Volume 10 - Issue 45
/ September 2021
105
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2021.45.09.11
How to Cite:
Tarasenko, O., Shevchishen, A., Yermakov, Y., Mirkovets, D., & Diakin, Y. (2021). Use of intelligence tools of operational and
search activities in pre-trial investigation. Amazonia Investiga, 10(45), 105-112. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2021.45.09.11
Use of intelligence tools of operational and search activities in
pre-trial investigation
Використання інструментарію оперативно-розшукової діяльності у процесі
досудового розслідування
Received: August 16, 2021 Accepted: September 16, 2021
Written by:
Oleh Tarasenko
37
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3179-0143
Artem Shevchishen
38
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1342-6639
Yurii Yermakov
39
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9400-0604
Dmytro Mirkovets
40
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2539-2824
Yaroslav Diakin
41
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6943-0151
Abstract
Анотація
Метою статті є визначення особливостей та
правових підстав використання
інструментарію оперативно-розшукової
діяльності у процесі досудового
розслідування. Предмет дослідження:
Предметом дослідження є негласні слідчі
(розшукові) дії та оперативно-розшукові
заходи. Методологія: діалектичний метод,
методи формальної логіки, логіко-
семантичний метод, метод системного
аналізу, теоретичний метод, нормативно-
догматичний метод, метод правового
моделювання. Результати дослідження:
Проаналізовано зміст понять «пошук» і
«розшук» з точки зору їх суттєвих
відмінностей. Виокремлено оперативні
пошукові та розшукові заходи із
застосуванням принципу: якщо об’єкт
оперативної діяльності вже відомий
працівникам правоохоронних органів –
заходи розшукові, якщо ні – пошукові.
Практичні наслідки: Визначена можливість
правового регламентування використання
37
Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Operational and Search Activity of the
National Academy of Internal Affairs (Kyiv, Ukraine).
38
Doctor of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor, Professor of the Department of Criminal Procedure of the National Academy of the
Internal Affairs (Kyiv, Ukraine).
39
Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor (Kyiv, Ukraine).
40
Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department public law disciplines of Private Higher
Education Institution «University of Modern Knowledge» (Kyiv, Ukraine).
41
Candidate of Legal Sciences, Leading researcher of the scientific laboratory on crime prevention of the National Academy of Internal
Affairs (Kyiv, Ukraine).
106
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
measures do not duplicate the CISAs, but
perform the task of ensuring the possibility of
fulfilling the investigator’s instructions to
conduct the CISAs.
інструментарію оперативно-розшукової
діяльності за стадіями кримінального
судочинства. Цінність / оригінальність:
Робиться висновок про те, що до переліку
оперативно-розшукових заходів, відносяться
також ті, що не мають аналогів з НСРД і тому
оперативно-розшукові заходи не дублюють
НСРД, а виконують завдання забезпечення
можливості виконання доручення слідчого
щодо проведення НСРД.
Ключові слова: досудове розслідування,
оперативно-розшукова діяльність, негласна
слідча (розшукова) дія, оперативно-
розшуковий захід, слідчий, оперативний
підрозділ.
Introduction
The Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine
(hereinafter – the CPC of Ukraine) (Law of
Ukraine No. 4651-VI, 2012) has introduced the
concept of “covert investigation (search) actions”
(hereinafter – CISA) into the pre-trial
investigation procedure, the system and
methodology of which, even before the Code was
approved, had been the subject of scientific
debate. According to Art. 246 of the CPC of
Ukraine, CISA is a kind of investigative (search)
actions, information about the fact and methods
of which are not subject to disclosure, except as
provided for in the CPC of Ukraine. CISA,
enshrined in Chapter 21 of the CPC of Ukraine
(Law of Ukraine No. 4651-VI, 2012), in the
nature and content of the activities carried out are
correlated with the operational and search
activities, enshrined in Part 1, Art. 8 of the Law
of Ukraine “Operational and Search Activities”
(Law of Ukraine No. 2135-XII, 1992); both types
of activities are conducted in cases, in which
information about the offense and the perpetrator
cannot be obtained in any other way and only in
criminal proceedings for serious or particularly
serious criminal offenses. However, the
detection, cessation and investigation of serious
and especially serious criminal offenses
(especially latent ones) without the use of tools
of operational and search activities are extremely
difficult or even impossible. Nowadays,
scientists are only trying to balance the
possibilities of investigation (search) measures
and CISA with operational and search measures
within a fundamentally new model of criminal
justice, as well as to determine the boundaries,
grounds and conditions of their application
during criminal and investigative proceedings
(Aidemskyi 2014, p. 18). The formation of the
institution of CISA, which occurs in the
operation of the current CPC of Ukraine, is
characterized by a number of controversial issues
that complicate the activities of investigative and
operational units in the detection and
investigation of criminal offenses. In particular,
the Law of Ukraine “On Operational and Search
Activities” (Law of Ukraine No. 2135-XII, 1992)
does not contain the list of operational and search
measures, as well as the grounds and procedure
for their implementation. This shortcoming is
partially minimized by the list of rights of
operational units, enshrined in Art. 8 of the above
Law, which actually allows to understand that
operational units have the right to conduct certain
activities; however, it remains unclear, which of
them are operative, and which belong to
searching ones. Besides, there are references to
the article of the CPC of Ukraine, which
regulates a specific CISA, in most of the
paragraphs of Art. 8 of the Law of Ukraine “On
Operational and search Activities” (Law of
Ukraine No. 2135-XII, 1992) (which specifies
the rights of operational units); i.e. literally
understanding the rule of law, the right of an
operational unit can be realized only by
conducting CISAs in criminal proceedings.
Accordingly, the question arises: in such a case,
the activity is a criminal investigation or the
participation of operational units in the pre-trial
investigation on behalf of the investigator? That
is, there are a number of inconsistencies
regarding the use of tools of operational and
search activities – operational and search
measures during the pre-trial investigation,
which necessitates the determination of the
peculiarities of the legal regulation for their
implementation.
Thus, the purpose of the article is to determine
the features and legal grounds for the use of tools
Tarasenko, O., Shevchishen, A., Yermakov, Y., Mirkovets, D., Diakin, Y. / Volume 10 - Issue 45: 105-112 / September, 2021
Volume 10 - Issue 45
/ September 2021
107
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
of operational and search activities in the pre-trial
investigation
Methodology
The methodological basis for the Article is
chosen given the goal, specifics of the object and
subject matter of the research. The
methodological basis for the article is dialectical
approach to the determination of the features and
legal grounds for the use of tools of operational
and search activities in the pre-trial investigation.
The formal logic methods of scientific
knowledge (abstraction, analogy, deduction,
induction, synthesis) help to clarify the legal
nature of covert investigative (search) actions
and operational and search measures.
Logical and semantic method is applied to reveal
the meaning of the concepts of “search” and
“investigation”.
With the help of system analysis method the
possibilities of legal regulation of the use of tools
of operational and search activities at different
stages of criminal proceedings are proposed.
Theoretical method makes it possible to study
scientific literature on the issue under
consideration.
Normative and dogmatic method is used to
examine legal acts regulating to problem under
investigation (Criminal Procedure Code of
Ukraine, Law “On Operational and search
Activity”).
Legal modeling method is applied in the process
of the features of covert investigative (search)
actions and operational and search measures.
Literature Review
The scientists, who studied the issue under
consideration, noted a number of problematic
issues. For example, Tatarov (2013, p. 15) noted
the uncertainty of the ratio and boundaries of
operational and search measures and CISAs,
namely: a problem in criminal proceedings is the
conduct of such CISAs as audio and video
surveillance of a person (Article 260 of the CPC)
(Law of Ukraine No. 4651-VI, 2012);
withdrawal of information from transport
telecommunications networks (Article 263 of the
CPC) (Law of Ukraine No. 4651-VI, 2012),
because they should be preceded by investigation
(search) actions aimed at identifying persons, as
the permission to interfere in private
communication is granted by the court only in
respect of a particular person (this leads to a
lengthy collection of information on such
persons, therefore there is a risk of information
leakage on the intentions of law enforcement
agencies to expose this activity); besides, it is
formally prohibited to carry out operational and
search measures in criminal proceedings.
Karnaukh (2018, p. 164) states that the Supreme
Court of Ukraine adheres to the position
according to which the operational and search
proceedings are limited to the preparatory stage
of the crime; in case of an attempt or a completed
criminal offense criminal proceedings should be
carried out.
Pohoretskyi and Serheieva (2014, p. 138) prove
that in contrast to the CISAs, the list of which is
defined directly in Chapter 21 of the CPC of
Ukraine (Law of Ukraine No. 4651-VI, 2012),
certain operational and search measures, their
grounds and procedure, providing results to the
agencies conducting criminal proceedings, are
enshrined in separate bylaws, which are not
available to all actors of criminal procedure.
A number of other scientists believe that the
practice has just begun to work out tactics for
operational and search measures under current
CPC of Ukraine and therefore, exploring the
theoretical aspects of the application of these
measures and CISAs in the new criminal
procedure legislation, there was no opportunity
to analyze the practice of their application. We
partially considered this issue in the study of the
process of formation of the institution of CISAs
in the criminal justice system of Ukraine,
resulting in the conclusion that: on the one hand,
the use of CISAs results in criminal proceedings
differs from similar simplified mechanism that
eliminates the need for additional legalization
and promotes the efficiency of the use of
documents drawn up as a result of covert
investigation (search) actions, but on the other
hand – the lack of clear regulation of these
procedures directly in the CPC of Ukraine
significantly reduces the effectiveness of their
implementation and use of the results obtained
(Tarasenko et al. 2021, p. 469).
Thus, aim of the article is to determine the
features and legal grounds for the use of tools of
operational and search activities in the process of
pre-trial investigation.
Results and Discussion
Investigation (search) actions are procedural
actions regulated by the criminal procedure law,
108
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
aimed at collecting, recording and verifying
evidence. The criteria for classifying any
procedural actions are: their cognitive
orientation, i.e. the focus on collecting, recording
and verifying evidence; the procedural form
provided by law, in accordance with which
investigative actions are carried out; the
possibility of violation of rights and legitimate
interests of persons, that’s why some of them are
carried out only after the permission of the court
or with the sanction of the prosecutor; the
possibility of using State coercion in their
conduct.
CISAs do not fully meet these criteria, as they are
operative in nature. According to the CPC of
Ukraine, the possibility of using the CISAs is
provided for the detection of the vast majority of
criminal offenses, and, first of all, serious and
especially serious ones. That is, the current
criminal procedure legislation had led to changes
in regulations governing operational and search
activities, as a result of which operative measures
in documenting the actions of criminals have
obtained new specifics. According to Art. 41 of
the CPC of Ukraine (Law of Ukraine No. 4651-
VI, 2012), operational units carry out CISAs in
criminal proceedings on behalf of the
investigator, prosecutor. Although, during the
execution of these instructions the officer of the
operational unit uses the powers of the
investigator, but the employees of the operational
units do not have the right to carry out these
actions in criminal proceedings on their own
initiative or to apply to the investigating judge or
prosecutor. That is, on the one hand, operatives
have the powers of investigator and on the other
hand – this authority is truncated. Besides,
operational units practically carry out operational
and search measures when conducting CISAs,
exercising their rights in accordance with the
requirements of the Law “On Operational and
Search Activities” (Law of Ukraine No. 2135-
XII, 1992).
We note the logical and semantic mistake in the
defined ratios of operational and search measures
and SICAs. Operational measures include the
collection of information about the planned
crimes, the behavior of specific individuals, the
causes of certain crimes that require immediate
action (Khyzhniak, Khankevych, Nazarenko,
Pleskach, & Tretiak 2021, p. 39). In practice,
operational search lies in obtaining primary
information and its verification. There is a need
to take a number of measures in the process of
detecting criminal offenses in the absence of all
elements of the criminal offense – this is due to
the specifics of committing latent criminal
offenses (at the time of commission of a criminal
offence, a person may commit a number of legal
acts, therefore, it is also impossible to claim that
a person is preparing to commit criminal acts).
According to the Law of Ukraine “On
Operational and Search Activities”, this activity
should be carried out within the established
operational and investigative case, and only the
availability of sufficient information obtained in
the manner prescribed by law, which requires
verification by operational and investigative
measures is the basis for its initiation
(Shapovalov 2015, p. 175). Therefore, the Law
of Ukraine “On Operational and Search
Activities” allows to exercise the rights of
operational units with the use of separate, clearly
defined measures. Besides, when planning
measures to verify primary operational
information, it is necessary to take into account
the possibility of drawing a clear line between
information verification and documentation of
criminal activity, as in the course of certain
operational and search measures aimed at
verifying primary information, criminal actions
will be recorded. Shapovalov (2015, p. 175)
notes that in fact, the measures of operational
search ensure the implementation of the rights of
operational units also when a check is made prior
to the establishment of a criminal investigation
file.
Formally, operational and search activities
consist of a system of transparent and covert
search and counter-intelligence activities carried
out using operational and operational and
technical means. Note that there are no “search
measures” in this list of measures. Instead, the
semantics of the term “covert investigative
(search) actions” emphasizes that the actions are
“investigative”, although these actions take place
in the course the criminal process and the
investigator does not search in the literal sense of
the term, but gives instructions to operational
units; in turn, they shoud exercise their rights to
conduct operational and search measures during
the execution of this order. One could suggest
that investigative and search activities are one
and the same. But the concepts of “investigation”
and “search” have quite different meaning.
These differences lie in the degree of uncertainty
of the subject’s knowledge of object being
searched. When searching, the initial image of a
person, material object, trace is revealed in the
mind of the subject (investigator, operative) in
the form of a plausible model of his (her) image,
skills, properties and condition. When searching
for specific features of the wanted object, the
Volume 10 - Issue 45
/ September 2021
109
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
search ends with the identification of the wanted
object; thus, the information on the identification
features of the wanted person or object
(identification tasks are solved after identifying
the object) is of great importance for a successful
search. Effective search requires knowledge of
the traceability of a certain class(s) of offender,
material objects, traces in the environment or in
the environment that contributes to concealment.
Search is an independent activity of law
enforcement agencies to identify persons and
objects related to a criminal offense, which is
carried out in a relatively unlimited space and
time. Obraztsov (1992, p. 45) notes that the
search is a method of procedural or non-
procedural activities, including covert ones,
aimed at identifying the sources (carriers) of the
information relevant to criminal proceedings. At
the same time, it is correctly noted that search
activity “is a necessary attribute, an important
basic chain, an element of each stage of the
investigation”.
This position, in our opinion, needs to be
clarified, as the detection of a perpetrator, other
object or its search are independent, but
organically interconnected functional areas in the
detection of criminal offenses. When searching
for the image of a person, a material object is
presented in the mind of the subject (operational
worker) in the probabilistic model and for
effective search requires knowledge of the
traceability of a certain class(s) of offender,
material objects, traces in the environment or in
the environment that contributes to concealment.
Therefore, search is exclusively a process of
operational and search activity. The researchers
note that the level of search activity, the degree
of “saturation” of search operations and activities
of each of the traditional stages of the
investigation process are different. The same
conclusion can be made by analyzing the stages
of disclosure of a criminal offense. Thus, at the
beginning of the activity of the operational
officer, it is of clearly search nature. At the next
stage, provided that the search component is
preserved, the main feature is the information
and research orientation, that is, checking the
primary information. With regard to the final
stage, the activity is mainly procedural and
systematizing in nature (transfer of materials to
the investigative unit, provided that a criminal
offence is being committed or has been
committed; the establishment of operational and
investigative cases and further operational
proceedings). Besides, operational units are
obliged to continue the search activity, due to the
fact that it allows covert methods and means to
obtain new information about episodes,
accomplices or other circumstances that were
previously unknown – that is, it is “search” and
not “investigation”.
That is, distinguishing between investigation and
search measures, we apply the following
principle: if the object of operational activities is
already known to law enforcement officers we
are talking about search measures, if not – about
investigation measures. This gives grounds to
assert the following: since the definition of
operational and search activities does not contain
such a component as investigative measures, but
instead it is present in the term “covert
investigative (search) actions”, and operational
units perform such activity independently
(without the investigator’s instructions), it should
be called “operational and search activity”. The
search for persons performed within the pre-trial
investigation after the beginning of criminal
proceedings; if CISAs are used in the process of
its application, then operational units, searching
for a person on behalf of the investigator or
conducting other CISAs, participate in pre-trial
investigation operational search activities,
identifying persons and facts of operational
interest.
In addition to terminology, there are a number of
problematic issues and inconsistencies in the
legal regulation of operational and search
measures, which significantly affect the
effectiveness of combating criminal offenses and
their investigation. In this regard, Bahanets
(2012) notes that despite the significant
differences between procedural evidence and
evidence obtained as a result of CISAs and
operational and search measures, the CPC of
Ukraine actually combines operational and
search activities and pre-trial investigation,
giving the investigator uncharacteristic powers to
conduct CISAs. The scientist believes that these
activities have been carried out, are being carried
out and should be carried out in the future only
by specially authorized operational units that
have the appropriate special tools, and most
importantly – proper training, knowledge and
skills. Partially agreeing with this opinion, we
note that, indeed, operational units conduct
operational and search measures both before the
criminal proceedings and during the pre-trial
investigation. But at each of these stages there are
issues of legal admissibility of operational and
investigative measures.
Nowadays, the procedure for obtaining
information from official sources on the fact of
committing criminal offense with registration in
110
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
the Unified Register of pre-trial investigations
and the beginning of criminal proceedings is
clearly defined. However, a radically different
situation occurs when the fact of committing a
specific criminal offense is unknown, but, for
example, there is information about the
preparation for its commission on the basis of
indirect signs (Vardanian 2015, p. 64). The
latency of a significant part of criminal offenses
leads to the absence of official statements and
notifications, so one of the grounds for
registration of information about the commission
of a criminal offense in the Unified Register of
pre-trial investigations is the detection of its signs
by operational units. Operational officers receive
primary information, which does not contain
signs of all elements of the criminal offense. That
is, it may be a subjective opinion of the
operational officer on the possible signs, rather
than the actual facts that indicate the commission
of a criminal offense. However, it is necessary to
pay attention to the wording of Part 2 of Art. 7 of
the Law of Ukraine “On Operational and Search
Activities” (Law of Ukraine No. 2135-XII,
1992), which states that in case of detection of
signs of a crime, the operational unit should
immediately send the collected materials (which
recorded factual data on illegal actions of
individuals and groups, the liability for which is
provided by the Criminal Code of Ukraine) to the
relevant body of pre-trial investigation to initiate
and conduct a pre-trial investigation. That is,
there is a logical discrepancy between the content
(in terms of proof) of the identified “signs of a
criminal offense” and “factual data”, which
cannot be established “immediately”.
Considering the meaning of the term “fact of a
criminal offense” it is clear that its use requires
the presence of all elements of the criminal
offense (object, objective aspect, subject,
subjective aspect), without which it is impossible
to talk about the fact of a criminal offense, but
only about its individual features (Shapovalov
2015, p. 137).
But since the current legislation does not provide
for such an inspection, the operational units use
the opportunities provided by Part 3, Art. 7 of the
Law of Ukraine “On Operational and Search
Activities” (Law of Ukraine No. 2135-XII,
1992), which states that if the signs of an offense
are detected in the course of ongoing operational
and search measures, the termination of which
may adversely affect the results of criminal
proceedings, the unit that carries out such
activities notifies the relevant body of pre-trial
investigation and the prosecutor on detection of
the signs of a crime, completes these measures,
and sends the collected materials (which
recorded factual data on illegal actions of
individuals and groups, the liability for which is
provided by the Criminal Code of Ukraine) to the
relevant body of pre-trial investigation.
At the next stage (in the course of investigation)
the investigator helps operation officers to carry
out the necessary in such cases CISAs, search
and detention of certain persons. A number of
operational and search measures are performed
after registration of an offense in the Unified
Register of pre-trial investigations within
criminal proceedings in the implementation of
the CISAs. That is, in the presence of all
necessary grounds (Nykyforchuk, Tarasenko,
Lyzohubenko 2015, pp. 7 – 20) and the
investigator’s order, the operational unit
exercises its right by conducting both CISAs and
operational and search activities, which do not
require a court permission (decision) (for
example, interviewing individuals with their
consent). When executing orders for conducting
CISAs, a necessary precondition for their
implementation is the prior secret collection and
verification of information about the person in
respect for whom the CISA is planned, or other
objects, information about which is necessary for
their effective implementation.
The problem with obtaining such information is
that the activities during active receipt involve
interference with a person’s private life, but
remains outside the legal regulation of the CPC
of Ukraine. That is, on the one hand, the
measures to obtain such supporting data are not
procedural (because they are not regulated by the
CPC), and on the other one – they are not
formally operational and search (because they
are carried out during criminal proceedings);
therefore the question arises as to the validity of
such actions, as they are carried out before the
decision of the investigating judge. Part 3, Art. 8
of the Law of Ukraine “On Operational and
Search Activities” (Law of Ukraine No. 2135-
XII, 1992) determines the possibility of carrying
out investigative measures in accordance with
the decision of the of the head of the body,
operational unit or his (her) deputy, authorized to
perform them, informing the prosecutor of the
decision taken.
The scientists consider operational and
investigative activities within certain blocks,
distinguishing the legal justification for each of
them (Nykyforchuk, Kravchenko, Kopylov
2013, pp. 175 – 176). Taking into account these
views, we interpret the possibility of legal
regulation of the use of tools of operational and
Volume 10 - Issue 45
/ September 2021
111
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
search activities at the following stages of
criminal proceedings, namely:
at the stage of detection of criminal offenses a
number of operational and investigative
measures are aimed at obtaining primary
information, the legal basis for which is Art. 7 of
the Law of Ukraine “On Operational and Search
Activities”, which states that operational units
are obliged to take the necessary operational and
investigative measures within their powers on
timely detection of crimes. Analyzing the logic
of the legislator, it becomes clear that when the
operational unit reveals the actual data about the
commission of a criminal offense (and not some
of its features), it transfers this information to the
relevant body of pre-trial investigation;
the legal basis for conducting operational and
search measures at the stage of obtaining primary
information (which requires verification) about a
criminal offense that is being prepared or a
person who is preparing to commit it is Art. 8 of
the Law of Ukraine “On Operational and Search
Activities” (Law of Ukraine No. 2135-XII, 1992)
(the rights listed in the paragraphs, which contain
a reference to the specific article of the CPC, can
be exercised only by conducting CISAs);
at the stage when the information about the
criminal offense that is being prepared or the
person who is preparing to commit it is
confirmed, the legal basis for conducting
operational and search measures is Art. 6 of the
Law of Ukraine “On Operational and Search
Activities” (Law of Ukraine No. 2135-XII,
1992), which directly indicates the possibility of
conducting operational and investigative
measures, as well as Art. 9 of this Law, according
to which an operational and search case is opened
against the person suspected of preparing to
commit a criminal offense; against unidentified
persons who are preparing to commit it, as well
as against the persons, for whom there is
evidence of participation in the preparation of the
commission.
at the stage of pre-trial investigation in criminal
proceedings in the presence of all necessary
grounds and instructions of the investigator, the
operational unit exercises its rights listed in Art.
8 of the Law of Ukraine “On Operational and
Search Activities” (Law of Ukraine No. 2135-
XII, 1992) (which contain a reference to a
specific article of the CPC of Ukraine), by
conducting CISAs in the manner prescribed by
the CPC of Ukraine. Besides, Part 3, Art. 8 of this
Law determines the possibility of performing
operational and search measures by the decision
of the head of the body, operational unit or his
(her) deputy, authorized to perform such
activities informing the prosecutor of this
decision. In the future, the protocol and material
media of classified information obtained during
the search operations may be declassified and
transferred to the pre-trial investigation bodies or
the court if they hold factual data that can be used
in criminal proceedings (as the basis for initiating
criminal proceedings or conducting urgent
investigative (search) actions and CISAs.
Conclusions
Thus, operational and search activities can be
carried out both before the pre-trial investigation
and simultaneously; operational and search
measures can be initiated before the pre-trial
investigation and terminate during its conduct;
operative and search measures do not terminate
with the beginning of criminal proceedings, but
continue further obtaining a different status;
performing operational and search measures is
aimed not only at fixing the facts of criminal
offenses that are being prepared or the criminal
actions of persons who are preparing to commit
them, but also solves a number of other tasks in
the course of pre-trial investigation; the list of
operational and search measures also includes
those that have no analogues with the CISAs and
therefore operational and search measures do not
duplicate the CISAs, but perform the task of
ensuring the possibility of fulfilling the
investigator’s instructions to conduct the CISAs.
Bibliographic references
Aidemskyi, E. (2014). Activities of operational
units to detect and cease crimes in the
gambling business. Law Forum, Num. 1,
pp. 16–34.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/sear
ch?q=cache:HWuT3GmjazQJ:irbis-
nbuv.gov.ua/cgi-
bin/irbis_nbuv/cgiirbis_64.exe%3FC21CO
M%3D2%26I21DBN%3DUJRN%26P21DB
N%3DUJRN%26IMAGE_FILE_DOWNLO
AD%3D1%26Image_file_name%3DPDF/F
P_index.htm_2014_1_3.pdf+&cd=2&hl=ru
&ct=clnk&gl=ua
Bahanets, O. (2012). Advantages and
disadvantages of the new Criminal Procedure
Code. Proposals for amendments to the new
Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.
http://baganets.com/blogs-
baganets/perevagi-ta-nedol-ki-novogo-
kpk.html.
Karnaukh, S. (2018). Urgent investigative
(search) actions and operational and search
112
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
measures: the issues of theory and practice.
University Scientific Notes, No. 66,
pp. 159 – 166.
Khyzhniak, Y., Khankevych, A., Nazarenko, I.,
Pleskach, O., & Tretiak, O. (2021). Model of
operational search prediction of intentional
homicide by criminal police. Amazonia
Investiga, 10(40), pp. 37-44.
https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2021.40.04.4.
https://amazoniainvestiga.info/index.php/am
azonia/article/view/1595/1638
Law of Ukraine No. 2135-XII. About operational
search activity. Official Web site of the
Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, April 13,
2012. Available online.
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2135-
12#Text
Law of Ukraine No. 4651-VI. Criminal
Procedure Code of Ukraine. Official Web site
of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, April 13,
2012. Available online.
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/4651-
17#Text
Nykyforchuk, D., Kravchenko, A., and
Kopylov, A. (2013). Problematic issues of
operational and search measures and covert
investigative (search) actions. Scientific
Bulletin of the NAVS, No. 4, pp. 173–181.
Nykyforchuk, D., Tarasenko, O., and
Lyzohubenko, E. (2015). Covert
investigative (search) actions: textbook with
structural and logical schemes. Kyiv:
National Academy of Internal Affairs.
Obraztsov, V. (1992). Forensic support of the
preliminary investigation. Moskow: Jurist.
Pohoretskyi, M., and Serheieva, D. (2014).
Covert investigative (search) actions and
operational and search measures: the concept,
essence and relationship. Fight against
organized crime and corruption (theory and
practice), 2(33), pp. 137 – 166.
http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/boz_2014_2_34
Shapovalov, O. (2015). Operational search for
the signs of latent crimes in the sphere of
economic activity. Prykarpattia Legal
Bulletin, 3(9), pp. 183 – 187.
http://www.pjv.nuoua.od.ua/v3-
2_2015/42.pdf
Tarasenko O., Tsutskiridze M., Shevchishen A.,
Yermakov Y., & Mirkovets D. (2021).
Establishment of the institution of covert
investigation in the criminal justice system of
Ukraine. Cuestiones Politicas, 39(69),
pp. 462 – 474.
Tatarov, O. (2013). Problems of pre-trial
investigation of gambling // In the collection:
Actual problems of investigation of crimes
under the new Criminal Procedure Code of
Ukraine of All-Ukrainian scientific and
practical conference (Kyiv, July 5, 2013).
Kyiv: National Academy of Internal Affairs,
p. 13–16.
Vardanian, H. (2015). Methods of investigation
of crimes related to the production and
treatment of non-compliant licensing and (or)
falsified, substandard, unregistered drugs,
medical devices or biologically active
additives. (PhD Dissertation). Tula State
University, Russian. https://xn--h1ap6b.xn--
b1aew.xn--
p1ai/upload/site138/document_file/CS0pDM
rfvE.pdf