WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES FOR THE INVESTIGATOR’S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE DECISION OF THE INVESTIGATING JUDGE?

 Prikhodko & Partners Law Firm, while defending a client in criminal proceedings, was faced with the practice of non-compliance by the GSU investigator of the National Police of Ukraine with the decision of the investigating judge of the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv. Consider how to act properly in such a situation.

 On December 12, 2018, during a search of the defendant's apartment, money belonging to other persons was temporarily confiscated.

On January 28, 2019, the investigating judge seized the property at the investigator's request. However, the lawyers of the law firm Prikhodko & Partners filed a lawsuit to lift the arrest, as it was imposed in violation of the requirements of criminal procedure law. On May 21, 2019, the investigating judge granted the request of the defense, declared the arrest illegal, revoked it completely and ordered the investigator to return the seized funds.

 However, the investigator of the GSU of the National Police of Ukraine ignored the decision of the investigating judge and re-filed a motion to seize the temporarily seized property during the search. On July 22, 2019, the investigating judge again imposed illegal seizure on the property, which will later be partially revoked by another investigating judge.

 According to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, the investigator must immediately comply with the decision of the investigating judge to lift the seizure of temporarily seized property. However, in our criminal proceedings, the investigator violated the requirements of procedural law and did not return the money, the arrest of which was lifted.

 Due to the failure of the investigators of the GSU of the National Police of Ukraine, the lawyers of the law firm "Prikhodko and Partners" were forced to apply to the Territorial Department of the State Bureau of Investigation, located in Kyiv with a complaint about the crime of the investigator. The State Bureau of Investigation provided the expected response to the refusal to enter information into the ERDR about the commission of the crime, due to the lack of circumstances that could indicate the possible commission of a criminal offense. A complaint was immediately filed with the investigating judge about the inaction of investigators from the State Bureau of Investigation.

 On July 20, 2020, the investigating judge of the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv ruled to satisfy the complaint of lawyer Prikhodko A. A. on the inaction of investigators of the State Bureau of Investigation and ordered the latter to enter information into the ERDR information on the application of Prikhodko A. A. , concerning non-execution of decisions of the investigating judge.

 Thus, as we see, the failure of investigators to comply with court decisions can lead to the opening of criminal proceedings for criminal inaction of an official, and further prosecution of the guilty person.