Abuse and the 'Disputed Day': Problems of Calculating Deadlines in Criminal Proceedings
A round table dedicated to the issues of calculating pre-trial investigation deadlines and current judicial practice was held at the Criminal Cassation Court of the Supreme Court. Judges of the Criminal Cassation Court of the Supreme Court and the Kyiv Court of Appeal participated in the event.
The main focus of the parties was on finding a fair balance between respecting the procedural rights of participants and minimizing abuses by the prosecution or defense parties of their procedural rights.
Acting Head of the Criminal Cassation Court of the Supreme Court Natalia Antonyuk emphasized that the correct calculation of pre-trial investigation deadlines and their observance by the prosecution is a necessary prerequisite for the further progress of the proceedings as a whole. The Criminal Cassation Court has formulated many conclusions concerning this issue, and as practice shows, in a number of cases the defense and prosecution even dispute a single day, which is key to the conclusion about whether the prosecution complied with the statutory pre-trial investigation deadline or not. Conclusions regarding pre-trial investigation deadlines are contained in as many as 10 rulings of the United Chamber of the Criminal Cassation Court or its separate chambers.
A Supreme Court judge in the Criminal Cassation Court noted that when considering a case on the merits, the court conducts a comprehensive assessment of rulings by investigative judges, which are not subject to separate appeal at the pre-trial investigation stage, including those affecting the calculation of the pre-trial investigation deadline. He also stressed that parties must conscientiously exercise their procedural rights, as in many cases there is reason to speak of abuse of these rights.
The Secretary of the Second Judicial Chamber of the Criminal Cassation Court of the Supreme Court pointed out that the pre-trial investigation deadline is suspended only when the defense party is acquainted with the materials of the criminal proceedings, not the prosecutor or the victim. These issues were also considered by the United Chamber of the Criminal Cassation Court.
At the same time, the Head of the Kyiv Court of Appeal Yaroslav Holovachov emphasized the importance of communication between judges of different instances on certain issues arising in the course of justice administration.
According to him, thematic reviews of judicial practice significantly facilitate the application of the positions of the cassation instance, and such professional discussions contribute to legal certainty and stability of criminal justice. He also proposed making such meetings regular.
Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp pages on Facebook and Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.
