Criteria for the information contained in a criminal offense report as grounds for initiating a pre-trial investigation and acquiring the procedural status of an applicant

This article examines scientific publications, provisions of Ukraine’s criminal procedural legislation, the Constitution of Ukraine, other normative legal acts, and current judicial practice to identify and substantiate the criteria that the information contained in a report of a criminal offense must meet to be considered a legitimate ground for initiating a pre-trial investigation and for the applicant to acquire procedural status. Based on the conducted research, the study defines two primary criteria for assessing the information provided in such a report: substantive and qualitative. The substantive criterion requires the report’s compliance with the characteristics of a criminal offense, meaning the presence of circumstances indicating an unlawful act and its legal qualification under the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The qualitative criterion encompasses objectivity, specificity, reality, validity, provability, legal justification, and the sufficiency of the information for preliminary classification of the act and the decision to enter the information into the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations. The author justifies the necessity of a comprehensive approach by authorized officials in assessing the report’s compliance with these criteria, which will enhance the efficiency of criminal proceedings and uphold the principle of the rule of law in criminal procedure. The article provides a thorough analysis of judicial practice regarding the interpretation of Article 214 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, which establishes the obligation of pre-trial investigation bodies to enter information into the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations. Two opposing approaches are identified: the formal approach, which requires the unconditional entry of any report into the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations, and the substantive approach, which is based on assessing the report’s compliance with the criteria of justification and the presence of criminal offense elements. The author advocates for the necessity of the substantive approach, as it ensures the effectiveness of criminal proceedings and prevents abuse of the right to file a criminal offense report. The study also examines the impact of national judicial practice, particularly the decisions of the Cassation Criminal Court, in shaping practical standards for evaluating criminal offense reports. It is concluded that the quality of the initial information contained in a report is a decisive factor in the lawful initiation of criminal proceedings, aligning with the fundamental principles of criminal procedure. The findings of this study hold significant practical value for investigators, prosecutors, and judges, as they establish key approaches to evaluating reports of criminal offenses, their content, and their legal implications.