Criminal proceedings as activities are specific, because they are characterized by a specific ratio, including the convergence, on the one hand, of public and private interests, on the other hand, of different private interests. Accordingly, there is a question as to how to use rights and powers to realize the same interests. In a situation where the general permit type of regulation of behavior is characteristic for the non-governmental participants, and the government has a discretionary power, the doctrine and practice raises the question of the constitution of abuse of the right as a criminal procedural phenomenon, in which case not only the right, but also the powers. However, because of the difficulty of understanding and defining this phenomenon, the doctrine and practice on this issue is neither consistent nor consistent.

The purpose of the article is to define the nature of “abuse of the right” in the legal doctrine, its forms, subject-matter composition, identification of the application of this phenomenon to criminal proceedings; to assess the possibility of allocation as a phenomenon of abuse of the right to protection.

 The article, based on doctrinal sources, in the foundation of the rule of law, examined the legal nature of the abuse of law in the doctrine. The problem of abuse of the right on the basis of the practice of the ECHR has been considered. The practical assessment of the abuse of law in the practice of national courts, in particular the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, the Casation Criminal Court, the Supreme Court and the High AntiCorruption Court, has been studied, and the legal approaches to interpretation of this concept have been analyzed.

The use of the term “abuse of the right” in the text of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine has been commented, and attention is paid to the fact that the abuse of the right in criminal proceedings is considered by the national law-maker as harmful behavior, such way of realization of the right, which formally meets the requirements of the CPC of Ukraine, However, it contradicts its normative goal and the task of criminal proceedings in general or some of its institutes, which can be directly envisaged in the CPC of Ukraine restriction of realization of rights, as well as initiation of disciplinary measures.

The draft laws were criticized for not establishing the basis of the inadmissibility of the abuse of the right to criminal proceedings because of the legal uncertainty and discrimination of their provisions. Proved wrong terminological design as “abuse of the right to protection”.

As is seen from the analysis of perspective legislation, the lawmaker introduces into criminal procedural legislation the concept of abuse of the right, under which such a way of its realization is the basis of legal responsibility. However, in the context of competition and conflict of criminal proceedings, when the interests of its participants contradict each other, including the ones directly opposite, granting the investigating judge, court, and the prosecution of the authority to recognize certain actions (the list of which is inexhaustible) abuse of procedural rights, could significantly undermine theprinciple of legal certainty in the field of criminal proceedings and would not contribute to the strengthening of the legal protection of its participants. Thus, to prevent the fact that the doctrine and practice is called abuse, there is a need to apply another legal mechanism – formalization of violations with respect to the principle of legal certainty, that is, in such a way that their presence / absence could not be viewed in different ways by the participants of criminal proceedings, taking into account, the term “abuse of the right to defense” in criminal proceedings is inconsistent with the essence of this right and the mechanism of its realization.

Bibliography

Authored books

 1. Udalova L, Khablo O, Zlovzhyvannia u sferi kryminalnoho protsesu (Dakor 2010) (in Ukrainian).

Edited books

2. Karnaukh B, ‘Zlovzhyvannia sub’iektyvnym tsyvilnym pravom: oznaky ta naslidky’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 20–9 (in Ukrainian).

3. Kibenko O, ‘Zlovzhyvannia protsesualnymy pravamy pry podanni kasatsiinoi skarhy’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 270–90 (in Ukrainian).

4. Kochyn V, ‘Konstytutsiino-pravova otsinka ta mozhlyvist sudovoho zakhystu pry zlovzhyvanni sub’iektyvnym tsyvilnym pravom’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 66–79 (in Ukrainian).

5. Kokhanovska O, ‘Zlovzhyvannia pravom na informatsiiu (tsyvilno-pravovyi aspekt)’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 42–65 (in Ukrainian).

6. Kot O, ‘Katehoriia “zlovzhyvannia pravom” u suchasnii doktryni tsyvilnoho prava’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 30–41 (in Ukrainian).

7. Krat V, ‘Sudova praktyka z pytan osporiuvannia pravochyniv i zastosuvannia sudom normy st. 13 TsK Ukrainy pro zlovzhyvannia pravom’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 291–307 (in Ukrainian).

8. Levkivskyi B, ‘Zlovzhyvannia batkivskymy pravamy’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 80–94 (in Ukrainian).

9. Muzyka-Stefanchuk O, Huberska N, Yamnenko T, ‘Zlovzhyvannia pravom ta vladoiu sub’iektamy podatkovykh pravovidnosyn’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 95–122 (in Ukrainian).

10. Petryshyn O (red), Zahalna teoriia prava: pidruchnyk (Pravo 2021) (in Ukrainian).

11. Rieznikova V, ‘Zlovzhyvannia protsesualnymy pravamy v hospodarskomu sudochynstvi’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 122–50 (in Ukrainian).

12. Smitiukh A, ‘Shchodo kvalifikatsii bezdiialnosti yak zlovzhyvannia sub’iektyvnym korporatyvnym pravom braty uchast v upravlinni tovarystvom’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 151–64 (in Ukrainian).

13. Spasybo-Fatieieva I, ‘Okremi sehmenty sudovoi praktyky shchodo zlovzhyvannia pravom’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 252–69 (in Ukrainian). 14. Spasybo-Fatieieva I, ‘Zlovzhyvannia pravom: shche odyn pohliad na sutnist & propozytsiia testiv dlia vyiavlennia’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 165–81 (in Ukrainian).

15. Stefanchuk M, ‘Poniattia, oznaky ta formy zlovzhyvannia sub’iektyvnym tsyvilnym pravom’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 181–206 (in Ukrainian).

16. Tsuvina T, ‘Zlovzhyvannia protsesualnymy pravamy: pidkhid Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny ta natsionalna praktyka’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 201–26 (in Ukrainian).

 17. Yakubivskyi I, ‘Zlovzhyvannia sub’iektyvnymy pravamy u sferi intelektualnoi vlasnosti’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 227–51 (in Ukrainian).

18. Zhornokui Yu, ‘Zlovzhyvannia korporatyvnymy pravamy: znachennia na suchasnomu etapi ta praktychne zastosuvannia’ v I Spasybo-Fatieieva (red), Zlovzhyvannia pravom: zbirka statei (EKUS 2021) 7–19 (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

19. Harasymchuk N, ‘Poniattia ta oznaky zlovzhyvannia protsesualnymy pravamy advokatom u kryminalnomu provadzhenni’ (2021) 2 Yurydychnyi visnyk 216 (in Ukrainian).

20. Kaplina O, ‘Problemy zlovzhyvannia pravom u kryminalnomu protsesi’ [2010] 3 (62) Visnyk Akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy 290 (in Ukrainian).

21. Kirieiev R, ‘Nehatyvni naslidky zlovzhyvannia pravom na zakhyst pidozriuvanym, obvynuvachenym’ (2013) 7 Zakon y zhyzn 40–3 (in Ukrainian).

22. Kryvoruchko D, ‘Zlovzhyvannia pravom: yurydychna pryroda ta oznaky’ (2021) 9 Yurydychnyi naukovyi elektronnyi zhurnal 250 <http://www.lsej.org.ua/9_2021/63. pdf> (accessed: 28.06.2022) (in Ukrainian).

 23. Lazarenko A, ‘Otsinka zlovzhyvannia protsesualnymy pravamy v rozsliduvanni podatkovykh zlochyniv u konteksti zasad kryminalnoho provadzhennia’ [2021] 3 (39) 1 Knowledge, Education, Law, Management 240 (in Ukrainian).

24. Pashuk T, ‘Zlovzhyvannia protsesualnymy pravamy: do zahalnoteoretychnoi kharakterystyky poniattia (na materialakh praktyky Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny)’ [2021] 1 (34) Slovo Natsionalnoi shkoly suddiv Ukrainy 171–2 (in Ukrainian).

Newspaper articles

25. Drozdov O, Shulhin S, Drozdova O, ‘Try momenty odniiei stadii. Yak chas na oznaiomlennia z materialamy vplyvaie na zavershennia dosudovoho rozsliduvannia ta inshi dotychni pytannia’ <https://zib.com.ua/ua/148152-yak_chas_na_oznayom lennya_z_materialami_ vplivae_na_zavershen.html> (accessed: 28.06.2022) (in Ukrainian).

26. Monaienko A, ‘Zlovzhyvannia protsesualnymy pravamy v administratyvnomu sudochynstvi’ [2019] 28–29 (682–683) (Iurydychna hazeta) <https://yur-gazeta.com/ publications/practice/sudova-praktika/zlovzhivannya-procesualnimi-pravami-vadministrativnomusudochinstvi.html> (accessed: 28.06.2022) (in Ukrainian).

Theses

27. Andrushko O, ‘Teoriia ta praktyka yurydychnoi vidpovidalnosti za pravoporushennia v kryminalnomu protsesi’ (dys d-ra yuryd nauk, 2020) (in Ukrainian).

28. Polishchuk V, ‘Zlovzhyvannia protsesualnymy pravamy v administratyvnomu sudochynstvi’ (dys kand yuryd nauk, 2021) (in Ukrainian).

Conference papers

29. Mykhailenko V, ‘Protsesualni zlovzhyvannia pid chas dosudovoho rozsliduvannia v kryminalnomu provadzhenni’ v Kryminalne sudochynstvo: suchasnyi stan ta perspektyvy rozvytku: materialy Vseukr. nauk.-prakt. konf. (Cherniei V, Husariev S, Cherniavskyi S ta in redkol, Nats akad vnutr sprav 2021) 38–44 (in Ukrainian).

Websites

30. ‘RAU zatverdyla rekomendatsii shchodo zakhystu prav advokativ v umovakh karantynu’ <https://unba.org.ua/news/6518-rau-zatverdila-rekomendacii-shodo-zahistu-pravadvokativv-umovah-karantinu.html> (accessed: 28.06.2022) (in Ukrainian).

31. Hloviuk I, ‘Neprypustymist zlovzhyvannia protsesualnymy pravamy yak perspektyvna zasada kryminalnoho provadzhennia: prohres chy rehres?’ <https://unba.org.ua/ publications/3646-nepripustimist-zlovzhivannya-procesual-nimi-pravami-yakperspektivnazasada-kriminal-nogo-provadzhennya-progres-chi-regres.html> (accessed: 28.06.2022) (in Ukrainian).

32. Ohliad rishen Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny (sichen – berezen 2022 roku). Rishennia za period iz 01.01.2022 po 31.03.2022 (O Tarasenko, D Mordas, R Babanly vidp za vyp, 2022) 53, 54 <https://supreme.court.gov.ua/userfiles/media/new_folder_ for_uploads/supreme/sud_pract/Oglyad_ESPL_01_03.pdf> (accessed: 28.06.2022) (in Ukrainian). 33. Posibnyk zi stati 17 Konventsii pro zakhyst prav liudyny ta osnovopolozhnykh svobod. Zaborona zlovzhyvannia pravamy. 2019. Punkty 1–2, 4, 8 <https://www.echr.com.ua/ wp-content/uploads/2019/05/posibnyk-zlovzhivannia-protsesualnimi-pravami-st-17konventsii.pdf> (accessed: 28.06.2022) (in Ukrainian).

34. Rieznikova V, ‘Suchasna doktryna zlovzhyvannia protsesualnymy pravamy’ <https:// rd.ua/storage/lessons/617/681Suchasna%20doktryna%20zlovzhyvannia%20 protsesualnymy%20pravamy> (accessed: 28.06.2022) (in Ukrainian).