DOI 10.37749/2308-9636-2021-4(220)-4

Klochkov V. G. Problems of organization and procedural management of the prosecutors presidential investigation.

The article examines the problem of legislative support for the activities of the procedural head — the prosecutor and the head of the prosecutor’s office regarding criminal proceedings in the pre-trial investigation.

It is substantiated that the amended constitutional norm on the organization and procedural management of the pre-trial investigation by the prosecutor’s office is one of the important functions. However, some laws do not fully specify the content of this constitutional norm. This has led to their different interpretations among scholars and law enforcement officers, as well as in law enforcement practice. It is alleged that Art. 25 of the Law of Ukraine «On the Prosecutor’s Office» the function of monitoring compliance with the law by bodies conducting operational and investigative activities, inquiries and pre-trial investigation, is broader than supervision in the form of procedural guidance.

Attention is drawn to the fact that the prosecutor must perform the tasks of criminal proceedings for the protection of rights and freedoms and legitimate interests, ensuring a prompt, complete and impartial investigation. The Code of Criminal Procedure does not specify the essence of the concept of the term «organization», and therefore it is not clear what is the essence of the organizational activities of the prosecutor’s office in this direction. In this regard, on the basis of the analysis of the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code, the forms of «organization» of this activity are investigated.

The notion of the terms procedural management and procedural manager is defined, and therefore it is proposed to make additions to Article 3 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It is important that the prosecutor and the investigator, the head of the pre-trial investigation body, must comply with the requirements of Part 2 of Article 2 of the Criminal Code, which provides for the commission of an act that contains 4 elements of a crime.

The criteria for the ineffectiveness of prosecutorial supervision in this direction have been determined. It is alleged that the interaction of the prosecutor with investigators are important in solving the problems of criminal proceedings. It is concluded that a clear delineation of the powers of the above-mentioned prosecutorial positions is needed.

It is proposed to make certain changes to the laws, which must fully comply with the specified constitutional norm.

It is substantiated that it is necessary to minimize unsubstantiated facts when reporting a suspicion that will ensure the human right not to be prosecuted.

The article emphasizes that the procedure of notification of suspicion and indictment without questioning for a crime combines different legal systems, which is not entirely correct.

Key words: prosecutor, head of the prosecutor’s office, procedural management, investigator, organization of crime investigation, suspicion report.



  1. Yurchyshyn V. M. Prosecutor as procedural director of pre-trial investigation // Lawyer. 2012. № 7. Pp. 26–30.
  2. Komarchuk V. P. Procedural guidance of the prosecutor as a guarantee of compliance with the law in the pre-trial investigation // Problems of reforming the prosecutor’s office: mater. All-Ukrainian scientific-practical conf. (Kharkiv, April 15, 2016) editors: L. M. Moskvich (chairman), A. V. Lapkin, I. V. Yurevich and others. T. 1. Kharkiv: Pravo, 2016. Pp. 84–88.
  3. Sakal V. M. The place and role of the prosecutor — procedural manager in the organization of pre-trial investigation // Scientific Bulletin of the National Academy of Internal Affairs. 2015. № 2. Pp. 41–51.
  4. Babkova V. S. Problems of the prosecutor’s supervisory powers in the form of procedural guidance during the pre-trial investigation // Visnyk Nats. Academy of the Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine. 2012. № 3. Pp. 71–73.
  5. Shulgan I. I. Procedural management of pre-trial investigation as a separate function of the prosecutor’s office // National University “Lviv Polytechnic. Legal Sciences Series. 2016. № 837. Pp. 516—520.
  6. Klochkov V. G. Interaction of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine with the highest state authorities to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens // Police. 2009. № 4. P. 23.
  7. Klochkov V. G. Interaction of the General Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine with the highest state authorities to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens // Bulletin of the Prosecutor’s Office. 2011. № 5. Pp. 33–39.
  8. Klochkov V. G. Forms of interaction of the Prosecutor General’s Office with the media // Legal Ukraine. 2020. № 8. Pp. 60–66.
  9. Klochkov V. G. Prosecutor’s supervision over the legality and validity of the election and extension of detention / textbook. way. for students. higher textbook lock Kyiv: In Jure Publishing House, 2005. 64 p.
  10. Klochkov V. G. On improving the procedure for calculating detention // Law of Ukraine. 1999. № 1. Pp. 66–67.
  11. Klochkov V. G. The judge must extend the term of detention // Prosecutorial and investigative practice. M., 1997. № 2. Pp. 112–114.