This article examines issues related to the problems of removing seizure from property for committing crimes in the sphere of trafficking in narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, their analogues or precursors.

It is noted that the decision to seize property in each case acquires individual specificity and content, which is primarily manifested in the subject matter, the grounds of the stated demands, the circumstances that are subject to proof, the purpose, tasks and legal consequences of satisfying the stated demands.

It was emphasized that the issue of whether the operational purchase was carried out through an electronic or crypto wallet remains unsettled. In such a case, it is quite difficult to prove the fact that the seller of narcotics received money. This is precisely where the procedural gap in the legislation will be quite clearly manifested, because by purchasing a crypto-currency that is not recognized by Ukraine, the prosecution will essentially be contradicting the current code. As a measure to ensure the preservation of physical evidence, arrest is used in offenses of this area immediately after conducting searches or detaining a person suspected of committing an offense.

Asa conclusion, it is stated that in the system of measures to ensure criminal proceedings, a special place belongs to one of them, such as seizure of property. This measure is an important element of the mechanism of ensuring the tasks of criminal proceedings and the factor of the most tangible invasion of the sphere of the property rights of a person. In this regard, the proper legal regulation of the activity of the investigator, prosecutor, investigating judge, and court during the seizure of property, their observance of legality, the rule of law, and other legal prescriptions is a guarantee of the protection of the property rights of citizens and the provision of Part 2 of Art. 170 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine on the results of criminal proceedings.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Udalova L, Bilous O, Zasada nedotorkannosti zhytla chy inshoho volodinnia osoby u dosudovomu kryminalnomu provadzhenni (KNT 2015) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

2. Hloviuk I, ‘Aresht maina yak zakhid zabezpechennia kryminalnoho provadzhennia: analiz novel’ (2016) 8 Visnyk Pivdennoho rehionalnoho tsentru Natsionalnoi akademii pravovykh nauk 158 (in Ukrainian). Newspaper articles

3. Hrabchuk O, ‘Iak skasuvaty aresht maina pislia zakryttia kryminalnoho provadzhennia’ <https://protocol.ua/ua/yak_skasuvati_aresht_mayna_pislya_zakrittya_ kriminalnogo_provadgennya> (accessed: 21.06.2023) (in Ukrainian).

4. Oryshchuk F, Miniailo N, Abibok Yu, ‘Anatomiia presynhu. Shcho analiz ponad 2000 sudovykh rishen kazhe pro biznes-klimat v Ukraini’ (Voks Ukraina 26.03.2018) <https://voxukraine.org/anatomiya-presingu-shho-analiz-ponad-2000-sudovih-rishenkazhepro-biznes-klimat-v-ukrayini> (accessed: 21.06.2023) (in Ukrainian).

5. Shaposhnikova I, ‘“Dopoky tse bude vidbuvatysia?” abo problematyka skasuvannia areshtu na maino u razi zakryttia kryminalnoho provadzhennia’ (Yurydychna Hazeta, 26.02.2018) <https://yur-gazeta.com/publications/practice/inshe/dopoki-cebudevidbuvatisya. html> (accessed: 21.06.2023) (in Ukrainian).

Websites

6. Nuralin M, ‘Aresht sudom tymchasovo vyluchenoho maina bez vyklyku vlasnyka’ (17.12.2019) <https://vbpartners.ua/uk/aresht-sudom-timchasovo-viluchenogo-majnabezvikliku-vlasnika> (accessed: 21.06.2023).