ISSN 2410-3594
e-ISSN 2786-7382
UDC 34; 159.9
Scientific Journal of the National Academy of Internal Affairs
- arrest; detention; criminal proceedings; reasonable suspicion; grounds for applying preventive measures; investigator; judge
- https://doi.org/10.63341/naia-herald/2.2025.94
- Pages 94-104
Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights sets out the guarantees of the right to liberty and security. During criminal proceedings, this fundamental human right may be subject to restriction. Therefore, both legislation and law enforcement practice must ensure fair procedures for such restrictions. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis, systematisation, and explanation of the Convention standards that guarantee the lawfulness of restrictions on the right to liberty and security within criminal proceedings. It also aimed to identify the grounds for the application of custodial preventive measures, thereby helping to avoid errors in legal practice and contributing to the development of a uniform and consistent investigative and judicial approach, including under conditions of martial law. The principal methods of inquiry include axiological, formal-legal, logical-legal, systemic-structural, comparative-legal analysis, and generalisation. These methods have made it possible to describe the results and substantiate the conclusions reached. The study was conducted concerning the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the national criminal procedural legislation. It has been established that, according to the standards developed in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the threshold for suspicion does not require the same degree of certainty as a formal charge. A reasonable suspicion implies the existence of sufficient factual information that would enable an external observer (the investigating judge) to conclude, with a high degree of probability, that the individual whose right to liberty and security is to be restricted has committed the alleged offence. It was argued that the European Court of Human Rights adheres to a substantive rather than a formal conception of a charge. Based on an analysis of the legal regulation of the grounds for applying preventive measures, it has been demonstrated that the investigating judge will, in each specific case, determine whether the factual data are sufficient to establish a reasonable suspicion and whether the associated risks are justified. The practical value of this study lies in the possibility of applying the established standards of the European Court of Human Rights when deciding on the imposition of custodial preventive measures. This would help ensure uniformity in legal practice and promote the rule of law in Ukraine
References
[1] Ablamskyi, S., Galagan, V., Basysta, I., & Udovenko, Zh. (2023). Detention of a person suspected of committing a criminal offense during martial law in Ukraine. Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas, 13(3), 451-467. doi: 10.5102/rbpp.v13i3.9129.
[2] Balyan, C., & Shelke, A. (2025). Pre-trial detention in India: The need for introduction of objective criterion. In S. Gurpur, B.S. Ronald, A. Mohanty & A.F. Shelke (Eds.), Rule of law in context: Globalisation and Indian resonances to sustainable development (pp. 176-199). London: Routledge. doi: 10.1201/9781003564522.
[3] Barabash, O., Dobkina, K., Senyk, S., Klyuyeva, Y., & Martiuk, A. (2022). European human rights standards: The practice of applying ECTHR decisions. Informatologia, 55(1-2), 27-41.
[4] Blikhar, M., Dufeniuk, О., & Blikhar, V. (2020). The philosophy of the European Court of Human Rights: Axiological paradigm. Beytulhikme an International Journal of Philosophy, 10(2), 355-371. doi: 10.18491/beytulhikme.1559.
[5] Blikhar, V., Dufeniuk, O., & Blikhar, M. (2021). Balance of “goal-means” in the system of criminal procedure or can a good goal justify evil means? Beytulhikme an International Journal of Philosophy, 11(4), 1801-1817. doi: 10.18491/beytulhikme.1804.
[6] Boreiko, H., & Navrotska, V. (2023). Abuse of the right to prosecution in criminal proceedings: The experience of Ukraine and the United States. Social & Legal Studios, 6(4), 38-47. doi: 10.32518/sals4.2023.38.
[7] Braaten, C.N., & Vaughn, M.S. (2023). Police officersʼ qualified immunity in excessive force claims, warrant execution, and warrantless searches and arrests: Tracing the evolution of, and stagnation in, U.S. Supreme Court precedents. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 48, 65-95. doi: 10.1007/s12103-021-09617-w.
[8] Fomina, T., Galagan, V., Udovenko, Zh., Ablamskyi, S., & Koniushenko, Ya. (2023). Extradition of a person: The national law of Ukraine and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Relações Internacionais no Mundo Atual, 4(42). doi: 10.25115/eea.v39i9.5806.
[9] Fomina, T.G. (2018). Justification of the risk of hiding from pre-trial investigation bodies and/or the court during the application of preventive measures through the prism of the practice of the ECHR. Judicial and Investigative Practice in Ukraine, 6, 126-130.
[10] Grynenko, S.O., & Zelenska, I.M. (2022). Features of ensuring the right to freedom and personal invincibility in the activities of authorities of criminal proceedings in the conditions of armed conflict. Forum Prava, 73(2), 29-39. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6471063.
[11] Hloviuk, I., & Zavtur, V. (2022). Trends of changes in criminal justice in wartime and human rights. In The Russian-Ukrainian war (2014-2022): Historical, political, cultural-educational, religious, economic, and legal aspects (pp. 1123-1129). Riga: Baltija Publishing. doi: 10.30525/978-9934-26-223-4-139.
[12] Hloviuk, I., Zavtur, V., Zinkovskyy, I., & Pavlyk, L. (2024). Substantiating the legality of human rights restrictions in Ukraine in pre-trial investigation. Social and Legal Studios, 7(2), 130-139. doi: 10.32518/sals2.2024.130.
[13] Kaplina, O., Kravtsov, S., & Leyba, O. (2022). Military justice in Ukraine: Renaissance during wartime. Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, 3(15), 120-136. doi: 10.33327/AJEE-18-5.2-n000323.
[14] Khablo, O.Yu. (2020). Substantiation of the grounds for the application of preventive measures: Convention standards and domestic practice. Law and Society, 4, 270-278. doi: 10.32842/2078-3736/2020.4.39.
[15] Khablo, О. (2023). Proportionality in the regulation of restrictions on the right to liberty and security of person in martial law. In Criminal procedural law at the current stage of development of Ukraine (pp. 166-170). Kyiv: National Academy of Internal Affairs.
[16] Marchuk, N.O., Kasko, V.V., Kuybida, R.O., & Khavronyuk, M.I., Aleynikov, G., Emelianova, A., Osyka, I., Drozach, S., Tsymbrivska, O., & Fedorchuk, N. (2015). Professional judgeʼs desk book (criminal proceedings). Kyiv: “Art-Design”.
[17] Mykhailenko, V.V. (2019). Implementation of the principle of the rule of law in criminal proceedings. Kyiv: Palivoda A.V.
[18] Nguindip, N., & Ablamskyi, S. (2020). Ensuring the right to liberty and security of person in Ukraine and Cameroon: A comparative analysis in the area of criminal justice. Commonwealth Law Review Journal, 6, 281-304.
[19] Nor, V.T., & Shevchuk, M.I. (2019.) Reasonable suspicion as a basis for choosing a preventive measure and extending its terms: The practice of the European Court of Human Rights and Ukrainian realities. Law and Society, 6(2), 173-187. doi: 10.32842/2078-3736-2019-6-2-28.
[20] Prodyvus, S. (2023). Lawful resctriction of the right to freedom of movement: International legal standards and practice of the European court of human rights. Scientific Bulletin of the Uzhgorod National University, Series “Law”, 78(2), 365-371. doi: 10.24144/2307-3322.2023.78.2.59.
[21] Rozhnova, V.V. (2003). Application of procedural coercive measures related to the isolation of a person. (PhD dissertation, National Academy of Internal Affairs, Kyiv, Ukraine).
[22] Shapovalova, I., & Rohalska, V. (2020). Application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights by the investigating judge of the local general court during judicial control. Odesa: Helvetica.
[23] Shylo, O.G. (2014). Peculiarities of substantiating the choice of preventive measures in criminal proceedings. Scientific Bulletin of the Uzhgorod National University. Series “Law”, 25, 269-273.