Search

Copyright of Cuestiones Políticas is the property of Revista Cuestiones Politicas and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

On November 20, 2012, the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine 2012 came into force. It introduced a new philosophy of the national criminal procedure oriented to the European standards of criminal justice. The 10-year period of its application has shown a slow adaptation of its provisions and ideas into modern scientific, rule-making and law enforcement activities. To investigate the reasons for this phenomenon, the author resorted to a comparative analysis of the processes of implementation of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of the USSR of 1922 and the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine 2012. In his opinion, there is much in common in the fate of these codified acts. They were adopted at the crossroads of different procedural paradigms. The Criminal Procedure Code of the USSR of 1922 gave impetus to the formation of a socialist-type criminal procedure, and the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine 2012 began its destruction. In this regard, the article examines the main stages of formation of the "special Soviet type" of criminal procedure. They were accompanied by the non-recognition of fundamental European legal values: the presumption of innocence, publicity, oral proceedings, adversarial proceedings, guarantees of the accused's right to defence, participation of defence counsel, the principle of evaluating evidence according to the judges' internal conviction and other democratic principles of justice. Therefore, after Ukraine gained independence, it inherited a deformed "special type of Soviet criminal procedure" subordinated to the administrative command system, which manifested the dictates of the state over the individual, and the following trends: diminished role of the court, with the prosecuting authorities taking over judicial functions; no distinction between procedural functions, formalized evidence procedure, lack of judicial control over the pre-trial investigation and its bureaucratization. Unfortunately, for many years, deformed ideas about the criminal process were "theoretically substantiated" in scientific research and educational publications, which were used by many generations of Soviet lawyers. Therefore, the established ideas about the Soviet criminal procedure to a certain extent hindered the mastery of the ideas and provisions of the CPC 2012. In this regard, the author of the article examines a number of reasons which impede further comprehension and implementation of the general provisions and ideas of the CPC-2012 into the rulemaking practice. At the same time, the article proposes substantive measures aimed at overcoming the destructive phenomena which impede the improvement of the current CPC in the real conditions of legal reality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The opportunity of admission of the right to defence as an independent object of criminal law protection is analysed in this article. Such opportunity has been considered with the reference to the procedural, constitutional, international law and European aspects of the value of this right. The system-structural, dialectical and comparative methods, as well as the axiological (value) approach were chosen as a methodology for the implementation of the research task. The potential models of criminalisation of violation of the right to defence have been identified as a result.

Copyright of Przegląd Europejski is the property of University of Warsaw and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)