Social and Legal Studios
ISSN 2617-4162
e-ISSN 2617-4170
Publisher: Lviv State University of Internal Affairs
Abstract
Today, the combined chamber of the Criminal Court of Cassation as part of the Supreme Court is trying to solve the problem of the appellate court’s initiative in the examination of evidence, since the approaches of individual court chambers, namely the First and Third ones, differ. The purpose of this study was to identify those cases when the appellate authority is entitled to investigate the evidence proactively, without encroaching on the components of the principle prescribed in Article 22 of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine. The formal-logical method helped generalize that the content and form of such a review must comply with the principles of criminal proceedings, including equality before the law and the court, as well as competition between the parties (it has been proven that their absence may indicate a violation of both constitutional and convention rights), freedom in presenting their evidence to the court and in proving their persuasiveness before the court. The results of the deductive method helped formulate the following theses: the legislator, understanding the equality of procedural rights not as their uniformity, normalizes it in the Criminal Procedural Code as equality in terms of the possibilities of exercising the granted rights; the legislator also determines such equality of rights from the functions that a certain participant in criminal proceedings is endowed with. The combination of prosecution, defence, and justice in one guise contradicts the adversarial nature of the judicial procedure. The study revealed that the passivity of the parties forces the court to choose its activity within the limits of the function of justice defined for it, and its initiative is aimed at examining the evidence to make a legal, well-founded, and fair decision. It is proved that these features of judicial proceedings are a priori inherent in the appeal review, along with its inherent features, including the determination of the amount of evidence to be examined, as well as compliance with the limits of judicial review, which are normalized by Article 404 of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine. It was found that the initiative of the court of appeal to examine evidence and their further investigation in this court is permissible in situations where such evidence became known after the adoption of the appealed court decision. Compliance with this rule will protect the court from possible violations of the requirements of Article 22 of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine, and scientific developments in this area are designed, among other things, to pave the way for the unity of judicial practice through doctrinal recommendations.
Keywords: activity of the court, proactiveness of the court; judge’s discretion; limits of review by the appellate court; deterioration of the situation of the accused
Suggested citation
[1] Appeal from the judge of the Criminal Court of Cassation of the Supreme Court to the members of the Scientific Advisory Board at the Supreme Court in case №537/984/20 (proceedings No. 51-1747km22) with registration number 466/0/26-22. (2022, December).
[2] Basysta, I.V., Blahuta, R.I., & Komissarchuk, Yu.A. (2022). Actual problems of the application of criminal procedural legislation. Lviv: Lviv State University of Internal Affairs.
[3] Constitution of Ukraine. (1996, June). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/254к/96-вр#Text.
[4] Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. (2012, April). Retrieved from http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/4651-17/page8.
[5] Decision of the Judicial Chamber in Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in case No. 5-249ks15. (2016, January). Retrieved from https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/56580962#.
[6] Decision of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in the case No. 720/1277/20. (2022, July). Retrieved from https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/105148891?fbclid=IwAR01eUu60cOK3ogTq44Gsp0uww2OtT1qirBXAW0MiF6HH3-CTf0-853CTaM.
[7] Drozdov, O.M., & Basysta, I.V. (2023). The court of appeal has investigated the evidence on its own initiative (in response to an appeal from the judge of the Criminal Court of Cassation of the Supreme Court Yury Mykolayovych Luhanskyi in case No. 537/984/20, proceedings No. 51-1747km22): Joint scientific opinion of the members of the Scientific Advisory Council at the Supreme Court. (2023, February).
[8] European Convention on Human Rights. (1950, November). Retrieved from https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/convention_eng.pdf.
[9] European Court of Human Rights. (2022). Guide on Article 6 of the Convention – Right to a fair trial (criminal limb). Retrieved from https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_Art_6_criminal_ENG.pdf.
[10] Horodetska, M.S. (2022). The subject of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings. Kyiv: Dakor Publishing House.
[11] Judgment of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine № 5-р/2020. (2020, March). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v005p710-20#Text.
[12] Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Kyprianou v. Cyprus (Application no. 73797/01).(2005, December). Retrieved from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-71671.
[13] Judgment of the First Judicial Chamber of the Criminal Court of Cassation of the Supreme Court in the case No. 183/2033/21. (2022, September). Retrieved from https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/106517321.
[14] Judgment of the panel of judges of the Third Judicial Chamber of the Cassation Criminal Court of the Supreme Court in the case No. 537/984/20. (2022, October). Retrieved from https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/106915634.
[15] Kaplina, O., & Tumanyants, A. (2021). ECtHR decisions that influenced the criminal procedure of Ukraine. Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, 1(9), 102-121. doi: 10.33327/AJEE-18-4.1-a000048.
[16] Kaplina, O.V., & Shylo, O.H. (Eds.). (2018). Criminal process. Kharkiv: Pravo.
[17] Kasapoglu, S.O. (2018). Implementation of norms of criminal procedural law. Dnipro: Bila K.O. Publisher.
[18] Khotynska-Nor, O.Z., & Pohoretskyi, M.A. (2020). The judge’s review, the judge’s discretion, judicial discretion. In Great Ukrainian legal encyclopedia (Vol. 19; pp. 868-869). Kharkiv: Pravo.
[19] Konovalova, V.O. (2007). Algorithmization in the theory of forensics. Journal of the Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine, 1, 169-175.
[20] Kopytova, O.S. (2020). Judicial law-making, judicial activism and judicial self-restraint: The interaction of legal categories in general theoretical aspect. Private and Public Law, 2, 3-9. doi: 10.32845/2663-5666.2020.2.1.
[21] Letter of the High Specialized Court of Ukraine for Consideration of Civil and Criminal Cases No. 10-1717/0/4-12 “On Some Questions Procedure for the Implementation of Court Proceedings on Review of Court Decisions Appeal in Accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine”. (2012, November). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v1717740-12#Text.
[22] Lytvyn, O.V. (2016). Criminal procedure of proof in trial (PhD thesis, National University “Odessa Law Academy”, Odesa, Ukraine).
[23] Malekh, I.B. (2022). Theoretical and practical aspects of judicial discretion (PhD thesis, Dnipropetrovsk State University of Internal Affairs, Dnipro; Scientific Institute of Public Law, Kyiv, Ukraine).
[24] Maryniv, V.I. (2020a). Appeal proceedings. In Great Ukrainian legal encyclopedia (Vol. 19; pp. 27-30). Kharkiv: Pravo.
[25] Maryniv, V.I. (2020b). Limits of reviewing the court decision. In Great Ukrainian legal encyclopedia (Vol. 19; pp. 444-446). Kharkiv: Pravo.
[26] Nadybska, O., Fedotova, H., Shcherbyna, S., Chornous, Yu., & Basysta, I. (2020). Сhildren’s rights ombudsman: Experience of Ukraine and foreign countries. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 23(2).
[27] Nor, V.T., & Kryklyvets, D.E. (2017). Implementation of the principle of competition during the examination of complaints by the investigating judge. Lviv: Kolir PRO.
[28] Nor, V.T., Bobechko, N.R., & Bahrii, M.V. (Eds.). (2021). Criminal process of Ukraine: Academic course (Vol. 1: General part). Lviv: Ivan Franko National University of Lviv.
[29] Petryshyn, V.O., Petryshyn, O.O., & Hyliaka, O.S. (2021). The problem of non-implementation of judgements of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine in the context of the rule of law (methodological and comparanive aspects). Journal of the National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine, 28(2), 17-24. doi: 10.37635/jnalsu.28(2).2021.17-24.
[30] Shapovalova, I.S., & Rohalska, V.V. (2020). Application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights by the investigating judge of the local general court during judicial control. Odesa: Helvetyca Publishing House.
[31] Shchur, B.V., & Basysta, I.V. (2021). ECHR decision to refuse to waive the immunity of a person under article 1 of the Protocol no. 6: Individual interpretations of the essence and consequences. Journal of the National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine, 28(3), 257-267. doi: 10.37635/jnalsu.28(3).2021.257-267.
[32] Shepitko, I.I. (2018). Trial in the system of court proceedings in the first instance. Kharkiv: Pravo; Apostil.
[33] Shevchuk, M.I. (2015). Court’s initiative and its limits in clarification of the criminal proceedings circumstances upon trial (PhD thesis, Ivan Franko National University of Lviv, Lviv, Ukraine).
[34] Torbas, O.O. (2020). Discretion in the criminal process of Ukraine: Theoretical justification and practice of implementation. Odesa: Yurydychna Literatura.
[35] Vapnyarchuk, V.V. (2014). The essence of an active and proactive operation of the court in criminal proceedings. Scientific Bulletin Uzhgorod National University: Series: Law, 25, 236-239.
[36] Yanovska, O.H. (2020). Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights. In Great Ukrainian legal encyclopedia (Vol. 19; pp. 745-746). Kharkiv: Pravo.
[37] Zhuravel, V.A., & Kovalenko, A.V. (2022). Еxamination of evidence in criminal proceedings as a component of the proof process. Journal of the National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine, 29(2), 313-328. doi: 10.31359/jnalsu.29(2).2022.313-328.