Процесуальні строки у кримінальному провадженні: проблемні питання

The problematic issues of the legal institution of procedural deadlines are investigated. Its status is determined by the fact that it permeates criminal proceedings from beginning to end and is one of the general principles of the criminal process. However, the formation of the institution of procedural deadlines was quite controversial, which negatively affected the current criminal procedural legislation. The aim is to identify contradictions and gaps in the legislation regarding the established procedural deadlines and their negative manifestations in the practice of pre-trial investigation bodies and courts, and to determine ways to eliminate them. Two types of procedural terms are identified and investigated depending on the subject of their definition: 1) procedural terms established by the legislator; 2) procedural “reasonable” terms, the definition of which is attributed to the competence of the prosecutor, investigating judge, and court. It is stated that the current criminal procedural legislation contains a number of contradictions and gaps regarding procedural terms, which lead to significant violations of the rights and legitimate interests of participants in the criminal process. It is argued that calculating the terms of the pre-trial investigation only from the moment of reporting the suspicion is erroneous, since it creates conditions for the prosecution for various kinds of violations of the rights of other participants in the criminal proceedings. During the period from the entry of information about the criminal offense in the ERDR and until the reporting of the suspicion, the participants, as a rule, do not have the opportunity to involve a lawyer to protect their rights and legitimate interests. It is noted that the current criminal procedural legislation does not establish time limits for judicial proceedings and the courts are not always guided by the correct ideas about reasonable terms. This is due to the continuation of the detention of the accused in the commission of a serious or especially serious crime throughout the entire judicial proceedings, which do not have legally established time limits. The thesis is substantiated that upon the expiration of the time limit for the detention of a person in custody, established for the pre-trial investigation, the courts are obliged to consider the issue of replacing this preventive measure with a less severe measure.