CC BY
74
Секция 15. Юриспруденция
Список литературы:
1. Про заходи щодо впровадження Концепцн адмшштративно! реформи в Украши Указ Президента Укра!ни вiд 22.07.1998 № 810/98//[Електронний ресурс] - Режим доступу: http://zakon1.rada.gov. ua/laws/show/810/98
2. Бахрах Д. Н. Административное право России: Учебник. - М.: Норма - Инфра-М, 2002. - 640 с
3. Старилов Ю. Н. Служебное право: Учебник. - М.: БЕК, 1996. - 698 с.
4. Романюк Л. В. Обмеження, пов'язаш з прийняттям на державну службу та проходженням державно! служ-би//Вiсник КНУ iм. Т. Шевченка, 60-62/2004. - С. 119-121
5. Про державну службу: Закон Украши вН 16.12.1993 № 3723-ХП//ВНомосй Верховно! Ради Украши. -1993. - № 52. - Ст. 490.
6. Про державну службу: Закон Украши вП 17.11.2011 № 4050-У1//ВИомосп Верховно! Ради Украши. -
2012. - № 26. - Ст. 273.
7. Про полтгичш партн в Украши Закон Украши вП 05.04.2001 № 2365-Ш//ВИомосп Верховно! Ради Украши. - 2001. - № 23. - Ст. 118.
8. Про засади запобЬання i протидн корупци: Закон Укра!ни вН 07.04.2011 № 3206-У1//ВПомосй Верховно! Ради Украши. - 2011. - № 40. - Ст. 404.
9. Про правила етично! поведшки: Закон Украши вН 17.05.2012 № 4722-У1//ВПомосй Верховно! Ради. -
2013. - № 14. - Ст. 94.
Tolochko Alexander Mykolayovuch, PhD, Associate Professor, Pro-rector of the National Academy of Prosecution of Ukraine, 3 class State Counselor of Justice, Honored Lawyer of Ukraine Email: tolochko_alexander@ukr.net
Modern typological model of criminal process of Ukraine: a comparative legal analysis
Abstract: The paper defines the typological features of the modern model of criminal procedure of Ukraine and tendencies of interpenetration of national procedural systems of European countries of common and continental law. It is proved that Ukrainian criminal process according to their functional characteristics is continental legal and close to the German and French procedural systems. The basic current problems of criminal procedural areas are circumscribed.
Keywords: criminal procedure, the current model of the criminal process, the adaptation of standards, criminal
proceedings.
Problem statement. Ukraine faced a serious need to reform the national legal system taking into account international legal standards and the adoption of a positive legal experience of other countries.
Modern social conditions, under which the reformation takes place, are significantly hampered. All spheres of public life have been globalized. National public interests begin to yield to the transnational interests. Legal policy of economically leading countries is becoming more international, and law — increasingly unified [1, 124]. The domestic legal system is gradually filled with humanistic principles and requires new scientific interpretation.
In the sphere of criminal procedure this is concerned with the improvement of legal regulation method, aimed
particularly at ensuring human rights and the definition of the legal capacity of the state as to their limits.
International legal instruments enshrine human rights standards and goals, reasons and procedures for their limitations, as well as creating general “supranational" control mechanisms of their adherence [2].
Problems of adaptation of international legal standards in the criminal process and its comparative legal analysis with the procedural systems of Western European countries were studied in the works M. Alekseyev, S. Alpert, O. Boykov, V. Volzhenkina, A. Volevoda, Yu. Groshevoy, Y. Gurdzhi, K. Kalinovsky, M. Kovtun,
O. Larin, V. Lukashevich, V. Malyarenko, T. Morshcha-kova, V. Nazhimov, V. Nor, I. Petrukhin, O. Smirnov,
271
Section 15. Science of law
S. Shestakova et al. However, the updating of domestic criminal procedural law needs further studying of mentioned problems.
The aim ofthe article is determining typological features of modern model of the criminal process of Ukraine and trends of convergence of the national procedural systems of European common law and continental law.
Presentation of main provisions. The process of adapting of the criminal procedural legislation to international legal standards and interpenetration of procedural institutions from developed national legal systems is objective and can be done in two ways.
First, the adoption of procedural institutions from another legal system (fragmented legal reception). Second, the system changes of the criminal process (fundamental procedural deculturization). [3, 27].
In the specified context, a comparison of the Ukrainian criminal process with the process of leading Western countries seems particularly significant. Criminal proceedings in England and Wales, the U. S., Germany, France and the Ukraine are specific procedural systems that emerged as a result of a long historical evolution.
Theoretically compared, they are typified by highlighting general essential characteristics and are classified on the basis of common similarities and differences. Traditionally, the following features are outlined: the presence or absence of codification, the rule of law over precedent or precedent over the law, priority of substantive or procedural law, the use of investigative or emulative method, the prevalence of public law or private law interests, the prevalence of hierarchical or peer procedural relations [4].
According first signs of this dichotomy criminal proceeding in Germany and France belongs to the continental (Romano-Germanic) type; according to the second signs criminal proceeding of the U. S., England and Wales belongs to Anglo-Saxon (Anglo-American) type.
In modern conditions the value of typological signs of the criminal process has changed. Practically there is no fundamental character in the trait such as the absence or presence of codification, since all countries without exception have a systematic law (consolidated in the countries of common law and codified in the countries of continental law). Recognition crime as a social phenomenon by the countries has changed the role and focus of substantive or procedural law, as punishment of offenders and protection of the rights and freedoms of the accused are recognized equally important. Other features remain important, but do not have such funda-mentality as before.
The priorities of international legal acts and practice of international judicial institutions over national law leads to the convergence of national legal systems, directly reduces the rule of law over precedent or precedent over the law.
On the one hand, in common law countries is spreading adoption of laws, on the other hand, in continental law countries the recognition of precedent (or rather, “kvazi-precedent”) as the source of law. However, the change of law-understanding and legal thinking of mandatory enforcement officers can be the subject of issue only in the future [5, 41-51].
Using investigative or adversarial method in legal systems has also undergone changes. In pre-trial proceedings of continental law countries investigative method gradually narrows, while the adversarial method extends. Proceedings in these countries by using the competitive method significantly approximated to the common law countries. However, taking into account the special situation of the court (investigating judge) in criminal proceedings, and given the tendency of expanding the competitive method, this distribution remains relevant.
Similarly, with the division on the basis of the prevalence of hierarchical or peer procedural relations: the first prevail in countries of continental law, the second — in common law countries. In other words, deep inter-type differences remain (at the level of operation methods), and therefore the merger of the criminal process into one type, as well as the dominance of one over the other type of process, is hardly possible in the short historical perspective.
The national criminal proceedings should be regarded as continental, with the exception of the Soviet period, when it was defined as a criminal process of the socialist type. But in that period of time by its main characteristics it was related to the continental type.
Modern Ukrainian criminal procedure typologically is the closest to German and French criminal procedure. However, we must recognize the presence in the national criminal proceedings ofprocedural institutions, which by its legal nature belong to the Anglo-American system of justice. In this regard, in the discussion of the new draft Code of Ukraine there were allegations in the literature that the bill fundamentally changes the very model (type) of the national criminal justice from traditional mixed (continental) into a fully adversarial Anglo-American sample [6, 34-40]. In legal literature, this position has been justly criticized [7, 82-88]. Indeed, the Ukrainian criminal procedure has become essentially more adversarial since it is based on the liberal provi-
272
Секция 15. Юриспруденция
sions of the Ukrainian Constitution, international legal standards, the European Court of Human Rights and the modern doctrine.
More specific arguments are as follows: 1) there decreased the role of the court is requesting evidence; 2) the parties were entitled to determine the order of the researching evidence; 3) witnesses are divided on either side; 4) the investigating judge decides on the choice of all precautions; 5) the court can not examine evidence obtained during the investigation, without the consent of the parties; 6) institute of further investigation has been canceled; 7) it is provided a preliminary hearing with the parties and the possibility of exclusion of evidence.
However, we believe that the changes had no impact on the essential, typological features of the national criminal proceedings.
Moreover, “a new legal ideology” of Code of Ukraine is aimed at limiting the actions of state bodies and the empowerment of suspect (accused) and victims, providing additional guarantees ofprotection of their legitimate interests.
In this respect, CPC of Ukraine is different from the CPC of Germany and France, who even now do not give the accused and their defenders and victims the extent of the rights and relevant guarantees as our legislation. The same is true of English and American criminal proceedings. Their undoubtedly competitive structure of the proceedings, in principle, does not provide a similar extension of competitive principles at pretrial proceedings.
Of course, this does not mean denial of substantial novelty the CPC of Ukraine. We just say that the Ukrainian Criminal Procedure shall maintain their affiliation with continental type. Even if you recognize and strengthen competitiveness according to the CPC of Ukraine, it is not adversarial to the Anglo-American model. Investigators and prosecutors have not ceased to be subjects responsible for the comprehensive, full and unbiased investigation of the circumstances of the criminal proceedings (Article 9 of the CPC of Ukraine).
The prosecutor continues to exercise a supervisory function in the form of procedural guidance of investigation and support of accusations in court. The Court did not evolve into passive arbiter that resolves a legal dispute between the parties or without evaluation of evidence approves agreement on admitting guilt (with a special order of the trial).
Such an effect was caused by two factors: 1) externally adversarial nature of many novels of the legislator seen as rejection of arriving at the truth, and created the impression of eliminating Ukrainian criminal pro-
cedure towards the Anglo-Saxon type of justice; 2) psychological unwillingness of most enforcement officers to significant innovations, especially such as the start of criminal proceedings, cancellation of further investigation, processiolization of operative-investigative operations as conducting covert investigative (detective) actions; introduction of the institution of on reconciliation and recognition of guilt, etc.
Reformed Ukrainian criminal procedure noted discrepancies between high legal standards imposed procedural novels and practice of implementation. Largely the reason behind this is archaic legal thinking of enforcement officers.
In connection with the above, attention is drawn to the way in which the transformation of French and German criminal justice is performed, typologically close criminal process in Ukraine. It should immediately be emphasized that, in comparison with Ukraine, no “revolutionary” steps to reform its criminal process, neither Germany nor France took in modern times (although some attempts of such reforms were in France).
Changes in legislation occurs gradually, with a reference to the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights, and considering their own legal traditions. Areas of reform in general coincide with those which changed the domestic criminal process: the empowerment of the suspect (accused) and the victim, strengthening judicial control in pre-trial proceedings and procedural confrontation of the parties in the proceedings. But the movement in these areas is very slow and careful. Virtually position of the court has not changed. It still has an overwhelming activity. There have not been any significant empowerment of non-state actors. Significantly has increased just the control over pretrial judicial review proceedings.
According to M. Stoyko, such caution is due to the presence of as quite natural conservatism among lawyers and some reasonable concerns. If innovations are not supported economically, politically and organizationally, they will be inevitably rejected by the practice and can adversely affect the effectiveness of combating crime. We cannot rule out the fact that Germany and France account for their historical experience, which shows that the borrowed English or American institutions of criminal procedural law do not survive: the jury existed only in Germany during the Weimar Republic, and in France was seriously modified considering own legal traditions.
The ideas of procedural equality and competitiveness have been implemented and developed as a stable system of values in common law countries. As extremely
273
Section 15. Science of law
general values, they are quite acceptable and for continental law, however having a different legal environment that involves fundamentally different ways of their implementation. Hence there is the need of finding such a way of development that would have respected fundamental rights and freedoms, but the criminal proceeding has not been fundamentally changed.
Therefore in France and Germany improvement of procedural forms to a greater extent is carried out by humanizing the procedural legal policy, by the effective procedure of monitoring compliance with human rights, real congruence of enforcement officers with high professional and ethical standards. After all, if the society is capable to guarantee the performance of their law enforcement agencies, in which the accused are treated humanely, and it is not permitted taking criminal proceedings against innocents, and ensures fair and inevitable punishment of the guilty, it can afford the existence of this type of criminal proceedings [8, 6].
This is why in monitoring the use of the CPC it is necessary to focus both on the formal and legal characteristics of the application of the provisions of criminal procedure as well as the reasons why they are not applied, and the prospects for their introduction.
It is scientifically proved that the modern national criminal procedure is in the process of social and legal convergence. This, in our opinion, clearly demonstrates the main directions of judicial politics of the modern state: observance and protection of the rights and freedoms of the suspect (accused); social support of suspect (accused); social support of the victim; rationality and effectiveness of the criminal proceedings; reconciliation.
Each of these components has certain features that reflect the perspective and a practical implementation of each area. Taken together, the signs indicate the presence in criminal proceedings of all compared countries a single value base, due to common social and legal nature of the criminal process [8, 84].
Assessing the implementation of criminal procedure areas, it should be noted that all of them are implemented differently in life and manifest themselves in practice in the form of trends. They systematically interpenetrate and influence each other. However, in any case they should not be opposed or substitute for one another.
Thus, passion just for ideas of restorative justice is fraught with danger of weakening fighting crime that will lead to the establishment ofjustice without a process capable to high degree to consider the interests of victims (victims) and the accused, but is not able to provide the same degree of maintaining public order. The above does
not mean refusal of strengthening the protection of the suspect (accused), but only means that the reform of criminal procedure should be carried out not only in the formal and legal, but also in social and political aspects.
It is equally a dangerous approach when the criminal procedural sphere excludes all measures of social influence, in addition to criminal law response. It comes down to only one punitive model. This approach leads to the dehumanization of the criminal process, ignoring the personal interests of the victims and the accused, the subordination of criminal proceedings only to the purpose of punishment and hence the expansion of the classical criminal repression. It is no accidentally noticeable the upgrading of direction prosecution. This is reflected in the recognition of the ineffectiveness of harsh criminal penalties; denial the death penalty for a criminal offense in many countries; in expansion of alternative to criminal legal exposure measures of deprivation of liberty (fines, community service, etc.); decriminalization of minor offenses; perception of the importance of respecting the rights and freedoms of the accused, as well as consideration of the interests of victims.
In most European countries the choice is made in favor of a liberal approach, when methods of criminal prosecution of the accused involve moderate restriction of their rights.
In some respects social support of victims proved unsuccessful, which did not actually lead to the desired result — the development of a positive relationship between the suspect (accused) and the victim.
Even in terms of redemption of guilt of the state to the victims for its failure to protect against crime, the trend found in many countries a number of weaknesses, such as:
— assisting limited categories of victims (mostly violent crime);
— victims’ insufficient awareness of the availability of special institutions and conditions of their support;
— the use of political expediency as criterion of social support for victims [9, 57].
The institute of reconciliation, in spite of its relative popularity and prevalence is also characterized by certain disadvantages associated with the fact that, in practice, in some cases, the needs of victims are put into the background in relation to the needs of the accused. In law enforcement practice of some countries victims are sometimes subjected to pressure in order to ensure their participation in mediation in favor of the accused. Also, you can not adequately take into account the social and moral values of crime to society.
274
Секция 15. Юриспруденция
Thus, we can draw the following conclusions:
1) criminal proceedings in all countries are in the process of criminal-political, rather than formal and legal convergence;
2) merge into one type, as well as the dominance of one justice system over another, it is currently impossible because of the cultural and historical reasons (it means a loss of national identity);
3) deep (inter-type) differences are stored only on the functional level;
4) general philosophy of criminal proceedings (internationally recognized principles and standards ofjustice, etc.) are not able to lead to a blurring of this distinction. They are the result of the historical evolution of each of the judiciary, have a natural character, ensure the integrity of the system, but do not prevent the integration processes at the international legal level;
5) the effectiveness of combating crime, protection of the rights and freedoms are not in direct proportion to the functional model (Anglo-Saxon and Romano-Germanic type) or generic (German, French form of criminal process) differences. Both systems are oriented on respect for and protection of human rights, require due process (procedural fairness), and requires identifying the perpetrators of the crime committed and their punishment (the material justice);
6) the emergence and implementation of joint of criminal procedural institutions is possibly independent of these differences and can affect the convergence of national of criminal procedural law systems-level on the stage of objectives and principles (principles).
Conclusions. In the criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine does not exclude the creation of similar (at national level) or common (international) regulation uniform procedural mechanisms of social relations, that is,
in the relevant harmonization of national procedural laws and their practical application (approval of official procedural and legal doctrines, conceptual approaches, principles, etc.) and its unification (adoption of based on common international standards of procedural rules, along with the return or national).
Convergence of criminal procedure continues both in the continental law and common law. The legal basis for this is the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the European Court of Human Rights. It can be argued that the criminal process of European states is united only by legal philosophy based on these universal values:
— the right to human treatment (prohibition tortures, inhuman or degrading human dignity);
— the right to freedom and personal inviolability (the right to liberty, the right to security of person, the right to respect for private life, inviolability of the home, the right to protection of personal information);
— equality of all before the law and prohibition of discrimination;
— fairness of justice (right to effective legal remedies;
Ukrainian criminal process according to its functional characteristics is continental and legal, and close to the German and French judicial systems, structural and functional features were borrowed and creatively reprocessed. The most significant borrowings from the Anglo-American (by type) process are related to human rights and adversarial criminal proceedings (standards of fairness of justice generally recognized principles of the process, judicial review of pretrial proceedings, trial by jury) did not significantly affect the type of criminal proceedings. They are in the process of adaptation, and do not provide destructive impact on law enforcement.
References:
1. Глобализация и развитие законодательства: Очерки/Отв. ред. Ю. А. Тихомиров, А. С. Пиголкин. - М.: Изд. дом «Городец», 2004. - 464 с.
2. Бахин С. В. Сотрудничество государств по сближению национальных правовых систем: Унификация и гармонизация права: автореф. дисс. на соискание уч. степени канд. докт. наук: спец. 12.00.10 «Международное право; Европейское право»/С. В. Бахин. - СПб, 2003. - 46 с.
3. Волеводз А. Г. Правовое регулирование новых направлений международного сотрудничества в сфере уголовного процесса/А. Г. Волеводз. - М.: Юрлитинформ, 2002. - 528 с.
4. Семухина О. Б. Типология уголовного процесса и деятельность суда в рамках обвинительного и состязательного типов уголовного процесса: дисс. ... канд. юрид. наук.: 12.00.09/Семухина Ольга Борисовна. -Томск, 2003. - 216 с.
5. Стойко Н. Г. Законодательство и прецедент как источники уголовно-процессуального права западноевропейских стран и России/Н. Г. Стойко//Правовая реформа и зарубежный опыт: сб. научных статей/отв. ред. Н. Г. Стойко. - Красноярск: Красноярский университет [КрасГУ], 2000. - С. 41-51.
275
Section 15. Science of law
6. Швненко В. Проект новогоКримшально-процесуальногокодексуУкраши:невдачипрорахунки/В. Швненко //ВКник прокуратури. - 2010. - № 11. - С. 34-40.
7. Лобойко Л. Про «воропв» украшського кримшального процесу/Л. Лобойко//Вiсник прокуратури. -2011. - № 3. - С. 82-88.
8. Стойко Н. Г. Уголовный процесс западных государств и России: сравнительное теоретико-правовое исследование англо-американской и романо-германской правовых систем: моногр./Н. Г. Стойко - СПб.: Издательский дом С.-Петерб. гос. ун-та, Издательство юридического факультета СПбГУ 2006. - 264 с.
9. Марченко М. Н. Курс сравнительного правоведения. - М.: ООО «Городец-издат», 2002. - 1068 с.
Sharkova Alina Nikolaevna, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
postgraduate student, Department of Justice E-mail: alina.sharkova@gmail.com
Defining of the concept and purpose of the detention in criminal proceedings
Abstract: the article deals with the problems of theoretical and legislative determination of essence, concept and purposes of criminal procedural detention. The author argues for the justification of the legislative recognition of concept and objectives of detention in the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.
Keywords: criminal procedural detention, purpose of detention, essence and concept of detention.
Шаркова Алина Николаевна, Киевский национальный университет имени Тараса Шевченко, aспирантка, кафедра правосудия
E-mail: alina.sharkova@gmail.com
Определение понятия и цели задержания в уголовном производстве
Аннотация: в статье анализируются проблемы теоретического и законодательного определения сущности, понятия и целей уголовного процессуального задержания. Автор обосновывает необходимость законодательного закрепления понятия и цели задержания подозреваемого в действующем УПК Украины.
Ключевые слова: уголовное процессуальное задержание, цель задержания, сущность и понятие задержания.
Среди правовых средств, предоставленных законом правоохранительным органам, задержание подозреваемого занимает особое место и привлекает особое внимание, как со стороны ученых-процессу-алистов, так и практиков, поскольку оно относится к тем процессуальным действиям, осуществление которых всегда сопровождается рядом проблем. По словам Уполномоченного Верховной Рады Украины по правам человека, наибольшее количество нарушений с применением пыток происходит именно во время задержания человека [1].
Различные аспекты проблем уголовного процессуального задержания рассмотрены в трудах таких ученых и практиков, как: А. П. Гуляев, П. М. Давыдов, З. З. Зинатуллин, М. С. Строгович, В. И. Борисов, О. В. Верхогляд-Герасименко, Н. В. Глинская, В. С. Зеленецкий, Л. М. Лобойко, А. С. Мазур, В. В. Рожнова, Н. А. Погорецкий, В. М. Тертышник,
О. Г. Шило. Однако основные положения были разработаны указанными учеными еще во время действия в Украине Уголовно-процессуального кодекса 1960 года, что свидетельствует об отсутствии на сегодня в Украине комплексного научного исследования проблем определения и законодательного регулирования понятия и целей уголовного процессуального задержания и создает фундаментальную базу для дальнейшего исследования проблем обеспечения прав задержанного в уголовном судопроизводстве.
Целью данной статьи является анализ проблем теоретического и законодательного определения сущности, понятия и целей уголовного процессуального задержания, а также обоснование необходимости законодательного закрепления понятия и цели задержания подозреваемого в Уголовном процессуальном кодексе Украины (далее — УПК Украины).
276
