Urgent search: problematic issues of law enforcement practice

The article provides a comprehensive analysis of the theoretical and applied aspects of conducting an urgent search in criminal proceedings. The article examines the problematic issues that have arisen in law enforcement practice in the context of the adoption of the Resolution of the Cassation Criminal Court of the Supreme Court of October 7, 2024 in case No. 466/525/22. The author stated that the legal prerequisite for the adoption of the above-mentioned Resolution by the Joint Chamber of the CCC of the Supreme Court was the presence of ambiguous, contradictory practice of the courts, including the court of cassation, regarding the interpretation of such a common basis for conducting an urgent search as the need to save property. It was concluded that minimization of potential negative consequences of incorrect use of part 3 of article 233 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine lies in the plane of effective application of legal safeguards specified in the said Resolution of the UC CCC of the Supreme Court, including compliance with the requirements regarding additional and clear argumentation of the position of the criminal prosecution authorities, in particular, in a petition for permission to conduct a search in accordance with part 3 of article 233 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the materials provided to substantiate it, in the determination of the investigating judge, issued ex post factum, it should be indicated what circumstances at the time of penetration indicated that delay could entail the destruction of material evidence, that information about the threat of their destruction, loss gave grounds to perceive it as real. The author argued that maintaining a balance between the need to ensure efficiency and legality in criminal proceedings during urgent searches includes the need to further improve the standard forms of procedural documents used to legalize such searches ex post factum, conduct additional joint professional development activities, adjust teaching and methodological materials and electronic applications, and ensure a more responsible and principled approach on the part of the management and professional staff of pre-trial investigation bodies and the prosecutor’s office.