I personally guarantee that we will honestly and decently do our job!

Prikhodko Andrey

Managing partner

Lawyer, Doctor of Laws, recognized media expert on legal issues, legal adviser to famous politicians and businessmen.

Contact now


The issue is not easy, because the Criminal Procedure Code restricts the rights of the defense, so a lawyer cannot interrogate a person at the stage of pre-trial investigation, a lawyer cannot interrogate 2 people at the same time, cannot make arrests, cannot search and so on. The only thing a lawyer can do is to petition the investigation or the prosecutor for investigative and investigative actions (pursuant to Article 220 of the CPC of Ukraine). As practice shows, no one properly fulfills such requests.

But now it’s not about that, I think that as in any work, and in the legal main indicator is the result.

Working for the sake of the process is a deception of the client. The result can be different, even when a lawyer loses a lawsuit – it can be a result. For example, the prosecution does not provide any case materials for review. How to get them? The best option is to file a series of petitions (for revocation of arrests, for the return of temporarily seized property, for examinations, for questioning of witnesses, for revocation of suspicion, etc.), and even if you lose all the courts: you will definitely understand what evidence the prosecution has and how to build a defense.

In addition, the Code does not prohibit the same request being made more than once. And the decisions of investigating judges have no prejudicial force. Therefore, even if you lose 5 courts on the same issue, there is a chance that you will win 6 courts.

Therefore, high-quality legal protection in criminal proceedings is always aimed at achieving results, and a criminal lawyer must give a clear algorithm of actions to the client, so that later there is no situation that the lawyer took money from the client, we do something there, but nothing in fact did not do and there is no result.

At the same time, I want to share another victory over the Main Investigation Department of the NPU and the Prosecutor’s Office in the framework of criminal proceedings 20112018220460002148 (Articles 345, 348, 296 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine). In case № 757/34589/20-k the investigating judge during the consideration of the petition for extension of the pre-trial investigation took into account the arguments of the defense, including lawyer Prikhodko A.A. that the pre-trial investigation body did not take all necessary measures to conduct investigative actions and obtaining new evidence. In addition, the investigating judge took into account the long time of the pre-trial investigation prior to the notification of suspicion. In view of the above, the court denied the investigator’s request.

If we do not call back during the day