| Abstrakt: |
Having analyzed the provisions of current legislation of Ukraine and foreign countries, the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter - the ECHR) and the materials of national court practice, the authors research into the challenging issues of court decision review in the criminal court procedure of Ukraine after an international judicial institution with jurisdiction recognized by Ukraine establishes that there has been a breach by Ukraine of international commitments while the case concerned was adjudicated by court. Within the framework of this research, the authors also focus on certain issues relating to a repeated review of cases in the event the ECHR's judgment establishes that Ukraine has breached the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and its Protocols, in particular: repeated review of cases which materials are lost, and also the issue of indemnification of the damage caused by prolonged detention. The purpose of the article is to obtain new results in the form of scientific conclusions on the specifics of court decision review in the criminal process of Ukraine as the implementation of the restitutio in integrum principle, and to identify the related problems and possible ways of overcoming them, and also to develop the criteria for admissibility of case review in criminal proceedings, with due regard for the standards and requirements of the Council of Europe. With due consideration of the international experience, the ECHR case law and the specifics of national legislation, the authors suggest that Chapter 34 of the CCrP of Ukraine should specify the grounds based on which a court decision may be overturned or modified in case an international judicial institution with jurisdiction recognized by Ukraine establishes that there has been a breach by Ukraine of international commitments while the case concerned was adjudicated by court. Introduction of such filters may ensure implementation of the restitutio in integrum principle, on the one part and, on the other part, may limit the number of applications for review submitted to court in cases where such a measure, being individual by nature, may not and should not be applied. At the same time, it is necessary to ensure protection and reinstatement of breached rights, as well as compliance with the legal certainty principle for participants to legal relations under the law of criminal procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
