СПІВВІДНОШЕННЯ ПОНЯТТЯ «НЕЗМІННІСТЬ ПРОКУРОРА» ТА ЗМІНА ПІДСЛІДНОСТІ

Abstract

The article is devoted to the formation of an up-to-date scientific opinion on the competence of the prosecutor and pre-trial investigation bodies in the process of exercising their powers during the pre-trial investigation, namely the exercise of these powers in the event of a change of jurisdiction during the criminal proceedings. The author analyzes the peculiarities of the implementation of the change of jurisdiction of the pre-trial investigation body and the role of the prosecutor in this process. It was determined that there is a legislative gap in the regulation of the change of the prosecutor in the process of changing the body of the pre-trial investigation due to the change of jurisdiction. Was disclosed the mechanism of interaction of pre-trial investigation bodies and prosecutor's offices at the stage of pre-trial investigation of criminal proceedings. Described the features of the organization of the pre-trial investigation process by the prosecutor. As well as the consequences of the replacement of the investigator in criminal proceedings without the appropriate replacement of the prosecutor which are expressed in time delays and the loss of quality of the investigation, in particular, the creation and establishment of new teams, the peculiarities of the transfer of materials of criminal. proceedings between various bodies of pre-trial investigation, as well as the time spent on familiarization with the case and setting up new work processes. The legislative irregularity of the process of determining and changing the investigation body and the prosecutor's office is the reason for their different interpretation, which in turn becomes a consequence of heterogeneous judicial practice. It is emphasized separately that the lack of regulation of the process of changing the prosecutor's office due to a change in the jurisdiction of the pre-trial investigation body is a consequence of the lack of prosecutor's office competence, which in turn calls into question the admissibility of the obtained evidence in the criminal proceedings.