SOME PROBLEMATIC ISSUES OF APPOINTMENT OF AN AUDIT AND THE USE OF ITS FINDINGS IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

Abstract

The significance of audit findings in the pre-trial investigation of criminal offenses in the field of economics is studied, differences between audit and forensic economic examination. The reasons for carrying out scheduled and unscheduled field audits by state financial control bodies were considered, including the grounds for the appointment of an unscheduled field audit in criminal proceedings provided for by the legislation of Ukraine. Analyzed the practice of consideration by investigative judges of petitions of investigators, prosecutors on the appointment of audit in criminal proceedings, and the court practice of consideration of cases in which the prosecution used as evidence of guilt the findings of an audit appointed and conducted on the basis of a decision of the investigating judge during the pre-trial investigation. Considered the reasons for the court’s recognition of audit findings as inadmissible evidence in criminal proceedings and the consequences of the court’s adoption of such a decision. Defined a problematic issues that arise during the appointment and conduct of the audit in criminal proceedings which are related to the absence in the current criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine of norms regulating the order of its appointment and implementation. Proposed solutions of problematic issues, substantiated the necessity of making changes to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine for the purpose of determining the procedural status of the audit, establishing the grounds and procedural order for the appointment of an audit at the pre-trial investigation stage, determination of the powers of the investigator, prosecutor, investigating judge regarding the appointment of an audit, as well as the rights and obligations of the parties and other participants in criminal proceedings related to the appointment and conduct of an audit.