Inadmissibility of Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in Ukraine
The aim of the article is to analyze the problematic aspects of finding evidence inadmissible in criminal proceedings, as well as to formulate, according to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (CCP of Ukraine) and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), proposals for elimination of existing shortcomings on the issue raised.
In the article used general scientific and special methods that enable to obtain scientifically sound conclusions and proposals. In particular, scientific methods, such as dialectical, comparative-legal, system-structural, modelling, abstraction, generalization and logical, are applied.
The problematic issues of the procedure for finding evidence inadmissible in the criminal proceedings of Ukraine are studied. The significant violations and shortcomings in collecting evidence by the pre-trial investigation bodies are under focus. The authors clarify grounds for the inadmissibility of evidence and the types of inadmissible evidence. The analysis of investigative practice and case-law enables to conclude that a violation in taking one piece of evidence in criminal proceedings may lead to finding a number of other pieces of evidence inadmissible (the doctrine of the fruit of the poisonous tree). The authors argue that the court should be proactive in resolving the issue of inadmissibility of evidence either on its own motion or on the motion by parties to criminal proceedings. The utilization of the case law of the ECHR in national law application activities are analyzed from legal perspective. The study establishes that ratio decidendi of the ECHR with regard to finding evidence inadmissible is that the issue of its inadmissibility is subject to regulation at the level of national law. The assessment of inadmissibility of evidence is the responsibility of national courts, and the ECHR is obliged to ensure that the means of taking evidence are fair.
Cusveller, J., Kleemans, E. (2018). Fair compensation for victims of human trafficking? A case study of the Dutch injured party claim. International Review of Victimology, 24(3), 297–311.
Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in the case on the constitutional submission of the Security Service of Ukraine with regard to the official interpretation of the provisions of the third part of Article 62 of the Constitution of Ukraine (20 October 2011, No. 12-рп/2011). Recovered from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v012p710-11#n54.
Decision of the European Court of Human Rights on the case “Shabelnyk v. Ukraine” (19 February 2009Ё Statements No. 48016/06, 16404/03). Recovered from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_457.
Decision of the European Court of Human Rights on the case “Sitnevskyi and Chaikovskyi v. Ukraine” (10 November 2016, Statements No. 48016/06, 7817/07). Recovered from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_b91.
Decision of the Panel of Judges of Criminal Cassation Court of the Supreme Court (21 January 2020, No. 756/8425/17). Recovered from http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/87053575.
Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. (2019). Kyiv: Center for Educational Literature, 704 p.
Drozd, V. H. (2018). Legal regulation of pre-trial investigation: Problems of theory and practice. Odessa: Helvetyka, 448 p.
Drozd, V. H., Ponomarenko, A. V., Ablamskyi, S. Ye. et al. (2019). Protection of rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of a person at the pre-trial stage. The State Research Inst.; Kharkiv National University of Internal Affairs; Kherson: Helvetyka, 498 p.
Drozd, V. H., Ponomarenko, A. V., Ablamskyi, S. Ye. et al. (2020). Organizational and legal principles of activity of investigative units of National Police of Ukraine. The State Research Inst.; Kharkiv National University of Internal Affairs; Kherson: Helvetyka, 352 p.
Honcharenko, V. H., Nor, V. T., Shumylo, M. E. (Eds.). (2012). Scientific and practical commentary to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. Kyiv: Yustinian, 1224 p.
Law of Ukraine on amendments to certain legislative acts of Ukraine concerning the confiscation of illegal assets of persons authorized to perform the functions of the state or local self-government, and the punishment for acquiring such assets (31 October 2019, No. 263-IX). Recovered from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/263-20#n33.
Law of Ukraine on the enforcement of judgments and the application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (23 February 2006, No. 3477-IV). Recovered from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3477-15.
Lutsiuk, P. S. Tsekhan, D. M. (2018). Inadmissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings (based on practice materials). 2012 Criminal Procedure Code: Ideology and law application. Yu. P. Alenin (Ed.). Odessa: Helvetyka, 1148 p.
Orlov, Yu. Yu., Cherniavskyi S. S. (2017). Application of electronic reflections as evidence in criminal proceedings. Yurydychnyi chasopys Natsionalnoi akademii vnutrishnikh sprav, 3 (104), p.p. 13-25.
Osetrova, O. S., Syzonenko, A. S., Bryskovska, O. M. (2017). The system of grounds for finding evidence inadmissible in criminal proceedings. Yurydychnyi chasopys Natsionalnoi akademii vnutrishnikh sprav, 2 (14), p.p. 340-351.
Panova, A. V. (2016). Finding evidence inadmissible in criminal proceedings. PhD Thesis in specialty 12.00.09. Kharkiv. 226 p.
Pushkar, P. V., Babanly, R. Sh. (2017). How to ensure the correct citation of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights? Recovered from https://radako.com.ua/news/yak-zabezpechiti-korektnist-cituvannya-rishen-ievropeyskogo-sudu-z-prav-lyudini?
Shevchuk, M. I. (2017). Finding evidence inadmissible: Right of the court or its duty? Law and society, 4(2), p.p. 207-213.
Shytov, A. Duff, P. (2019). Truth and procedural fairness in Chinese criminal procedure law. International Journal of Evidence and Proof, 23(3), p.p. 299-315.
Sirenko, O. V. (2019). Electronic evidence in criminal proceedings. Mizhnarodnyy yurydychnyy visnyk: aktualʹni problemy suchasnosti (teoriya ta praktyka), 14, 208-214.