22 November 2017, 17:15
The Conference focused on practical problems arising while applying certain provisions of the code and the modes of solution.
The event was organized by the Committee on Legislative Support of Law Enforcement in collaboration with the Committee on Legal Policy and Justice, with the support of the EU Advisory Mission Ukraine (EUAM).
The Conference held on November the 22nd, 2017 in Kyiv discussed the Ukrainian Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), in particular how it can be improved to make investigations more efficient while fully respecting human rights. The current CPC was adopted five years ago, replacing the version from 1960. The Code in force at the moment was an important reform, which departed significantly from Soviet practice. Nonetheless, it is the belief of many Ukrainian legal experts and lawmakers, as well as EUAM officials, that the current Code needs amending.
The experts advocated for certain procedures to be streamlined and also for more responsibility to be delegated to individual investigators and prosecutors to curtail bureaucracy. Proposals included merging the functions of operatives and investigators, standard in EU countries, and using pre-trial statements in court in the case of contradictory testimonies.
The lawmakers also upheld the introduction of anonymous witnesses in cases where there were a significant risk that the safety of the witness was at stake and measures to improve the investigation of cybercrime.
Victims’ rights were also central to the suggested amendments to the CPC. There was proposed a category of ‘vulnerable victims’ to be created in law. Victims would then benefit from enhanced protection, including measures to support them during court proceedings to diminish would-be psychological maims. Measures to ensure more effective compensation of victims were also proposed.
There was also said, while it was clear that amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code were necessary, any changes would need to be conducted in a transparent manner with the support of experts and the Ukrainian public.
Presently, there is a close collaboration between the public prosecutor's office and the relevant parliamentary committee. In order to effectively introduce the needful changes to the CPC, the committee head applied this June to the office for establishing an ad hoc working group in charge. A wide range of experts teamed up quickly and made a great deal of paperwork to fish out some hundred CPC’s items requiring mending. The findings were then submitted to the committee for further refinement. The key ad hoc group’s proposals are as follows:
- to clarify the regulation on prejudicial inquiry commencement,
- to remove unjustified summons of convicts letting them to have video-conferences,
- to implement prosecution’s authorities in a criminal proceeding with the aim to provide a productive prejudicial inquiry,
- to assure that replacement of an investigative force may be undertaken by the head of a prosecutor’s office provided there is a sound legal rationale,
- to entitle the head of a prejudicial inquiry body to assign a new investigator once the foregoer is discharged, or drops the office voluntarily,
- to define the status of a person which is subject to coercive educational actions as well as this person’s rights and duties,
- to articulate conditions for a challenge to trier (investigating judge) and improve the challenge procedure to avoid the infamous so-called ‘carousel of challenges’ capable of wilful eating some futile days to breach the law day,
- to simplify the permitting procedure for temporary access to effects and documents under a pre-trial investigation, having empowered the prosecutor accordingly,
- to define legal grounds for conducting inspections and visitations within the framework of prejudicial inquiry,
- to clarify grounds and procedure of bill of advocation, actions or inexertion (inaction) by prosecution under a criminal proceeding.
The Conference also hosted a range of panel discussions on lifting of pre-trial performance, refinement of using preventive measures procedure during a criminal proceeding, launching a simplified investigation procedure for criminal wrongs, special criminal proceeding procedures, protecting rights of certain categories of persons aggrieved from acts of crime under criminal proceedings.