ЗМАГАЛЬНІСТЬ СТОРІН ЯК СИСТЕМОУТВОРЮЮЧИЙ ЕЛЕМЕНТ БАЛАНСУ ПРОЦЕСУАЛЬНИХ ПРАВ СТОРІН У КРИМІНАЛЬНОМУ ПРОВАДЖЕННІ

Abstract

Article 22 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine enshrines the provisions that determine the principle of competition between the parties and their freedom in presenting their evidence to the court and in proving their persuasiveness before the court. They are based on the construction of independent defense by the prosecution and the defense of their legal positions, rights, freedoms and legitimate interests by the means provided for by this Code, for which they have equal rights to collect and submit to the court things, documents, other evidence, petitions, complaints, as well as for the implementation of other procedural rights provided for by the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine. The red line is the position established by the legislator that during criminal proceedings, the functions of state prosecution, defense and trial cannot rely on the same body or official. The court, maintaining objectivity and impartiality, creates the necessary conditions for the parties to exercise their procedural rights and perform procedural duties.

The category "competitiveness" has been studied by scholars in various fields of law for a long time. Meanwhile, at the current stage of the development of procedural science, its concepts and content continue to "twitch" the minds of lawyers. Each of the searchers lays down different phenomena as the basis of its elements (signs), and therefore even today there is no unified understanding of this legal phenomenon.

The article traces the existing scientific views on the category "competitiveness", the legal position on this issue of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter ECHR), as a result of which the characteristics are formulated, which, in the opinion of the author of the article, are inherent in the principle of competitiveness as a legal concept (legal category). In particular, they are: normality, comprehensiveness (comprehensive nature), universal obligation, implementation of the law enforcement function.