As the explanatory memorandum says, the new law is the answer to numerous appeals of business entities on alleged violations of their rights and legitimate interests by law enforcement agencies during a pre-trial investigation.
In particular, the law gives the right to appeal against inappropriate inaction of the investigating body (for example, if the case was considered more than one year or 18 months), and also enables an entrepreneur or a citizen to claim damages personally from the investigator and the prosecutor who committed the violation.
According to Andriy Kozhemyakin, the Chairman of the Committee on Legislative Support of Law Enforcement, "there was no such thing in the history of Ukrainian justice" that the state could compensate the victim by means of a "reciprocal claim" to the perpetrators, although this rule operates in developed European countries.
Now, if the investigator or prosecutor establishes not only a criminal offense, but also if there are signs of a disciplinary offense based on the results of an official investigation conducted on the basis of a court decision, which has satisfied a complaint against a decision, action or inaction of the body of pre-trial investigation, - not the state, but the investigator or the prosecutor will pay.
Corresponding changes were made to Article 130 of the CPC, Article 1191 of the Civil Code, Articles 2, 4 of the Law of Ukraine "On the Procedure for Compensation of Damage Inflicted on an Citizen by Unlawful Acts of Bodies Performing Investigation Activities, Prudential Investigations, Prosecutors and the Court".
The amendments made to Article 1119 of the Civil Code of Ukraine also provide that the refinement of the presence of signs of disciplinary offense for a recourse to a guilty person without a limitation period may also affect judges. For example, in cases of awarding compensation under the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights.
In addition, the law amended articles 220, 284, 303, 309 of the CPC in relation to the provision to another person whose rights or legitimate interests are limited during the pre-trial investigation or his representative's right to apply to the investigator, the prosecutor for the closure of criminal proceedings, if there is unacknowledged the decision of the investigator, the prosecutor on the closure of criminal proceedings on the grounds provided for in paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 9 par. 1 item 284 of the CPC.
Please note, in this case, the investigator, the prosecutor is obliged to consider such a request within the term of no more than 3 days from the moment of filing and to satisfy if there are appropriate grounds. A refusal to satisfy such a petition can be appealed to an investigating judge, and in case of refusal of the investigating judge to satisfy the relevant complaint to appeal it in a court of appeal.
The law also changed Art. 307 of the CPC, according to which the decision of the investigating judge (which is satisfied with the complaint about the decision, action or inaction of the body of pre-trial investigation) is sent to the head of the body, an official, an official of which there is an investigator, a public prosecutor, to organize an official investigation and to resolve the issue of bringing the perpetrators to responsibility.
Thus, due to the adoption of the law, an additional tool for protecting citizens and businesses from unlawful interference in their business activity was created, and a signal was given to investors that Ukraine became a territory of comfort for entrepreneurs.
