Ensuring the rights and freedoms of the person during the notification of suspicion
The article draws the attention of the institute to the notification of suspicion in the criminal procedure legislation, namely: problematic
issues that arise during the implementation of such procedural action. It is noted that the institution of suspicion should combine
not only the possibility on the basis of the collected evidence to reasonably suspect a person of committing a criminal offense, but also
to respect the procedural rights of persons in criminal proceedings. Particular attention is paid to preserving the procedural rights and
freedoms of the suspect in criminal proceedings.
The institution of suspicion is a set of interrelated norms that to some extent ensure the participation of a person in criminal proceedings,
but at the same time must ensure the realization of the rights and legitimate interests of the person. The essence of the suspicion
is determined by a combination of its two components: on the one hand – it is an inspection by officials of the pre-trial investigation
body against the suspect; on the other – providing the suspect with opportunities to exercise their rights and legitimate interests. The
procedural document itself retains its form, in the presence of all mandatory elements.
The requirements provided by the criminal procedure legislation which are put forward to the message on suspicion are investigated:
existence of signs of a criminal offense; involvement as a suspect may be carried out only by an authorized official; compliance
with the correct procedural mechanism for notifying a person of suspicion; the absence of doubts and assessment of the person’s actions
is formed on the basis of evidence collected in criminal proceedings.
The scientific article considers the stages of notifying a person of suspicion and provides a brief description of each of them. Such
stages should include: collection and evaluation of evidence that makes it possible to objectively inform the person of the suspicion;
procedural registration of suspicion by drawing up documents; notification of the person to whom the procedural document is to be
served – suspicion; handing over the suspect and explaining the rights and responsibilities as a suspect; interrogation of the suspect. At
each stage the problems of its carrying out are opened and recommendations on their improvement are given.
2. Konstytutsiia Ukrainy (28 chervnia 1996 r.) : pryjniata Verkhovnoiu Radoiu Ukrainy (VVR) 1996, № 30, st. 141. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/254k/96-VR [in Ukrainian]
3. Kryminal’nyj protsesual’nyj kodeks Ukrainy: tak samo.
4. Alenin Yu.P., Hloviuk I.V. (2014) Povidomlennia pro pidozru: zahal’na kharakterystyka ta problemy udoskonalennia//Visnyk Pivdennoho rehional’noho tsentru Natsional’noi akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy № 1 – Rezhym dostupu do resursu: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/50595392.pdf [in Ukrainian]
5. Hlyns’ka N., Lobojko L., Shylo O. (2017) Povidomlennia pro pidozru: pravomirnist’ zastosuvannia poriadku, peredbachenoho KPK dlia vruchennia povidomlen’// Yurydychnyj visnyk Ukrainy № 45 [in Ukrainian].
6. Maksymenko N. (2018) Poniattia ta pravova pryroda pidozry.//Pidpryiemnytstvo, hospodarstvo i pravo. № 7 – Rezhym dostupu do resursu: http://pgp-journal.kiev.ua/archive/2018/7/30.pdf [in Ukrainian]
7. Derev’ianko A.I. (2019) Problemni pytannia zabezpechennia prava pidozriuvanoho na zakhyst na stadii dosudovoho rozsliduvannia// Pravo i suspil’stvo. – Rezhym dostupu do resursu: http://pravoisuspilstvo.org.ua/archive/ 2019/4_2019/44.pdf [in Ukrainian].
8. Andrejchuk A.V. (2013) Pravova pryroda povidomlennia pro pidozru//Prykarpats’kyj iurydychnyj visnyk. (Vypusk 1(3). 259-271 [in Ukrainian]
9. Brovko N.I., Simakova S.I. (2020) Instytut kryminal’nykh prostupkiv iak mekhanizm sproschenoho poriadku dosudovoho rozsliduvannia. Yurydychnyj naukovyj elektronnyj zhurnal. - № 3. 298-301. Rezhym dostupu do resursu: http://www.lsej.org.ua/3_2020/74.pdf [in Ukrainian]
Kholondovych I.I. (2019) Pidstavy oskarzhennia povidomlennia pro pidozru u kryminal’nomu provadzhenni. Naukovyj visnyk publichnoho ta pryvatnoho prava. Vypusk 5, tom 2. - 263-267. [in Ukrainian]