Representative function of the prosecutor’s office: the current concept of court practice
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35774/app2024.01.117Keywords:
Public Prosecutor’s Office, prosecutor, functions of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, prosecutor's representation of the State’s interests in court, State’s interest, court practice, development trendsAbstract
The article analyzes the trends in the development of the current concept of judicial practice regarding the representative function of the Public Prosecutor’s Office in Ukraine.
It is stated that the representative function of the Public Prosecutor’s Office under the current legislative regulation is characterized by certain legal uncertainty and defects in such regulation, which leads to the formation of a practical understanding of the essence and mechanism of implementation of this function through the prism of legal positions of authorized law enforcement entities, mainly prosecutors and judges.
It is established that the practice of applying the legislation on determining the object of prosecutorial representation and exceptional cases of such representation is dynamic and variable, and this necessitates its constant monitoring and legal analysis to identify trends in its development regarding the representative function of the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
The author highlights the current trends in the development of the current concept of the prosecutor's representative function through the prism of case law: the lack of a uniform understanding of the category «interests of the State» as an object of prosecutorial representation; recognition of the expanded interpretation of cases (grounds) for the prosecutor's representation of the State's interests in court as inconsistent with the principle of adversarial proceedings, which is one of the principles of justice; recognition of the mandatory condition for the prosecutor's participation in the trial that he or she must substantiate the grounds for going to court with the introduction of a judicial standard for the prosecutor to prove inaction by the competent authority in protecting the interests of the state; formation of polar judicial concepts of the exclusivity of prosecutorial representation.
References
Stefanchuk, M. M. (2019). Predstavnytska funktsiia prokuratury: defekty zakonodavstva [Representative Function of the Public Prosecutor’s Office: Defects of Legislation]. Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva - Herald of criminal justice, 3, 164-175 [in Ukrainian]
Stratehiia rozvytku prokuratury na 2021-2023 roky, zatverdzhena Nakazom Heneralnoho prokurora vid 16 zhovtnia 2020 roku № 489 [Strategy for the Development of the Public Prosecutor’s Office for 2021–2023, approved by Order of the Prosecutor General dated October 16, 2020, No 489]. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v0489905-20?find=1&text=представництв#w1_1 [in Ukrainian]
Prokurory na zakhysti derzhavnykh interesiv. Rozpovidaiemo pro robotu u sferi predstavnytstva interesiv derzhavy v sudi [Prosecutors protecting the state’s interests. We talk about our work in representing the state in court]. Retrieved from https://www.gp.gov.ua/ua/posts/prokurori-na-zaxisti-derzavnix-interesiv-rozpovidajemo-pro-robotu-u-sferi-predstavnictva-interesiv-derzavi-v-sudi [in Ukrainian]
U spravi za konstytutsiinym podanniam Vyshchoho arbitrazhnoho sudu Ukrainy ta Heneralnoi prokuratury Ukrainy shchodo ofitsiinoho tlumachennia polozhen statti 2 Arbitrazhnoho protsesualnoho kodeksu Ukrainy (sprava pro predstavnytstvo prokuraturoiu Ukrainy interesiv derzhavy v arbitrazhnomu sudi) [In the case on the constitutional petition of the Higher Arbitration Court of Ukraine and the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine regarding the official interpretation of Article 2 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of Ukraine (case on representation of the state's interests in arbitration by the Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine)]. Rishennia Konstytutsiinoho Sudu Ukrainy vid 8 kvitnia 1999 roku № 3-rp/99 [Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine dated April 1999]. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v003p710-99#Text [in Ukrainian]
Bernaziuk, Ya. Osoblyvosti predstavnytstva prokurorom interesiv derzhavy v sudi: nove zakonodavstvo ta aktualni pidkhody Verkhovnoho Sudu [Peculiarities of the Prosecutor’s Representation of the State's Interests in Court: New Legislation and Current Approaches of the Supreme Court]. Retrieved from https://www.supreme.court.gov.ua/supreme/pres-centr/zmi/941986/ [in Ukrainian]
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 15 travnia 2019 roku u spravi № 911/1497/18 [Resolution of the Supreme Court dated May 15, 2019, in case № 911/1497/18]. Retrieved from https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/81880166 [in Ukrainian]
Pro vnesennia zmin do Konstytutsii Ukrainy (shchodo pravosuddia): Zakon Ukrainy vid 2 chervnia 2016 roku № 1401-VIII [On Amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine (regarding justice): Law of Ukraine dated June 2, 2016, № 1401-VIII]. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1401-19#Text [in Ukrainian]
Netska, L. (2017). Perspektyvy zakonodavchoho vdoskonalennia predstavnytskoi funktsii prokuratury: pohliad naukovtsia [Prospects for Legislative Improvement of the Representative Function of the Prosecutor’s Office: the View of the Scientist]. Naukovyi chasopys Natsionalnoi akademii prokuratury – Scientific Bulletin of the National Academy of Public Prosecution of Ukraine, 4, 152-160 [in Ukrainian]
Stefanchuk, M. M. (2016). Katehoriia «vykliuchni vypadky» v konteksti realizatsii prokuraturoiu Ukrainy funktsii predstavnytstva [«Exceptional cases» as a category in the context of implementation by the Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine function of representation]. Visnyk Natsionalnoi akademii prokuratury Ukrainy – Journal of the National Prosecution Academy of Ukraine, 4, 36-42 [in Ukrainian]
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 25 kvitnia 2018 roku. Sprava № 806/1000/17 (administratyvne provadzhennia №K/9901/2564/17) [Resolution of the Supreme Court dated April 25, 2018, in case № 806/1000/17]. Retrieved from http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73763984 [in Ukrainian].
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 8 liutoho 2019 roku. Sprava № 915/20/18 (administratyvne provadzhennia №K/9901/2564/17) [Resolution of the Supreme Court dated February 8, 2018, in case № 915/20/18]. Retrieved from http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73763984 (in Ukrainian).
Ukhvala Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 19 lypnia 2018 roku. Sprava № 822/1169/17 (administratyvne provadzhennia № K/9901/48834/18) [Ruling of the Supreme Court dated July 19, 2018, in case No. 822/1169/17]. Retrieved from http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/75424056 [in Ukrainian]
Postanova Velykoi Palaty Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 26.05.2020 u spravi № 912/2385/18 [Resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court dated May 26, 2020, in case No. 912/2385/18]. Retrieved from https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/90458902 [in Ukrainian]
Rudenko, M. (2018). Predstavnytstvo prokurorom interesiv derzhavy v sudi u konteksti onovlenoho Hospodarskoho protsesualnoho, Tsyvilnoho protsesualnoho kodeksiv ta Kodeksu administratyvnoho sudochynstva (vstup z teoretychnykh, pravovykh i praktychnykh pytan) [Representation of the State's Interests in Court by the Prosecutor in the Context of the Updated Commercial Procedure, Civil Procedure Codes, and the Code of Administrative Procedure (Introduction to Theoretical, Legal and Practical Issues]. Visnyk prokuratury – Bulletin of the Prosecutor's Office, 3, 64-71 [in Ukrainian]
Huze, K. (2020). Nenalezhne zdiisnennia subiektom vladnykh povnovazhen zakhystu interesiv derzhavy yak pidstava realizatsii prokurorom funktsii predstavnytstva v sudi: teoretyko-prykladnyi aspekt [Incompetent exercise by the entity of power of protection of the interests of the state as a ground for realization of the representative]. Yurydychnyi naukovyi elektronnyi zhurnal – Juridical scientific and electronic journal, 4, 78-81 [in Ukrainian]
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 29 lystopada 2022 roku u spravi № 240/401/1 (provadzhennia № K/9901/48257/21) [Resolution of the Supreme Court dated November 29, 2022, in case № 240/401/1]. Retrieved from https://supreme.court.gov.ua/supreme/pro_sud/rishennya_sud_palat/2022_12_12_240_401_1 [in Ukrainian]
Okrema dumka suddi Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi Kasatsiinoho administratyvnoho sudu Stetsenka S. H. na postanovu Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi Sudovoi palaty z rozghliadu sprav shchodo zakhystu sotsialnykh prav Kasatsiinoho administratyvnoho sudu vid 29 lystopada 2020 r. u spravi № 240/401/19 (administratyvne provadzhennia № K/9901/48257/21) [Dissenting opinion of Judge of the Supreme Court as part of the Administrative Court of Cassation Stetsenko S.G. on the decision of the Supreme Court as part of the Judicial Chamber for the Protection of Social Rights of the Administrative Court of Cassation dated November 29, 2020 in case No. 240/401/19]. Retrieved from https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/107706485 [in Ukrainian]
Okrema dumka suddi Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi Kasatsiinoho administratyvnoho sudu Rybachuka A. I. na postanovu Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi Sudovoi palaty z rozghliadu sprav shchodo zakhystu sotsialnykh prav Kasatsiinoho administratyvnoho sudu vid 29 lystopada 2020 r. u spravi № 240/401/19 (administratyvne provadzhennia № K/9901/48257/21) [Dissenting opinion of Judge of the Supreme Court within the Administrative Court of Cassation A. Rybachuk on the Resolution of the Supreme Court within the Judicial Chamber for the Protection of Social Rights of the Administrative Court of Cassation dated November 29, 2020 in case No. 240/401/19 (administrative proceedings No. K/9901/48257/21)]. Retrieved from https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/107632131 [in Ukrainian]
Okrema dumka suddi Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi Kasatsiinoho administratyvnoho sudu Kravchuka V. M. na postanovu Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi Sudovoi palaty z rozghliadu sprav shchodo zakhystu sotsialnykh prav Kasatsiinoho administratyvnoho sudu vid 29 lystopada 2020 r. u spravi № 240/401/19 [Dissenting opinion of Judge of the Supreme Court within the Administrative Court of Cassation Kravchuk V. M. on the Resolution of the Supreme Court within the Judicial Chamber for the Protection of Social Rights of the Administrative Court of Cassation dated November 29, 2020 in case No 240/401/19]. Retrieved from https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/107656553 [in Ukrainian]
U spravi za konstytutsiinoiu skarhoiu aktsionernoho tovarystva «Zaporizkyi zavod ferosplaviv» shchodo vidpovidnosti Konstytutsii Ukrainy (konstytutsiinosti) polozhennia punktu 13 chastyny pershoi statti 17 Zakonu Ukrainy «Pro Natsionalne antykoruptsiine biuro Ukrainy» [In the case of the constitutional complaint of the Zaporizhzhya Ferroalloy Plant Joint Stock Company regarding the compliance with the Constitution of Ukraine (constitutionality) of the provisions of paragraph 13 of part one of Article 17 of the Law of Ukraine «On the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine»]: Rishennia Konstytutsiinoho Sudu Ukrainy vid 6 chervnia 2019 r. № 4-r(II)/2019 [Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine dated June 6, 2019 No. 4-р(ІІ)/2019]. Retrieved from https://ccu.gov.ua/sites/default/files/docs/4_p2_2019.pdf [in Ukrainian]
