(2018) 2 Visn. Nac. akad. prokur. Ukr. 58–72
doi
Title of the article	Notice of Suspicion: Criminal Procedure Dichotomy
Author(s)	OLEKSANDR HLADUN PhD in Law, senior research officer, head, department of scientific and methodological support of prosecutor’s participation in the criminal proceedings, Scientific Research Institute, National Prosecution Academy of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, hladunsan@gmail.com OLEKSII ZELINSKYI lawyer, honorary officer of the prosecution service of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, zavzav@bigmir.net
Short title of the journal (ISSN)	Visn. Nac. akad. prokur. Ukr.
Year	2018
Issue	2
Pages	[58–72]
Language	Ukrainian
Abstract	Notice of suspicion is a juridical fact that causes exact juridical consequences. The discussion on the legal nature of a notice of suspicion was initiated after the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (CPC of Ukraine) came into force and has not yet been suspended. The purpose of the article is to further develop the hypothesis that a notice of suspicion depending on a particular context may be a procedural decision or a procedural action, but not both at the same time. Arts. 277, 278 of the CPC of Ukraine clearly distinguish between the procedure for drawing up a written notice of suspicion (including the pool of authorized entities, exclusively written form, list of information to be included therein), and the procedure for delivering a written notice of suspicion. According to Art. 111 of the CPC of Ukraine a notice in a criminal proceeding is a procedure action by which an investigator, prosecutor, investigative judge or court informs a certain participant of a criminal proceeding of the date, time, and place of conducting the relevant procedure act, or of a procedure decision taken, or procedure action performed. Thus, the delivery of a notice of suspicion may be regarded as a procedure action by which a person is informed of a procedure decision made in respect of him/her – a written notice of suspicion. The component of judicial immunity is a requirement set by law to limit a number of persons from the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine who may take a procedure decision on the commencement of prosecution of a judge. Instead, the formal submission of a notice of suspicion to the judge by the Deputy Prosecutor General will also not be a legal guarantee of the rights of the suspect. The criminal procedure dichotomy of a notice of suspicion is also apparent in the procedure of its appeal. So, as defined in Part 1 of Art. 303 of the CPC of Ukraine, a list of decisions and actions of an investigator or prosecutor, which may be appealed during the pre-trial investigation, is supplemented by a notice of suspicion of an investigator, prosecutor. To provide grounds for a suspicion is a mandatory subject of judicial control when considering requests for the application of a preventive measure, resolving the issue of seizure of property. At the same time, the court does not decide to cancel a notice of suspicion, but may refuse to satisfy the relevant petitions on the grounds that a person has not acquired the status of the suspect. Some of the above motives at the preparatory court session causes the return of the indictment to a prosecutor to remedy the shortcomings. Thus, a written notice of suspicion is a procedure decision and law sets clear formal requirements to its content. The adoption of this decision by a prosecutor or an investigator, in agreement with a prosecutor, necessitates the immediate implementation of the relevant procedural act, the delivery of a notice of suspicion. The delimitation of a procedure decision in the form of a notice of suspicion from a procedure action is essential to resolving the issue of the proper subject of a notice of suspicion to a person in respect of which a special procedure for criminal proceedings is being conducted, and to determine the procedure for appealing such a notice.
Keywords	criminal proceedings; notice; suspicion; suspect procedure decision; procedure action; judicial control; appeal.
References	REFERENCES List of legal documents Legislation 1. Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy [The Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 13 kvitnia 2012 roku № 4651-VI. URL: (accessed: 13.08.2018) (in Ukrainian). 2. Pro sudoustrii i status suddiv [On Judiciary and Status of Judges] vid 2 chervnia 2016 roku № 1402-VIII. URL: (accessed: 30.08.2018) (in Ukrainian). Cases 3. Postanova Vyshchoho administratyvnoho sudu Ukrainy [The Resolution of the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine] vid 18 sichnia 2016 roku u spravi № 800/408/15. URL: (accessed: 30.08.2018) (in Ukrainian). 4. Rishennia Rady advokativ Ukrainy pro zatverdzhennia roziasnennia punktu 13 chastyny pershoi statti 23 Zakonu Ukrainy “Pro advokaturu ta advokatsku diialnist” [The Decision of the Barristers Council of Ukraine on Approval of Clarification of Paragraph 13 of Part One of Article 23 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Advocacy and Advocacy Activity”] vid 23 veresnia 2017 roku № 222. URL: (accessed: 30.08.2018) (in Ukrainian). 5. Rishennia Kasatsiinoho administratyvnoho sudu u skladi Verkhovnoho Sudu [The Decision of the Cassation Administrative Court in the Supreme Court] vid 2 kvitnia 2018 roku u spravi № 800/536/17. URL: (accessed: 30.08.2018) (in Ukrainian). 6. Ukhvala Apeliatsiinoho sudu Khersonskoi oblasti [The Award of the Court of Appeal of Kherson Region] vid 25 chervnia 2018 roku u spravi № 651/10/18. URL: (accessed: 30.08.2018) (in Ukrainian). 7. Ukhvala Rivnenskoho miskoho sudu Rivnenskoi oblasti [The Award of Rivne City Court of Rivne Region] vid 11 sichnia 2016 roku u spravi № 569/81/16-k. URL: (accessed: 30.08.2018) (in Ukrainian). 8. Ukhvala Solomianskoho raionnoho sudu mista Kyieva [The Award of Solomianskyi District Court of Kyiv City] vid 17 travnia 2018 roku u spravi № 760/12762/18. URL: (accessed: 30.08.2018) (in Ukrainian). 9. Ukhvala Vilnianskoho raionnoho sudu Zaporizkoi oblasti [The Award of Vilniansk District Court of Zaporizhzhia Region] vid 6 kvitnia 2018 roku u spravi № 201/6489/16-к. URL: (accessed: 30.08.2018) (in Ukrainian). 10. Vyrok Koziatynskoho miskraionnoho sudu Vinnytskoi oblasti [The Verdict of Koziatyn Town District Court of Zaporizhzhia Region] vid 21 serpnia 2017 roku u spravi № 133/3695/14-k. URL: (accessed: 30.08.2018) (in Ukrainian). Bibliography Journal articles 11. Kubalskyi V, ‘Povidomlennia pro pidozru: pravozastosovni aspekty’ [‘Notice of Suspicion: Law Enforcement Aspects’] (2017) 1(46) Sudova apeliatsiia 64 (in Ukrainian). 12. Tatarov O, Mirkovets D, ‘Povidomlennia pro pidozru: problemy kryminalnoi protsesualnoi rehlamentatsii’ [‘Notice of Suspicion: Problems of Criminal Procedure Regulation’] (2015) 1(97) ІІ (2) Mytna sprava 270 (in Ukrainian). Newspaper articles 13. Hlushko S, ‘Kto dolzhen vruchat’ podozrenie sud’e: v ozhidanii reshenija Bol’shoj Palaty VS’ [‘Who Should Hand in the Note of Suspicion to a Judge: in Anticipation of the Decision of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court’] Sudovo-yurydychna hazeta (Kyiv, 18 Cherven 2018) 15–23 (434–442) 3–4 (in Russian). Websites 14. Bezpalyi T, ‘Skasuvannia povidomlennia pro pidozru’ [‘Cancellation of a Note of Suspicion’] (Liha. Blohy) URL: accessed 30 August 2018 (in Ukrainian). 15. ‘Porushennia prav advokativ: opublikovani zvity’ [‘Violation of Lawyers Rights: Published Reports’] (Zakon i biznes, 22 Traven 2018) URL: accessed 30 August 2018 (in Ukrainian).