Business initiated a bill on amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (CPC), which will provide businesses with tools to protect themselves from pressure from law enforcement agencies. The bill has already been supported by the relevant Committee of the Verkhovna Rada.
Business initiated a bill on amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (CPC), which will provide businesses with tools to protect themselves from pressure from law enforcement agencies. The bill has already been supported by the relevant Committee of the Verkhovna Rada.
This was announced by the founder and chairman of the supervisory board of Ajax Systems, Oleksandr Konotopskyi.
«This is the last of the 7 steps that the first Business Council put on its to-do list. Finally, after many fierce battles, Bill 12439 was supported by the committee. It provides businesses with many tools for protection,» Konotopsky wrote.
Part 3 of Article 170 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The adopted amendments establish a maximum term for the seizure of funds — up to 4 months, and an extension is possible only by a reasoned court decision. According to Konotopsky, this returns predictability to business and guarantees a change in the practice of «eternal arrests.»
«The arrest of funds without a specified period was one of the most painful problems for business. This was especially noticeable in wartime, when enterprises were working on the edge and fulfilling government orders, and increased attention to them and even to their counterparties often ended in the indefinite blocking of accounts, which often meant a complete blocking of economic activity. „Obtaining“ the arrest was relatively simple, but canceling it was an extremely complicated process due to the lack of clear deadlines and the desire of law enforcement officers,» added the founder of Ajax Systems.
Articles 233, 234, 172, 309 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The adopted amendments establish clear safeguards for an urgent search: mandatory notification of the owner of the property/premises about the court hearing on the «legalization» of the search (i.e. after the search has been conducted), the right to be present, and therefore the right to have a voice in the process, the right to invite witnesses and submit evidence of the lack of urgency, as well as the right to appeal the decision on legalization.
«An urgent search is an exceptional procedural action with a narrow list of grounds. In practice, due to the lack of clarity of the norm, it was often applied outside of such grounds, which created room for abuse. The changes restore legal certainty and adversarial nature where it was definitely lacking,» Konotopsky noted.
Art. 96 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. Now not only the investigator or prosecutor, but also other parties (defense, business) can ask their questions to the victim. This increases the adversarial nature of the parties and makes the process more transparent, the businessman explains.
Article 98 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The investigator is now obliged to make a timely decision that a certain object is evidence. This eliminates the practice of «suspended status», when seized property or documents did not have an official status for years.
Part 2 of Article 104 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine, Part 2 of Article 105 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine. Everything that is seized during a search must be entered into the protocol. If this is not done, such evidence becomes inadmissible in court. This protects the business from things that are «thrown away» or «disappeared» as a result of a search.
Part 6, Article 132 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The court received more rights — it can summon witnesses, experts, consider cases when making decisions on the seizure of property or other measures. That is, decisions should become more motivated.
Part 8, Article 132 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. If the court has already refused an arrest or a preventive measure, law enforcement officers will not be able to file the same petitions again without new grounds.
Part 4 of Article 163 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine, Part 8 of Article 163 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine. A petition for temporary access to things and documents must now be considered for a maximum of 15 days. If the party who filed the petition does not come to the meeting, it remains without consideration.
Part 5 of Article 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, Article 175 of the Criminal Procedure Code. If the seizure of property is canceled, it must be returned to the owner no later than 30 days. This puts an end to delays.
Art. 214 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. Data on a criminal offense under Article 191 of the Criminal Procedure Code are now entered into the register only when there are sufficient grounds and exclusively by the head of the prosecutor’s office. This limits the practice of opening cases for quantitative indicators or on fictitious grounds.
Article 216 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. If the case is being investigated by the «wrong» body, the party has the right to file a motion to change the jurisdiction, and the prosecutor is obliged to quickly consider it.
«This is a big step towards reducing the toxicity of Ukrainian jurisdiction. Entrepreneurial activity is the basis of economic growth and defense capability. People who want to create should receive all the conditions for this and maximum protection from any persecution,» Konotopskyi noted.
