. Such actions can not be recognized as a violation of item 1 of Art. 6 of The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and the evidence obtained on the results of operational procurement is admissibile according to Art. 86, 87 Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. Proved that due to the excessive accumulation separate sentences and phrases, the current version of Part 3 of Art. 271 Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine allows the possibility of a distorted interpretation of the term «provoke (incite)», which determines the expediency of its wording more clearly according to the fundamental decisions of The European Court of Human Rights

The procedural activity of the investigator has undergone significant transformations in its content and scope, which has changed the traditional view of the procedural activity of the authorized entity since current Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine enured. Currently, the relevant issue – ?is legal regulation of the activities of pre-trial investigation participants, in particular the activities of the investigator and his interaction with other unauthorized participants of the criminal process in general. Therefore, neither practice nor scientific research in criminal procedural law has not solved the problem during the period of the 1960’ Code of Criminal Procedure. The purpose of the article – ?to determine features of co-relation between the activities of the investigator and the activities of unauthorized participants in pre-trial investigation which are based on systematic analysis of the criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine, scientific sources, and materials of practice. It is noted that the procedural activity of the investigator became more controlled by unauthorized participants in the investigation and by the authorized representatives of its participants. The list of procedural actions and decisions of the investigator, which he must coordinate with the prosecutor and investigating judge, which can be appealed by the interested parties of the proceeding, is expanded.

The restriction of the right of a person to freedom and personal integrity should be carried out exclusively with observance of constitutional guarantees of the protection of human rights and freedoms and taking into account international standards. The Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine contains detailed regulations on the grounds and procedure for the selection of preventive measures in the form of detention, periods of detention and their continuation. However, during the pre-trial investigation and litigation, there are problems related to the application of criminal procedural rules for determining the terms of detention and justifying the need for their continuation. The purpose of the article is to find out the issues of observance of reasonable time periods in criminal proceedings when applying a preventive measure in the form of detention at the present stage of the reform of the criminal process in Ukraine. Reasonableness of the terms of detention is conditioned by observance of the norms of the CPC and the requirements of the practice of the ECHR. Violations of the reasonableness of the terms of detention take place in cases of their inappropriate calculation, exceeding the prescribed periods of detention and unjustified extensions. As during the pre-trial investigation, as well as during the court proceedings, the period of validity of the decree on the detention or extension of the period of detention may not exceed sixty days. The absence of statutory time limits for trial and the maximum periods of detention during court proceedings should compensate for the principles of reasonable time, which makes it possible to assess them in accordance with the criteria defined by the CPC of Ukraine, taking into account the practice of the ECHR.

The Government of Ukraine lodged two declarations under article 12(3) of the Rome Statute accepting the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction over crimes committed on Ukrainian territory. On 25 April 2014, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court opened a preliminary examination of the situation in Ukraine. During the preliminary examination stage there are no circumstances which could avoid cooperation between Ukraine and ICC. At once Ukrainian Code of Criminal Procedure contains some gaps which could block cooperation at the stage of investigation and prosecution. In particular, national legislation allows cooperation between Ukraine and international criminal courts (tribunals) only if exist some international treaty which regulate such cooperation. Consequently cooperation between Ukraine and International Criminal Court needs the strengthening at national level. The Government of Ukraine prepared draft bill which contains all necessary amendments to the Ukrainian Code of Criminal Procedure. Unfortunately the draft bill was blocked by Verkhovna Rada Committee on Legislative Support of Law Enforcement. The purpose of this article is to analyze criticism of the above mentioned draft bill. The Committee especially insists on unconstitutionality of the draft bill by appealing to the Opinion of the Constitutional court of Ukraine on the conformity of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court with the Constitution of Ukraine (the Rome Statute case). In this opinion Constitutional Court of Ukraine declared the principle of complementarity, as set forth in the Rome Statute, to be in conflict with the Ukrainian Constitution. However the Committee’s position is unconvincing for a wide variety of reasons. Firstly, it ignores most recent constitutional amendments which allow to ratify the Rome Statute. Secondly, there is reason to believe that Constitutional Court of Ukraine has already revised its opinion about unconstitutionality of the the principle of complementarity

In the article, based on the analysis of scientific literature on criminalistics, criminal process and taking into account actual changes to Art. 366–1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine «On Prevention of Corruption» have analyzed the criminalistics significant indications of the declaration of false information. The purpose of this article is to study within its scope the criminalistics characteristics of declaration false information. The criminalistics characteristic of the crime is considered by the authors as a system containing a set of forensic significance features inherent in a certain type of crime. Like any system education, criminalistics characterization of crimes consists of interconnected components – ?elements. The indicated elements are not isolated, but connected with certain correlation links, determined by the sequential placement of elements in accordance with the sequence of deployment of criminal activity, starting from the position: 1) personality of the offender acting in the direction 2) the choice of the object of the criminal offense, 3) in a certain environment, 4) by applying certain methods, 5) causing the corresponding effects in the form of a set of tracks and damage. The article analyzes the following elements of criminalistics characteristics of the declaration of false information: the person of the offender, the subject of a direct criminal offense, the method of committing the crime, the picture of the trace. The criminalistics characteristics of the declaration of false information helps to distinguish the said offense from other official crimes; crimes related to corruption; and the same administrative offense. The criminalistics characteristics of the declaration of false information facilitates the definition of a range of circumstances to be proved in a criminal proceeding for crimes of this kind and the planning of their investigation. At the same time, while investigating crimes of this kind, there are a number of problems that require further resolution, and therefore this issue requires a separate scientific study, which will be the subject of further scientific research

The issue of enforcement of the right for fair trial in Ukraine is becoming increasingly urgent, as the current judicial system does not have confidence in society and acts without taking into account the legally established fundamental principles of the judiciary. The purpose of this article is to analyse the problematic issues of enforcement of the right for fair trial in Ukraine and to suggest possible ways of their solution, taking into account the experience of France. To resolve the stated goal, the author proposes the following algorithm for observation the question of the right to a fair trial: 1) analysis of certain aspects of the enforcement of the right for fair trial in France; 2) a comparative analysis of the provision of the right for a fair trial in France and Ukraine; 3) Extrapolation of the experience of France in ensuring the right to a fair trial in the system of judicial proceedings of Ukraine. It is noted that according to Art. 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as well as the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, the right to a fair trial – ?the establishment of certain qualifications for the organization of a court: its creation by law; independence, impartiality; accessibility; observance of the procedure of consideration of the case; publicity; ensuring of the enforcement of the rights of participants in court proceedings provided by the procedural law; competition; a reasonable period of consideration of the case; execution of the final court decision, etc. The author concludes that the positive and useful in the legislation of France for the borrowing of Ukrainian legislators is a detailed normative definition of the principles of the activity of judges, the conditions for recognizing their bias, the rules for determining the composition of the court, withdrawal and isolation, such features were based on the analysis of procedural law, the specific cases examined by the European Court of Human Rights. For instance, the author states that in the legislation of Ukraine, it would be advisable to propose as a basis for the removal (recusal) of a judge, any pleading (enemy) relationship between a judge and any party in a case that would provide additional guarantees to ensure impartiality of the trial (on the example of France)

The Article gives a decent attention to the institute of witness immunity in criminal proceedings of two different countries, Ukraine, which belongs to the Romano-Germanic legal family, and England, a representative of Anglo-Saxon legal family, relying on techniques of the comparative-legal analysis. It carefully explores the existing national studies of the issue, which mostly fail to ensure the full disclosure of the immunity of witness in the criminal proceedings and its classification that in turn prevents from solving all current problems of law enforcement in Ukraine. To promote a deeper understanding of what is lacking, this Article summarizes the existing theory of criminal procedure law on the content and type of immunity of witnesses existing in Ukrainian legislation and offers perspective ways to categorize the notion of witness immunity. Accordingly, the Article proposes to divide the immunity of witness into two distinctive groups: a) the personal direct immunity of witness and b) the mediated lawful immunity of witness. Similarly, the Article examines the institute of witness immunity represented in the country with Anglo-Saxon (precedent) system of law, England, expanding on its broad interpretation and extensive experience. Although in England the privileges of witness are legally established, their provision in some way depends on the judge’s discretion, whereas in the Ukrainian criminal procedure a witness who referred to immunity right may insist on it and refuse to give evidence on a legitimate basis. Finally, the Article draws conclusion highlighting distinctive features of witness immunity in both countries and offers suggestions of further improvement of the institute in Ukrainian legislation. Particularly, the normative definition of the circle of family members baring witness immunity should be clearly defined in Ukrainian legislation as well as the guarantees of the implementation of immunity for minors are to be strongly established

? ????? ????????????? ???????? ?????????? ???????? ????????????? ? ???????? ????????? ??????? ? ?????? ??????? ????????? ??????? ? ????????????? ??????-????????????? ????????????, ???????????? ? ?????, ??????? ?????????? ? ???????????? ?????????????? ? ??????????? ????????????? ? ?????? ?????? ??????????. ? ??????? 2013 ???? ???????? ???????????? ??????????? ????? ?????? ???????? ???????? ??????? ? ???????? ????????????? ?????????????? ? ?????? ??????????????? ? ??????-????????????????? ???????????? ? ?????????? ??????????????? ????????????? ????? ?????? ???????????.

State activity in protecting people rights, freedom and interests is the main goal in the functionality of state bodies in society. The creation of effective implementation of protection the rights of citizens, respect for human freedoms, ensuring favorable conditions for the realization of human legitimate interests – ?all these tasks are necessary for the creation of a constitutional state. The purpose of this article is to analyze the elements and peculiarities of the national legal mechanism for ensuring the rights of participants of criminal proceedings. The author also aims to reveal the features of the separate national mechanism to ensure the rights of the participants of criminal proceedings, especially those, that have been introduced relatively recently. Within the scope of this research, we will analyze the subject, the procedure and the legislative sources of the national legal mechanism for ensuring the rights of participants of criminal proceedings, because the study of the problems of the system of ensuring the rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen has great practical importance for the further development of the science of criminal procedural law and the reform of Ukrainian legislation in the European integration aspirations of Ukraine, improvement the practice of realization and protection of human rights, development of Ukraine as a democratic state. Having examined the elements of national mechanism for ensuring the right of participants of criminal proceedings, we can develop our own vision of the general and individual role of elements of national mechanism for ensuring the right of participants of criminal proceedings. The national mechanism of ensuring the rights of participants of criminal proceedings functions not only within the framework of criminal justice. An institution of constitutional jurisdiction is a significant factor influencing the level of protection of the rights of participants of criminal proceedings. The Constitutional Court of Ukraine as an element of the national mechanism for ensuring the rights of participants of criminal proceedings began to play the particular weight with the introduction of the constitutional complaint institute

The author analyzed the features of modus operandi as a key element of forensic specifications of property insurance fraud. Also special attention is focused on the peculiarities of the ways with the aid of which the crime is committed, depending on its perpetrator. The purpose of the article is the study of property insurance fraud, its essential characteristics and ways in which it can be committed. The article acknowledges that insufficient level in the scientific study of insurance offences leads to the difficulties in the investigation of such type of crimes. Furthermore, abovementioned phenomenon has a direct impact on crime disclosure (particularly its statistics) and prosecuting those who responsible for committing such crime. The author concludes that insurance fraud is possible only in cases where there is an insurance relationship between the insurer and the insured. In the context of the current research, the author refers to the legal components of the fraud, stipulated in Ukrainian penal code. However, within the framework suggested by the author, underlying ways of committing fraud are mainly substantive and informative, taking into account the specificity of the insurance industry. Therefore, the author notes that the offenders must, by themselves or second persons, artificially create an insurance case. The article also examines the characteristic features of the way in which property insurance fraud can be committed, accordingly to its perpetrator. Thus, in case when the perpetrator is the insurance company, among key ways of committing the crime will be the issuing of invalid certificate of insurance or its forgery. Moreover, there may be the case where fraudster impersonates a representative of an insuring company. In such a case, the offence can be committed by forging of seal, issuance of forged set form of the particular insurance company

? ????? ???????????? ????????? ??????? ????????? ???????? ??? ??????? ????????? ???????? ???? ?????????? ??????? ???????? ??????????? ???????, ????????????? ?????????????? ??????? ???????, ????? ???????????? ????? ?? ????????? ??????: 1) ?? ??????? ? ??????? ? ??????????? ??????????? ??????? ??????? ??????????? ?? ????????????? ?????? ?????????? ???????? ??? ???????, ??? ?????????? ???????????? ?? ?????? ?? ?????????? ????, ? ????????????? ?? ????? ?????? ??? ?. 9 ?????????? ???????? ??????????? ???????, ? ???? ??????? ??? «??????? ???????? ? ???????????» ? ?????? ??? ?????????? ????????????? ?? ?? ?????????? ????, ?? ??????????? ?? ??????? ??????????. ???? ????????? ???? ?????????, ?????????, ???? ????? ??????? ???? ???????????????? ? ??????? ?. 2 ??. 19 ??????????? ??????? ?? ?. 9 ?????????? ???????? ????? «?????????? ?? ?????? ???????»; 2) ?? ??????? ??????? ??????????? ??????????? ??? ??????????????, ????????? ?? ???????????? ????????????? ???????????????? ???? ???????, ??? ???????? ???? ? ??’???? ?? ??????????? 20.11.2017 ? ??????? ??????? ??????????? ??????????? ?? ??????????? ?? ?????????????, ??????, ?? «????????? ?? ??????????? ?????????????? ???????? ??????? ???????????» ? ????????? ?????????? ???????? ??? ??????? ? ?????? ?? ?????, ?? ?????? ???????? 15.12.2017. ???? ????????? ???? ?????????, ??????? ????????? ????? ??? ???????, ??? ?????????? ???????? ????????? ?????????? ???????????? ?????????? ??? ????????? ?????? (????? ????????? ? ??????? 36 ??? ???????, ?????????? ????????????, ? ???? ????? ? ??????? ????????? ????? ?????? ?? ??????? 218 ??? ???????); 3) ?? ??????? ????? 20.11.2017 ?????????? ???????? ??????? ??????????? ?????????? ????????????? ????? (???????? ?? ??????? ??????? ????????? ???????????? ????? ???? ????) ???????????? ??????????, ?????????? ?? ?? ???????????? ?????????? ???? ????????????, ??? ? ????????????? ???????????????? ???? ???????

The article is devoted to the problem of qualitative characteristic of Criminal procedural law (CPD). The perfection (high quality) of the criminal procedural law – ?is the basis of its stability that warns of its change in the future. Therefore it is very important to develop a concept of quality standards of legislation that would be taken as a basis by the legislator in the development and adoption of laws in the field of the of criminal proceedings. In the context of Eurointegration of Ukraine, the question of the doctrinal definition of standards (criteria) of the quality of the law is actualized by the need for awareness and perception of the existing jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, which presents somewhat different approaches to understanding the quality of the law. All this requires a comprehensive study of the quality issues of the CPD from a new angle of view

The advocacy reform has largely influenced the legal regulation of access to the advocate’s profession in order to increase the credibility of advocacy. The paper deals with the place and role of access to the advocate’s profession in the light of the reform of the advocacy, discloses the peculiarities of ensuring the right of a person to access the profession of advocate and ways of exercising this right. The author highlights the problematic aspects of balancing between the subjective rights of a person and the professional standards of selection for the profession of advocate

In the article, based on the analysis of scholarly works of scientists, domestic criminal procedural legislation, international legal acts and materials of law practice, the problematic issues of the implementation of the protection function during the trial in the criminal process of Ukraine are considered. The purpose of the article is to find out the problem issues of the implementation of the function of protection in court proceedings in criminal proceedings at the present stage of development of legal and judicial reform in Ukraine. According to the results of the study, there were made conclusions and proposals to increase the effectiveness of the protection function during the trial of a criminal proceeding. The position on giving the right to protection to the party after the announcement of the indictment by the prosecutor has been supported is to object to the prosecution. The necessity of personal involvement of the accused in the trial and obligatory participation of the counsel in the cases where the law provides for the possibility of trial without a defendant is substantiated. Offered in case of removal the defendant from the courtroom, in violation of the order of the court, to provide for the possibility of his participation in the court hearing in the video conferencing regime, as well as to entitle the accused to return to the courtroom before the trial begins.

The article is devoted to the review of legislative acts of the Austrian Empire and the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which were used on Ukrainian lands in different periods of statehood. The author analyzes the most important law provisions for the modern criminal legislation of Ukraine. Legislative acts are divided into two groups in the article. The first group includes those that are basic and form the so-called «basic penal law», and the second – ?additional legislative acts included in the «additional penal law». The purpose of this article is to systematically present the legal constructions used in the legislative acts of the Austrian Empire and the Austro-Hungarian Empire as sources of criminal law. The legal constructions referred to above relate to various institutions of the criminal law of the Austrian Empire and the Austro-Hungarian Empire: a crime, an offense, a criminal responsibility, a criminal offender, complicity in a crime, etc. Substantiated that the content of these legal structures affected the structure of these laws as sources of criminal law. Taking into account such specificity, the article draws attention to the structure of the Austrian Penal Code of 1803 and the structure of this act in the wording of 1852. In particular, it is determined that Code in the edition of 1852 divided the acts into three types: grave crimes, less serious crimes and offenses. In its separate norms, less serious crimes and offenses were covered by the notion of «criminal act»

The article researches a role of an advocate as a defender of the suspect, the accused and a representative of the victim in criminal proceeding at each stage of mediation. There are analyzed the basic functions which an advocate performs as a defender of the suspect, the accused and a representative of the victim during the realization of mediation procedure. It is determined the specifics of advocate’s participation in mediation procedure in criminal proceeding. The purpose of the article is to obtain new results in the form of scientific conclusions on the organizational and legal principles of participation of an advocate in mediation in criminal proceeding in the context of realization of the right to a fair trial

More than six months ago (December 15, 2017) the «newly formed» Supreme Court began its work. In this regard, the article examines the first results of the activities of the Grand Chamber and the Judicial Chamber on Criminal Cases in the Supreme Court. Particular attention is paid to the actual legal positions of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in criminal law and legal proceedings, the validity of the relevant legal positions and their significance for further court practice. The author analyzes the problem points in the activity of the «updated» Supreme Court and makes the proposals for their elimination. The purpose of this article is to analyze the first results and achievements of the activities of the Grand Chamber and Judicial Chamber on Criminal Cases as part of the Supreme Court, the latest court practice in criminal law and legal proceedings, as well as to develop concrete proposals for improving the work of the Supreme Court.

The article deals with the legislative realities of the current legal regulation of the issue of appeals against court rulings in criminal proceedings in Part 2 of Art. 392 Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, which clearly do not correspond to the content of the constitutional norm in Point 8 of Art. 129, that is, there is an apparent discrepancy with constitutional guarantees regarding the right to appeal the case, in particular, any court decision on any question. Analysis of the content of Art. 392 CPC of Ukraine leads to the conclusion that judgments can be appealed in an appeal only in cases provided for by the CPC of Ukraine. However, it should be noted that the content of the provisions of Part 2 of Art. 382 CPC of Ukraine fully corresponded to the previous wording of Article 129 of the Constitution of Ukraine, which has expired. Contents of Part 2 of Art. 392 CPC of Ukraine is not brought by the legislator in accordance with the requirements of the constitutional guarantees of the appeal review of the case concerning court decisions without any restrictions (Point 8 of Part 1 of Art. 129 of the Constitution of Ukraine, after the introduction of amendments by the Law No. 1401-VIII of 02.06.2016), which, in accordance with the case law, leads to a violation of the constitutional guarantees of the implementation of the basic principles of legal proceedings and, accordingly, the rights of individuals to freedom and personal integrity. Application by courts of Part 2 of Art. 392 of the CPC of Ukraine, effectively deprives the accused of the right to appeal and appeal cassation of a court of first instance decision regarding the election of a preventive measure against them

The introduction of the specialization of judges in conducting criminal proceedings against minors is one of the main guarantees of the qualitative and professional resolution of court cases of this category. At the same time, the introduction of specialization of judges is characterized by a rather restrictive approach of the legislator, since today the specialization of courts, that is, the construction and structure of the judicial system, is more important. The purpose of the article is to find out the essence of the specialization of judges in conducting criminal proceedings against minors and the possibility of its introduction in criminal proceedings in which juveniles are victims.

The article examines conception and implementation of the bail institute in Ukrainian legislature and legislature of foreign countries. The authors compare the origin of bail institute as preventive measure in legislature of England, USA and Ukraine. The authors also point out that fixing bail as one of the preventive measures not only promotes reaching the assignments of criminal procedure and testifies about humanization of criminal procedure in Ukraine, but also corresponds to the practice of European Court of Human Rights. During scientific research, statistics of applying of this preventive measure in practical activity have been analyzed. They indicate that bail is used during criminal procedure rarely. Authors make a conclusion, that the main reasons of this rare use consist in drawbacks of legislative regulation, for example uncertainty of legal position of a bailor as the participant of criminal procedure, absence of coherent mechanism of realization of its rights and duties.

One of the components of the judge status is its independence and immunity, which predetermines the appointment of a judge to a particular category of persons, whose criminal proceedings are carried out in a special procedure, including a report of the judge on suspicion. At the same time, the results of our analysis the norms of current CPC of Ukraine, which regulate this procedure, as well as more than 5 years of practice of their application, highlight a number of problematic issues that require urgent solution at the theoretical, legal and law enforcement levels, which updates their scientific research. The purpose of the article is to study the issue of the suspicion of a judge in criminal proceedings and to provide scientifically substantiated proposals for their solution, taking into account the recent domestic jurisprudence of recent years and the practice of the ECtHR. The article highlights main approaches of doctrinal interpretation by the lawyers of the Art. 481 CPC of Ukraine regarding the subject of drafting, signing and delivery of suspicion reports to certain categories of persons, including judges. The jurisprudence, including the highest judicial authorities, is presented and analyzed, as to the procedural order of notification of a suspect to a judge

Considering the centuries-old national and foreign experience of investigation and detection of crimes, an adoption of lawful and justified judgments by the courts is safeguarded only by an application of adequate, effective, secret tools of obtaining evidence, which, pursuant to the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine currently in force, are covert evidence-gathering activities. Despite the fact, that almost 85% of grave offences and especially serious crimes in the world are detected by means of application of covert evidence-gathering tools; whereas the results of most covert evidence-gathering activities are considered admissible judicial evidence by the courts of Western countries, the analysis of more than five years of national practice of the application of covert evidence-gathering activities has shown a markedly different picture. Only 5% of the results of application of covert evidence-gathering activities were considered an evidence by national courts. It foregrounds the scientific research in this field, not only due to the lack of application of covert evidence-gathering actions for obtaining evidence, but to develop other possibilities of the application of results of covert evidence-gathering actions in the criminal procedural averment. The author of the article has set an aim to determine directions of using the results of covert evidence-gathering activities in the criminal procedural averment. It is established that an equivocal understanding by the law enforcement authorities of the term and essence of evidence and averment directly affects an efficiency of application of the results of covert evidence-gathering activities in the criminal procedural averment.

The article is devoted to the research of the issue of relation between renewed provision of the Constitution of Ukraine and CPC of Ukraine regarding to functions and powers of the prosecutor within criminal proceedings. It is pointed that reconciliation between CPC of Ukraine and the changes made to the Constitution of Ukraine would require the shift in methodological and functional approaches to the prosecutor’s functions, head of pre-trial agency powers and significant transformation of the pre-trial investigation stage, private prosecution, and compensation of damage in criminal proceedings. It is proposed to provide in the CPC of Ukraine the notion of criminal proceedings as a unified to all forms of prosecution against which a person can defend itself and which is decided by a court; public prosecution as a prosecution which is upheld by a prosecutor; private prosecution as a prosecution which is upheld prospectively by a victim. In addition, the normative model of private prosecution needs transformation, the classic model of private prosecution should be brought back with the accurate list of exclusions regarding the possibility of their initiation by a prosecutor when the circumstances of the committed criminal offence require it and to point that in such case the prosecution is transforming into public. Due to the absence of prosecutor’s power to represent the interests of citizens in the Constitution of Ukraine the obligatory normative security of professional legal representation of a victim should be provided in the CPC of Ukraine as well as in the Law of Ukraine ’On free legal aid’ at least in the interest of citizens which, due to their physical condition, old age, incapacity or limited legal capacity, cannot protect their rights on their own

The Government of Ukraine lodged two declarations under article 12(3) of the Rome Statute accepting theInternational Criminal Court’s jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed on its territory. On 25 April 2014, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court opened a preliminary examination of the situation in Ukraine. During the preliminary examination stage there are no circumstances which could avoid such cooperation. At once Ukrainian Code of Criminal Procedure containes some gaps which could block coopertion at the stage of investigation and prosecution. In particular, national legislation allows cooperation between Ukraine and international criminal courts (tribunals) only if exist some international treaty which regulate such cooperation. But Ukraine and International Criminal Court didn’t made corresponding treaty. Parties can’t cooperate on the ground of the Rome Statute because Ukraine has only unilateral obligations with regard to the International Criminal Court.

The author of the article shows some problematic issues of realization of criminal procedural guarantees of the prosecution party as the subject of obtaining evidence by using such instrument as the temporal access to things and documents in pre-trial investigation. It is noted that today among the practical workers there are cases of indicating in the petitions or in decisions on temporary access to things and documents by the executors the use of the appropriate instruments of obtaining evidence is indicated by the staff of the operating departments. It is substantiated that such practice of preparation and drawing up of petitions or decisions on temporary access to things and documents contradicts the legal principles of evidence. It is indicated that in most cases the execution by the operating departments of the orders of the investigator, the prosecutor for temporal access to things and documents becomes the basis for the statement by the defenders of petitions during the preparatory court proceedings or judicial review of the recognition of the results of the relevant procedural action by inadmissible evidence in criminal proceedings, since they are received in the manner not provided for by the CPC of Ukraine. It turns out that such situation negatively affects the effectiveness of the implementation of criminal procedural guarantees of the prosecution as a subject of evidence in the pre-trial investigation

This article is devoted to the preconditions for improving national legislation in the context of preventing violence against women and domestic violence. It is noted that main purposes of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence are to protect women against all forms of violence, and prevent, prosecute and eliminate violence against women and domestic violence. The Convention is based on the understanding that violence against women is a form of gender-based violence that is committed against women because they are women

The consideration of the legal (juridical) grounds and of the actual conduct of cover investigative (search) actions, the propositions of the improvement of their legislative definition, the specifying the subjects of the adoption of procedural decisions on the conduct of cover investigative (search) actions are made on the basis of theoretical studies, the provisions of the criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine and the materials of the practice. The actual grounds of realization of secret investigative (search) actions are the availability of sufficient information in criminal proceedings, which indicate the possibility of reaching the goal of the relevant secret investigative (search) action. The legal grounds for conducting a cover investigative (search) action are: 1) investigation of a crime of the corresponding severity; the availability of such aggregate of factual dates, which allow the investigator, prosecutor, investigating judge to conclude that there may be actual evidence during the course of its conduct, which, according to the results of the inspection and evaluation, may be the content of evidence in criminal proceedings; the information about the crime and the person who committed it, can not be obtained in any other way; 2) the decision of the investigator, the prosecutor on conducting about cover investigative (search) action, and in cases provided by this Code – ?the decision of the investigating judge on the permission to conduct a cover investigative (search) action, made on the basis of the corresponding request of the investigator, prosecutor. It is substantiated that the investigators and the prosecutor are the subjects of the adoption of a procedural decision to conduct cover investigative (search) action

In October and November in 2017 Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine was supplemented by a number of significant changes. In particular, part of the changes regarded the question of closing of criminal proceedings. Article number 284 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was supplemented by new points, which established an independent basis for closing criminal proceedings. This article is devoted to the analysis of the changes to the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine mentioned above. In this article the main features of changes are considered, the author’s assessment of their legal perfection and forecasts for the further application is expressed. In this article the disadvantages of new amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure are described. In addition, it is illustrated the peculiarities of interpretation of new changes as well as analyzed the opportunity of compensation for moral harm during the the process of closing criminal proceeding. The author predicts possible complications, concerning the application of law changes. The situation is considered from the position of defense lawyer. In the article, the author offers advocates the algorithms which aimed at protecting rights of the suspect. Last but not least, the position on the haste and imperfection of individual innovations is expressed and argued. Also new changes to the Code of Criminal Procedure are proposed

??????? ???????????? ????????????? ????? ? ??????? ????????? ????? ???????? ???????, ??? ? ????????? ? ????????? ??? ?????????? ?????????. ????? ????? ???? ?????????? ???????????? ??????????? ?????. ????? ?????? ???????????? ? ??????????? ????????? ????????, ?????? ????? ? ???????? ???????????? ???????? ????????, ???????? ??????????? ?? ??????. ? ?????? ????, ???????? ????????? ????? ???????? ???????? ????? ?? ??????????? ???? ????????, ???????? ???????? ????? ???????? ??????????? ??????? ????’????? ??? ???????????? ?? ????????? ? ???????????. ? ?????? ?? ??, ??????? ? ??? ????? ???????? ???????? ????? ?? ?????????? ?????????, ?? ????????? ? ??????, ?? ????????? ???????? ?? ????????? ????

The article is devoted to the problems of legal regulation background check of criminal offenses in the early pre-trial investigation, the existence of gaps in the legislation of Ukraine and analysis of certain provisions of international law in accordance with legislative acts of Ukraine. The presence of gaps and non-refinements in the current legislation should be an impetus for the creation of new regulatory legal acts and the improvement of the norms of the current legislation. In addition to the availability of existing laws in the country needed a real opportunity to use them in practice employees of the National Police, which charged with the protection of fundamental rights and interests of citizens, their life and health, and public order and safety. the analysis of acts, legislative acts of Ukraine, department normatively-legal acts is carried out. The article deals with issues related to the procedural activities of the bodies of pre-trial investigation and authorized officials at the beginning of the pre-trial investigation at the check of applications and reports of criminal offenses committed. Discussion questions regarding the abolition of the stage of criminal proceedings and the commencement of a pre-trial investigation, as well as the content of the stages of the commencement of criminal proceedings. Every stage of criminal process is characterized by the tasks and aims, by totality of judicial relations, wide circle of subjects that enter inter se into relations, and acceptance of final decision. But, in spite of abolition of the stage of laying an action, during test of information about criminal offences to bringing of information to Only register of pre-trial investigations authorized official persons get information about perfect criminal offence, they are got by the wide circle of persons that execute different functions and are of interest different parties. At the beginning of pre-trial investigation at verification of statements and reports an investigator, operative subdivisions, declarant, victim, specialist, also persons, that any circumstances that is subject to finishing telling during criminal realization can be known, take part about criminal offences. Will mark that every stage of criminal process is characterized by the tasks and aims, by totality of judicial relations, wide circle of subjects that enter inter se into relations, and acceptance of final decision. At the beginning of pre-trial investigation at verification of statements and reports an investigator, operative subdivisions, declarant, victim, specialist and also persons, that any circumstances that is subject to finishing telling during criminal realization can be known, take part about criminal offences. But, in spite of abolition of the stage of laying an action, during test of information about criminal offences to bringing of information to of the Unified Register of pre-trial investigation authorized official persons get information about perfect criminal offence, they are got by the wide circle of persons that execute different functions and are of interest different parties. To our opinion, for the facilitation of consideration of theoretical material beginning of pre-trial investigation can be conditionally divided into the next stages separate from that have optional character: 1. An acceptance of statements, reports and primary information is about criminal offences. 2. Registration of statements and reports about criminal offences and preparation are to realization of inquisitional (of criminal investigation) actions. 3. Realization of urgent inquisitional (of criminal investigation) actions and acceptance of other measures, directed in support of or refutation of data that is contained in a statement or report, and collection of sources criminalistics meaningful information. 4. Bringing of information is to of the Unified Register of pre-trial investigation.