APPEAL AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE INVESTIGATING JUDGE ON THE APPLICATION OF A PREVENTIVE MEASURE IN THE FORM OF DETENTION: PROBLEMATIC ISSUES

Abstract

During pre-trial investigation, a suspect may be subjected to the preventive measure of detention, which is the most severe measure as it entails confinement. Being confined can have adverse consequences for the suspect, such as deteriorating health, loss of employment, financial and family problems. The prosecuting party, which often exercises its right to petition the investigating judge for the application of detention as a preventive measure, is well aware of these consequences. In many cases, this becomes a tool of psychological pressure on the suspect. Therefore, an effective means of protection should be the appeal against the decision of the investigating judge regarding the application of detention, which fully corresponds to the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The three-day period for considering the appeal does not apply; the review is delayed for a month, sometimes even longer. There are many cases where the appellate court schedules the hearing of the appeal when a new decision of the investigating judge to extend the detention period already exists, rendering the appeal irrelevant. This makes the appeal against the decision of the investigating judge an ineffective means of protection. This article explores the provisions of the criminal procedural law of Ukraine regarding the appeal against the decision of the investigating judge on the application of detention as a preventive measure, as well as the relevant judicial practice. Problematic issues arising from such appeals are identified, and solutions to address them are proposed.