On November 20, 2012, the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine 2012 came into force. It introduced a new philosophy of the national criminal procedure oriented to the European standards of criminal justice. The 10-year period of its application has shown a slow adaptation of its provisions and ideas into modern scientific, rule-making and law enforcement activities. To investigate the reasons for this phenomenon, the author resorted to a comparative analysis of the processes of implementation of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of the USSR of 1922 and the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine 2012. In his opinion, there is much in common in the fate of these codified acts. They were adopted at the crossroads of different procedural paradigms. The Criminal Procedure Code of the USSR of 1922 gave impetus to the formation of a socialist-type criminal procedure, and the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine 2012 began its destruction. In this regard, the article examines the main stages of formation of the “special Soviet type” of criminal procedure. They were accompanied by the non-recognition of fundamental European legal values: the presumption of innocence, publicity, oral proceedings, adversarial proceedings, guarantees of the accused’s right to defence, participation of defence counsel, the principle of evaluating evidence according to the judges’ internal conviction and other democratic principles of justice. Therefore, after Ukraine gained independence, it inherited a deformed “special type of Soviet criminal procedure” subordinated to the administrative command system, which manifested the dictates of the state over the individual, and the following trends: diminished role of the court, with the prosecuting authorities taking over judicial functions; no distinction between procedural functions, formalized evidence procedure, lack of judicial control over the pre-trial investigation and its bureaucratization. Unfortunately, for many years, deformed ideas about the criminal process were “theoretically substantiated” in scientific research and educational publications, which were used by many generations of Soviet lawyers. Therefore, the established ideas about the Soviet criminal procedure to a certain extent hindered the mastery of the ideas and provisions of the CPC 2012. In this regard, the author of the article examines a number of reasons which impede further comprehension and implementation of the general provisions and ideas of the CPC-2012 into the rulemaking practice. At the same time, the article proposes substantive measures aimed at overcoming the destructive phenomena which impede the improvement of the current CPC in the real conditions of legal reality.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Cheltsov-Bebutov M, Kryminalnyi protses: dlia nyzovykh robitnykiv yustytsii ta samoosvity (Iuryd vyd-vo NKIu URSR 1929) (in Ukrainian).

2. Mokichev K, Protiv revizionistskih izvrashhenij marksistsko-leninskogo uchenija o gosudarstve i prave: lekcija (VJuZI 1959) (in Russian).

Edited books

3. Pamjatniki rossijskogo prava v 35 tomah: Ugolovno-processual’nye kodeksy, t XXІX (Jurlitinform 2016) (in Russian).

4. Shylo O (zah red), Kontseptualni osnovy pobudovy suchasnoho kryminalnoho protsesu Ukrainy (NDI VPZ imeni akad V V Stashysa NAPrNU 2016) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

5. Chel’cov M, ‘O nedopustimosti perenesenija burzhuaznyh konstrukcij v sovetskuju ugolovno-processual’nuju teoriju’ (1958) IV Uchenye zapiski VJuZI 48–97 (in Russian).

6. Hrodzynskyi M, ‘Do perehliadu KPK USRR’ (1930) 20/21 Visnyk radianskoi yustytsii 565 (in Ukrainian).

7. Hroshevyi Yu, ‘Problemy normatyvnoho rehuliuvannia diialnosti orhaniv poperednoho rozsliduvannia u novomu KPK Ukrainy’ (1994) 2 Visnyk Akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy 138–9 (in Ukrainian).

8. Lisicyn A, ‘Nuzhno uprostit’’ (1922) 43 Ezhenedel’nik sovetskoj justicii 1–2 (in Russian).

9. Shchyhol O, ‘Nova kontseptsiia protsesualnoho stanovyshcha poterpiloho ta yoho predstavnykiv u kryminalnomu provadzhenni z urakhuvanniam zasady protsesualnoho viktymotsentryzmu’ (2021) 2 Yurydychnyi visnyk 182 (in Ukrainian).

Conference papers

10. Hmyrko V, ‘Diialnisnyi kontsept dovedennia v restrukturyzovanomu kryminalnomu protsesi (metodolohichni refleksii)’ v Suchasni kontseptsii dokazuvannia i dokaziv u yurydychnomu protsesi krain blyzhnoho zarubizhzhia ta yikh vplyv na formuvannia yedynoi sudovoi praktyky: materialy naukovo-metodolohichnoho seminaru (Shumylo M uporiad, Pravo 2020) (in Ukrainian).

Websites

11. Banchuk O. ‘5 idei vid rozrobnykiv KPK, yaki tak i ne vdalosia vtilyty u zhyttia’ (Justtalk, 12.11.2021) <https://justtalk.com.ua/post/5-idej-vid-rozrobnikiv-kpk-yakitaki-ne-vdalosya-vtiliti-u-zhittya?> (accessed: 02.01.2023) (in Ukrainian).

12. Sushchenko V, ‘Iak formuvavsia KPK 2012 roku: notatky avtora’ (Justtalk, 11.11.2021) <https://justtalk.com.ua/post/yak-formuvavsya-kpk-2012-roku-notatki-avtora?> (accessed: 02.01.2023) (in Ukrainian).