Call Leave a request
Криминальный адвокат

Supreme Court of Ukraine on the disclosure of classified materials in criminal cases

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of Ukraine considered the criminal case No. 751/7557/15-k and on January 16, 2019 published a resolution that regulated the application the Art. 290th Criminal Code.

It is important that the Supreme Court decided not to deviate from the existing legal conclusion regulating the procedural aspects of opening materials to the other side of the proceedings.

Case details

Thus, the reason for the formation of a legal conclusion was the criminal proceedings on cassation complaints of a human rights activist in the interests of convicted persons against the verdict of the court of first instance and the decision of the appeal.

The question was considered, can the classified materials of the investigation be opened to the defense and recognized as evidence?

The consideration resulted in a legal opinion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine prohibiting the recognition of classified investigation materials open to the defense side as evidence.

The BC-SCU substantiated its conclusion by the fact that, at the request of the person, the procedural documents that are the grounds for conducting the NDDR (not opened to the defense in accordance with Article 290 of the Code of Criminal Procedure due to their absence from the prosecution or due to the fact that they were classified in the moment the prosecution opens the materials of criminal proceedings) may be opened to the other side, but …

As evidence, information from these materials of criminal proceedings cannot be accepted by the court, because…

“Non-disclosure of materials by the parties to each other under the procedure of Art. 290 of the Code of Criminal Procedure after the completion of the pre-trial investigation and additional materials received before (during) the trial of the case, is the basis for recognizing the information from these materials as inadmissible as evidence”.

The Cassation Criminal Court (collegium of judges) established a rule according to which:

  •  procedural documentation (the basis for conducting covert investigative and search activities) may be opened during the trial in the first and appeal instances, if it was not opened to the defense side during the filing of the indictment with the court for the reasons mentioned above;
  • disclosure to a human rights defender of information (the results of the NDDR) from this documentation cannot serve as a source of evidence admissible in court under these circumstances in accordance with the requirements of Article 290 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

So, it was decided that the lawyer conducting the criminal case could find out the content of the documents classified as “secret”, but he had no right to use it to prove in the trial!

 

12.02.2019

437

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN
SPU on the fulfillment of obligations in a fictitious transaction

Fictitious transactions with residential real estate are always a risk of being left without a roof over your head. It is not entirely clear what the citizen thought, who fictitiously sold his apartment to other people, whose purpose was to obtain a loan from a bank secured by this property. As a result, he had […]

Currency Control Penalties in Ukraine: How Businesses Can Challenge a Tax Notice

Foreign trade contracts involving Ukrainian companies are not only a matter of commercial risk. They may also trigger currency control obligations. If a foreign buyer fails to pay for exported goods, a foreign supplier does not deliver prepaid goods, or a payment deadline is missed, the Ukrainian resident company may face not only a dispute […]

Bringing the management and owners of the debtor company to property liability for the debts of such company

The business sector of the country is overflowing with problem debt created by unscrupulous debtors. That is why, in order to prevent the use of a legal entity as a tool for unjust enrichment at someone else’s expense, the legislator constantly implements and expands additional mechanisms to protect the rights and interests of creditors from […]

The nuances of transactions made by persons who are not aware of their actions

“All transactions carried out by persons who, at the time of their commission, did not fully realize their actions, are subject to invalidation, but their recognition in court as such should be carried out after a full study of the proceedings!” – This conclusion was made by the Supreme Court of Ukraine on September 18, […]

The child of divorced parents is an object of struggle for attention

In 99% of 100%, a divorce is a problematic event, and the help of a lawyer in a divorce is a necessity that determines the outcome of the case. The division of property is half the trouble, and the struggle for the attention of children is a real problem. Let’s leave the prefaces. Live situations […]

The Supreme Court of Ukraine on the cancellation of the “old” will with a new one

The citizen applied to the court with a claim against two other persons, demanding the recognition of property rights by inheritance. The claim was motivated by the fact that after the death of her aunt, an inheritance for real estate (house, land) was opened. She, within the time period established by law, turned to the […]

Address

01133, Kyiv, blvd. Lesi Ukrainky 26 (block L26), office 613

Email

info@grandliga.com.ua

Phone number

+380443395088

We work

Schedule: from 10:00 to 18:00
Weekend: Sunday

Make a route