Prosecutor's supervision of detection and investigation of drug crimes: International standards and best practices

In the 21^st century, in countries belonging to the “strict control” group, along with strengthening control over drug trafficking, there is a tendency to legalise the use of certain types of drugs for medical purposes and decriminalise the storage of a small amount of narcotic drugs intended for personal use.

The countries of the “liberal approach” group include those where the sale of “light” drugs is de jure and/or de facto allowed, which is combined with effective state control over their accounting, distribution and sale, and over the turnover of other (more potent) drugs.

The law enforcement agencies of these countries pay considerable attention to identifying and exposing persons involved in organised drug crime. If proven guilty, such persons face long prison terms. Among the most famous countries of this group are the Netherlands, Malta, and Belgium.

The policy of specific states to counteract illicit drug trafficking, among other things, is embodied in the detection and investigation of drug crimes.

The public prosecution service (prosecutor's office) plays an important role in ensuring the effectiveness and legality of such activities. An analysis of the legislation of the member states of the European Union suggests that not all standards of the prosecutor's office are provided for in the recommendations REC (2000) 19 of the Council of Europe¹ and PACE Recommendations 1604 (2003) Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe No. Rec (2000) 19 “To Member States on the Role of the Public Prosecutor's Office in the Criminal Justice System”. (2000, October). Retrieved from https://supreme.court.gov.ua/userfiles/ Rec_2000_19_2000_10_6.pdf. PACE Recommendation No. 1604 “On the Role of Public Prosecutors in a Democratic Society Based on the Rule of Law”. (2003, May). Retrieved from https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/xref/xref-xml2html-en.asp?fileid=17109&lang = en. Constitution of France. (2023, December). Retrieved from https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/J0RFTEXT000000571356/. Criminal Procedural Code of France. (2020, January). Retrieved from https://legislationline.org/sites/default/files/documents/6e/ France_CPC_am022020_fr.pdf. were taken into account by national legislators.

In general, in the countries of the European continent, there are no common approaches to normalising the place of the prosecutor's office in the system of state bodies, its organisational structure, functions and powers in terms of ensuring the detection and investigation of criminal offences (Drach, 2020; Ba- nakh, 2020). What is common in all EU member states is that the prosecutor's office is tasked with initiating criminal prosecution, bringing charges, presenting them during court proceedings, and filing appeals against court decisions. But there are significant differences in the legal assignment of functions to prosecutors that go beyond criminal justice. Moreover, prosecutors in different countries have excellent powers directly in the field of criminal justice.

The prosecutor's offices of France and Hungary have the widest range of powers among European countries (European Information and Research Centre, n.d.). According to French law^3,4 the prosecutor's office is entrusted with the functions of criminal prosecution at all stages of criminal proceedings, and participation in administrative and judicial proceedings and bankruptcy cases in the interests of society and the state. Directly in the field of criminal justice, French prosecutors have broader powers than prosecutors in many other EU countries. This, in particular, is manifested in the fact that they supervise the activities of the judicial police, initiate criminal prosecution on their own initiative, can independently conduct a pre-trial investigation, are authorised to participate in any investigative actions, give mandatory instructions to the pre-trial investigation body, and make decisions on choosing a preventive measure and closing criminal proceedings outside of judicial procedures. Therefore, in France, the prosecutor controls all processes that take place during the pre-trial investigation, which, according to the criminal procedural law of this state, consists of an inquiry, initiation of criminal prosecution, and preliminary investigation.

The inquiry is conducted by the judicial police. This is not only the stage of pre-trial investigation, but also a specific type of activity, which, among other things, is aimed at: urgent identification and detention of persons who have committed criminal offences in conditions of evidence; detection of previously unknown crimes, search for persons involved in their commission, obtaining evidence of their guilt, and, if necessary, establishing the location of such persons; clarification of the causes of death of a person under suspicious circumstances; search for missing persons and persons who evade investigation, trial, and serving a criminal sentence. Police officers use both public and secret methods, act both on their own initiative and on behalf of the investigator and only under the supervision of the prosecutor¹.

The approach in which, under the supervision of the same prosecutor, both the detection of crimes and the identification of those who committed them, the collection of evidence in criminal proceedings, is considered quite justified and relevant for the purpose of practical application in countering drug crime in Ukraine. The effectiveness of the French model is an additional confirmation of the thesis that we have justified in the past that “the detection and investigation of drug crimes are two successively located in time components (stages) of a single process that has its own characteristics due to the specifics of illegal activities. This process objectively requires external monitoring (with the possibility of intervention and adjustment) due to the high risks that its subjects (operational units and pre-trial investigation bodies) may ignore the requirements of the legislation. The role of such monitoring is theoretically and practically played only by prosecutor's supervision (Shelikhovska, 2023).

So there are significant differences in the understanding of the concept of inquiry in Ukraine and France. If in Ukraine an inquiry is a form in which a pre-trial investigation of criminal offences is carried out (according to a simplified procedure), then in France it is a search work conducted by public and secret methods. What these countries have in common is that it is conducted under the supervision of a prosecutor.

The German prosecutor's office also has a wide range of powers in the field of criminal justice. But it should mainly be considered an investigative body, whose main task is to conduct a preliminary investigation by clarifying both incriminating and exculpatory circumstances leading to the possible prosecution (Glaser & Hartmann, 2022). According to the German Code of Criminal Procedure Criminal Procedural Code of France. (2020, January). Retrieved from https://legislationline.org/sites/default/files/documents/6e/ France_CPC_am022020_fr.pdf. German Code of Criminal Procedure. (1987, April). Retrieved from https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stpo., it is this body that is responsible for investigating crimes (inquiry), collecting evidence, and evaluating them.

The prosecutor has the right to fully manage the course of the inquiry, determine the specifics of its organisation, and make appropriate procedural decisions. However, in practice, specific public and secret investigative search actions are carried out by the police on behalf of the prosecutor. In fact, prosecutors personally participate in the investigation of only serious and especially serious crimes.

In order to resolve the issue of bringing charges, the prosecutor establishes circumstances relevant to the criminal proceedings. It can question the accused, the victim, witnesses, experts, give instructions to conduct a search, inspection, seizure, etc. (Nalutsyshyn, 2021). An inquiry under German law covers almost all actions that are carried out in Ukraine within the framework of investigative and search actions and pre-trial investigation. The German legislator does not link the inquiry with the investigation of criminal offences of a certain degree of severity, as is done in Ukraine. A judicial investigator (District Judge-Inquirer) participates in an inquiry only when making the most important decisions or deciding on the legalisation of evidence (Baranets, 2023).

In the Czech Republic, the function of public prosecution is assigned to the prosecutor's office of the republic by the provisions of Article 80 of the Constitution of this country Constitution of Czech Republic. (1992, December). Retrieved from https://bit.ly/38ZekWD. and a separate law establishing the structure, system of organisation of work and competence of this state body Law of the Czech Republic No. 283/1993 “On the Public Prosecutor's Office”. (1993, November). Retrieved from https://bit.ly/3rLyjPc.. The Criminal Procedural Code of this state defines the main function of the prosecutor's office at the stage of pre-trial investigation as supervision of the activities of police investigators.

The prosecutor is granted the right to participate in any investigations, personally conduct individual ones, independently conduct a pre-trial investigation and make any procedural decision Law of the Czech Republic No. 141/1961 “On Criminal Procedure (Criminal Procedure Code)”. (1962, January) Retrieved from https:// www.zakonyprolidi.cz/cs/1961-141.. The Prosecutor's Office of the Czech Republic has powers that go beyond the criminal justice system. They relate to civil cases in terms of establishing legal capacity; declaring a person dead, etc. (Nalutsyshyn, 2021).

The Estonian Prosecutor's Office is a government agency that is managed by the Ministry of Justice and is independent in performing its tasks arising from the law. The prosecutor's office manages pre-trial criminal proceedings, ensuring their legality and effectiveness; supports the state prosecution in court, participates in the planning of operational and investigative activities necessary for detecting, stopping, and solving crimes, gives permission to the pre-trial investigation body to conduct certain operational and investigative activities, and performs other duties assigned to the prosecutor's office by law Law of the Estonia No. RT I 1998, 41, 625 “On the Public Prosecutor's Office”. (1998, May). Retrieved from https://www.riigiteata.ja. ee/akt/12749278..

The prosecutor has the right to give instructions to the pre-trial investigation bodies regarding the collection of evidence and, in accordance with the factual data obtained, decides to bring charges against specific persons Estonia Code of Criminal Procedure. (2004, July). Retrieved from https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/121122012010.

¹ Estonia Code of Criminal Procedure. (2004, July). Retrieved from https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/121122012010.

² Law of the Republic of Moldova No. 3 “On the Prosecutor Office”. (2016, February). Retrieved from https://www.legis.md/cautare/ getResults?doc_id = 140236&lang = ro.

³ Ibidem, 2016..

Article one of the Estonian Criminal Procedural Code not only provides that the scope of this law extends not only to pre-trial and judicial criminal proceedings (Article 1, Paragraph 1), but also defines the grounds and procedure for conducting operational and investigative activities (Article 1, Paragraph 2).

This activity is regulated by a separate chapter (chapters 3-1) of this Code. The grounds for conducting it, among other things, are: the need to collect information about the preparation of a crime in order to prevent or solve it (Paragraph 1 of Article 126-2)1 - on the one hand, the need to collect information about the crime in the framework of criminal proceedings.

Thus, operational and investigative activities can not only accompany criminal proceedings, but also precede them. This activity is carried out under the supervision of the prosecutor, who not only grants the police permission to conduct certain secret actions and applies to the court with relevant petitions, but also participates in the planning of operational and investigative activities.

According to the Law of the Republic Of Moldova “On the Prosecutor's Office” of 25.02.201 62, the competence of this “autonomous public institution” is limited only to the sphere of criminal justice. This law provides that the prosecutor: directs and carries out criminal prosecution, supports the prosecution in court (Paragraph “A” of Article 5); monitors compliance with the legislation on special search activities (paragraph “C” of Article 5); initiates disciplinary proceedings in cases of violation of the law, failure or improper performance of duties in criminal proceedings by criminal prosecution officers, employees of ascertaining bodies, employees of bodies engaged in special search activities, and employees responsible for registering messages (Paragraph “B” of Article 6). The principle of specialisation is embodied in Article 9 of the Law of the Republic Of Moldova “On the Prosecutor's Office” of 25.02.20163. In particular, Moldova has introduced an anti-corruption prosecutor's office and a prosecutor's office for combating organised crime and special cases.

All the countries discussed above, including Ukraine, belong to the Romano-German legal system.

Therefore, taking this experience into account is an important factor in improving prosecutor's supervision over the detection and investigation of drug crimes in Ukraine (Likhovytskyi, & Spiridonova, 2023). However, R.V. Zvarych et al. (2023) argue that in recent years, there has been an active mutual borrowing of the best elements (principles, legal means, methods, tools) of the Romano-Germanic and Anglo-Saxon legal families in order to protect the interests of society and the state, and ensure human rights. These trends are also evident in Ukraine, where, among other things, judicial precedents characteristic of the Anglo-Saxon legal family are widely used in law enforcement.

Consequently, international standards of prosecutor's supervision over the detection and investigation of drug crimes do not have a single source and are a purely criminological concept.

Their content consists of separate norms of international legal acts, which define the minimum requirements for: the work of law enforcement agencies, ensuring human rights and freedoms, countering crimes in the field of drug trafficking, and the powers of the prosecutor's office in the field of criminal justice. Approaches to the implementation of these standards are purely individual in each state: there are various combinations that are destablished due to consideration of some requirements and recommendations and neglect of others. In a democratic society, it is advisable to introduce these standards as widely as possible.



Discussion

Problematic issues of legal regulation and the practice of prosecutor's supervision are widely discussed by researchers from different countries. Their assessments are important for this study, as they provide an insight into the advantages and disadvantages of organising and implementing prosecutor's supervision using specific examples. Some of these examples are not directly related to the detection and investigation of drug crimes, while others are directly related to this activity. However, both the former and the latter deserve attention as they analyse the prosecutor's activity in the field of criminal justice.

Researchers from the USA, S. Bonnes & S.A. To- sto (2023), examined the tactics of the prosecutor's support in court in cases of sexual violence committed by (and against) members of the armed forces of a state. Researchers have shown that in support of the charge, prosecutors actively use information that is not evidence of the actual circumstances of the crime (especially in cases where there is not enough direct evidence of the event of the crime and the guilt of the person). This refers to, in particular, data on the accused that contradict the established ideas of the US military about the standards of behaviour of soldiers and officers. In addition, prosecutors also rely on military jargon and the values of the military court to encourage jurors to find the accused guilty and convince them of the need to impose a specific sentence. Moreover, prosecutors emphasise that the victim meets the expectations of the military and the image of an ideal serviceman. This tactic often works, as judges and jurors are themselves military personnel. This leads to the conviction of persons whose guilt has not actually been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

There are no such problems in Ukraine, which is due, among other things, to differences in the judicial system. There are no specialised military courts in Ukraine, and in cases of sexual violence, prosecutors usually rely on direct evidence confirming the fact and circumstances of the crime. The problems of the prosecutor's use of data describing a person (information about criminal records, drug addiction, behaviour in everyday life, employment, etc.) in support of their guilt, in particular, in drug crime proceedings, should be studied separately. In the meantime, this study provides recommendations for Ukraine to borrow the best international prosecutorial practices in the field of countering drug crime.

The topic of the prosecutor's activities in criminal cases related to sexual violence is raised by researchers not onlyin terms of certain categories of accused or victims, but also in general. Thus, T. Slovinsky & S.J. Brubaker (2022) developed tactics for protecting the prosecutor from the traumatic effects of procedural and non-procedural factors, and the work to prevent secondary and repeated victimisation of victims of sexual violence. In drug crime proceedings, for the most part, there are no victims and there is no such traumatic effect. However, in Ukraine, the issues of emotional balance of the prosecutor's activities, the means of their psychological protection are currently extremely relevant for any category of criminal proceedings. Ultimately, the armed aggression of the Russian Federation has become a catalyst for polar phenomena in the prosecutor's environment: the activation of civil position against the aggressor, professional and behavioural destructions that can lead to the end of the prosecutor's career (Khotynska-Nor et al., 2023).

A lot of scientific research is devoted to the psychological and moral aspects of the activities of prosecutors in UK. L. Soubise (2023) drew particular attention to the insufficiently investigated aspect of the professional identity of public prosecutors - moral legitimacy and, in particular, self-legitimacy, that is, the belief of prosecutors in their own competence to make decisions in individual cases. As a result of direct observations and interviews, a sense of loss of their own legitimacy by employees of the Crown Prosecution Service of Great Britain was revealed due to the constant monitoring of their decisions by colleagues and managers. This comprehensive managerism, according to the researcher, undermines the very legitimacy (and, consequently, transparency), the development of which the prosecutor's office has had to work hard since its inception.

This problem is certainly inherent in Ukraine. Ukrainian prosecutors must coordinate with the management almost every decision in any criminal proceedings, including cases of drug crimes. This, among other things, concerns the details of notifying a person of suspicion and the content of the indictment, determining the type of preventive measure, concluding a plea agreement, applying to the court with a request for exemption from criminal liability, etc.

In another plane, the issue of moral legitimacy and self-legitimacy of prosecutors was considered by American researchers. For the most part, such studies are directly related to the problems of illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. In particular, this is the issue of determining by the prosecutor the expediency of criminal prosecution for possession of a small amount of drugs (for their own use). As stated by S.B. Baughman & M.S. Wright (2020), over-active criminal prosecution for these and other minor criminal offences has led to mass incarceration of people for long periods of time. This, in turn, led to a loss of confidence on the part of a significant number of the population in the courts, the prosecutor's office, and the police. These institutions have lost their moral correctness in the eyes of community residents. Most of the people who fell under the repression were descendants of immigrants from the African continent, which outraged broad segments of the US population belonging to this category (their opinion was shared by other Americans).

The consequence of these events was the emergence of a “progressive” movement in the prosecutor's environment. It consists in introducing practices aimed at preventing mass incarceration, eliminating racial inequality (racially disproportionate consequences of charges), waiving charges of committing minor drug crimes, and giving preference to the use of medical and educational measures (including compulsory ones) and social rehabilitation over criminal punishment. Thus, “progressive” prosecutors try to assert their moral authority (legitimacy) both in the eyes of their fellow citizens and in their own conviction.

Thus, A.L. Cox & C. Gripp (2022), exploring the strategies of ordinary prosecutors in Belton (USA), among other things, made the following conclusions: 1) recognising the problem of legitimacy faced by prosecutors in general, Belton prosecutors seek to dissociate themselves from their colleagues (other prosecutors, police, judges) whom they consider responsible for mass incarceration; 2) by doing so, they seek to assert their moral, intellectual, and social superiority; 3) by staying away from the police, prosecutors simultaneously demonstrate their ability to influence its decisions, stop its illegitimate activities and bring to justice officers guilty of violating the law; 4) recognising the systemic the injustice and challenges faced by those accused of a crime, prosecutors are inclined to apply to the latter measures that are alternative to criminal prosecution.

These alternative measures are implemented under special programmes that provide for the use of special treatment, education, social rehabilitation of offenders with their involvement in socially useful work, etc. These programmes are often criticised. R.F. Wright & K.L. Levine (2022) criticise them for their lack of specific standards and established criteria. The lack of common approaches to the content and form of such programmes is due to the fact that their development and implementation are carried out by the prosecutor's offices of US states that do not have a single subordination and act independently of each other. In addition, the conflicting legislation of individual states does not contribute to the proper implementation of such programmes. E. O'brien (2020) notes that Wisconsin has a drug-related homicide act passed back in 1986. This law was intended to expose and convict drug dealers. However, its provisions made it possible to bring to justice and severely punish drug addicts who are not involved in the drug business. This refers to friends, relatives, or acquaintances of the deceased from a drug overdose, who found another dose for the victim or shared it. Thus, addicts face the possibility of being charged with murder when they call for medical attention for an overdose victim. Since 2014, another law has been in force in Wisconsin, providing such individuals with treatment for drug addiction and protecting them from prosecution. However, its implementation faces problems due to the active implementation of the provisions of the 1986 law. In connection with the above, the researcher rightly suggests adjusting both the legislation and the prosecutor's practice.

Another feature of the activities of “progressive” US prosecutors in cases of illegal drug trafficking is the active use of the Institute of plea agreements. C.A. Grodensky et al. (2023), investigating this issue, interviewed prosecutors who described working to achieve five major progressive goals in their plea bargain decisions: dropping charges of drug possession in small quantities; avoiding excessive punishment, especially for crimes without victims; avoiding prosecution in obviously weak cases; encouraging open communication with the defence; and promoting racial equality. Prosecutors' descriptions of how these goals were guided by case decisions show how progressive prosecution can affect the criminal justice system through plea bargaining.

However, A.M. Gershowitz (2021) points to the unjustified extension of the liberal policy of “progressive” prosecutors to numerous cases against doctors who massively prescribe narcotic drugs to patients without appropriate medical indications. Despite the fact that such doctors were deprived of their licenses due to abuse of the right to prescribe narcotic drugs to patients (proving their guilt was not complicated), prosecutors refused to prosecute them. The researcher quite justifiably compares these doctors with street drug dealers, and also rightly notes that their use of drug licenses to cover up their illegal business only increases the public danger of illegal actions committed by them.

A.M. Gershowitz (2021) argues the need for criminal prosecution of doctors who unreasonably issue prescriptions for the purchase of drugs. The practices of “progressive” US prosecutors regarding the use of their discretionary powers to avoid criminal and public prosecution in certain categories of drug crimes deserve attention, as they save state resources and comply with the principles of functioning of a democratic society.

Thus, the generalisation of the studied standards, according to the acts of these organisations, together with the analysis of the experience of developed democratic countries and the analysis of scientific literature, highlight the most useful and valuable approaches and practices in the field of prosecutor's supervision over the detection and investigation of drug crimes. Ukraine needs to follow a further course towards the introduction of effective special criminological programmes and methods of combating drug crimes with the assignment of the responsibility for their development and implementation to specially created police units (national and local levels) - with the involvement of scientific institutions. It will be effective to introduce the specialisation of prosecutors in supervising the detection and pre-trial investigation of drug crimes, followed by the support of public prosecution in court. It is important to ensure that the severity of punishment for drug crimes corresponds to their public danger through adequate, progressive use of discretionary powers in bringing and maintaining public prosecution (within the limits of the types and amounts of punishment established by the legislator). The prosecutor's competence should include resolving issues related to the application of alternative measures to criminal prosecution and prosecution in relation to persons who have committed drug crimes (treatment for addiction with subsequent monitoring of the patient, upbringing and re-education, restoration of working capacity and social reintegration of the offender). It is also necessary to ensure that the prosecutor has the discretionary power (under certain conditions) to discontinue criminal prosecution or drop charges against a person who has committed a criminal offence or a minor crime in the field of illicit drug trafficking. The prosecutor's office should be charged with ensuring the legality of the actions of law enforcement agencies to obtain the information necessary to start continuing the criminal prosecution of a person for committing drug crimes. It is also important to ensure the moral legitimacy and self-legitimacy of prosecutors through the organisation of such conditions for their use of discretionary powers, in which individual procedural decisions and legal position do not need to be coordinated with the leadership of the prosecutor's office.



Conclusions

International standards of prosecutor's supervision over the detection and investigation of drug crimes are a set of separate provisions of various international laws and regulations, which establish minimum requirements and recommendations in terms of: rationing at the level of national legislation the activities of law enforcement agencies to counteract illegal trafficking in narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and their analogues - on the one hand, as well as the legal status of the prosecutor's office, its functions and powers in the field of criminal justice - on the other. These standards do not have a single regulatory source and are determined based on the results of a comprehensive analysis of these provisions.

The analysis of the UN and EU regulations, as well as the practice of implementing their provisions in different countries of the world, allowed for the conclusion that there are different approaches to the implementation of provisions related to prosecutor's supervision of the detection and investigation of drug crimes. This led to the existence of various models of a special criminological system for countering drug trafficking: from the repressive role of the prosecutor's office in combining a significant excess of the recommended limits of criminal punishment (up to the death penalty) to the legalisation of drug use and possession (without the purpose of selling) in combination with rationing the prosecutor's ability to drop charges and apply measures alternative to criminal prosecution to the guilty person. Each of the models has its own disadvantages and advantages and is determined by national legal traditions. However, in order to ensure the balance of interests of a democratic society and respect for the rights and freedoms of a particular person in the fight against illegal drug trafficking, it is important that the prosecutor's supervision of the detection and investigation of drug crimes is based as the most complete consideration of international standards.

Ukraine occupies a leading position in the implementation of the standards under study, ahead of many other states, including developed democratic ones. This is due to Ukraine's political orientation and active work on joining the EU. Among other things, significant achievements of Ukraine on this path are to ensure: independence and organisational separation of the prosecutor's office from the executive branch, the court and law enforcement agencies that are entrusted with conducting criminal investigation and pre-trial investigation; giving the prosecutor the authority to conduct procedural management of inquiry and pre-trial investigation; limiting the competence of the prosecutor's office (with minor exceptions) to the sphere of criminal justice; establishing by the legislator penalties for committing drug crimes within the limits recommended by UN and EU documents.



References

[1] Banakh, S.V. (2020). International experience of the organisation of the prosecutor's office. Bulletin of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, 29, 276-280. doi: 10.26565/2075-1834-2020-29-37.

[2] Baranets, V.A. (2023). Foreign experience of investigation of criminal offences in the form of inquiry. Kyiv Journal of Law, 1, 331-336. doi: 10.32782/klj/2023.1.51.

[3] Baughman, S.B., & Wright, M.S. (2020). Prosecutors and mass incarceration. Southern California Law Review, 94(5), 1123-1190.

[4] Bilokin, R.M. (2023). International standards of prosecutor supervision over legality in criminal proceedings. Scientific Bulletin of the Uzhhorod National University, 78(2), 256-262. doi: 10.24144/23073322.2023.78.2.40.

[5] Bonnes, S., & Tosto, S.A. (2023). Prosecuting military sexual assault: The entanglement of military discourse and victim stereotypes in prosecutor case strategies. Feminist Criminology, 18(5), 459-489. doi: 10.1177/15570851231197913.

[6] Bukovskyi, Yu.D. (2023). The experience of the United States in organizing the activities of units to combat illegal drug trafficking. Legal Scientific Electronic Journal, 1, 258-262. doi: 10.32782/25240374/2023-1/61.

[7] Cox, A.L., & Gripp, C. (2022). The legitimation strategies of “progressive” prosecutors. Social & Legal Studies, 31(5), 657-678. doi: 10.1177/09646639211060814.

[8] Drach, D. (2020). Prosecutorial supervision: Ukrainian and European experience. Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law, 5, 132-136. doi: 10.32849/2663-5313/2020.5.23.

[9] European Information and Research Centre. (n.d.). Functions of prosecutor's offices in European countries: Informational reference prepared by the European Information and Research Center at the request of the People's Deputy of Ukraine. Retrieved from https://infocenter.rada.gov.ua/uploads/documents/29323.pdf.

[10] From fines to the death penalty: How drugs are punished in different countries. Ukraine is criminal. (2017). Retrieved from https://cripo.com.ua/stories/?p = 224675/.

[11] Gershowitz, A.M. (2021). Opioid doctors: Is losing your license sufficient punishment for drug trafficking? Hastings Law Journal, 72(3), 871-918.

[12] Glaser, S., & Hartmann, S. (2022). CJEU: Germany's public prosecution authorities cannot be regarded as a “Judicial authority” with regard to EAWs - the truth or a misconstrual of the legal reality? German Law Journal, 23(4), 650-660. doi: 10.1017/glj.2022.36.

[13] Grodensky, C.A., Crozier, W.E., Gifford, E.J., & Garrett, B.L. (2023). Understanding plea bargaining in a new progressive DA's office: How line prosecutors understand and implement progressive goals through plea decisions. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 50(3), 429-453. doi: 10.1177/00938548221140356.

[14] Hrystova, Yu. (2023). International standards for ensuring the security of justice. Scientific Bulletin of the Dnipropetrovsk State University of Internal Affairs, 2, 234-243. doi: 10.31733/2078-3566-2023-2-234243.

[15] Khotynska-Nor, O., Bakaianova, N., & Kravchenko, M. (2023). Prosecutor's office of Ukraine under martial law:Challenges, trends, statistical data. Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, 3, 40-53. doi: 10.33327/ AJEE-18-6.3-a000303.

[16] Klymchuk, M.P., & Stetsyk, B.V. (2023). International legal standards for the protection of a person's defender or representative from interference in their activities. Electronic Scientific Publication “Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence”, 4, 471-476. doi: 10.24144/2788-6018.2023.04.76.

[17] Likhovytskyi, Ya.O., & Spiridonova, A.Yu. (2023). The legal system of Ukraine: Changes in the conditions of necessary accession to the European Union. Scientific Bulletin of the Uzhgorod National University, 77(2), 299-303. doi: 10.24144/2307-3322.2023.77.2.51.

[18] Maksymenko, V. (2022). Analysis of the legislation of EU member states regarding control in the sphere of circulation of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and precursors. The Grail of Science, 22, 101103. doi: 10.36074/grail-of-science.25.11.2022.15.

[19] Nalutsyshyn, V. (2021). Legal status and functions of the prosecutor's office: European experience. University Scientific Notes, 6(84), 17-27. doi: 10.37491/UNZ.84.2.

[20] O'Brien, E. (2020). A Willful Choice: The ineffective and incompassionate application of Wisconsin's criminal laws in combating the opioid crisis. Wisconsin Law Review, 5, 1065-1105. doi: 10.2139/ ssrn.3675887.

[21] Participation of the prosecutor in criminal proceedings regarding criminal offences in the field of illegal drug trafficking. (2022). Retrieved from https://ptcu.gp.gov.ua/uk/2022/01/uchast-prokurora- u-kryminalnomu-provadzhenni-shhodo-kryminalnyh-pravoporushen-u-sferi-nezakonnogo-obigu- narkotychnyh-zasobiv/.

[22] Riabovol, L.T. (2021). Documents of the bodies of the Council of Europe as a basis for reforming the prosecutor's office in Ukraine. Proceedings, 10, 9-14. doi: 10.36550/2522-9230-2021-10-9-14.

[23] Serhieieva, T.V. (2020). Implementation of the provisions of international agreements on combating illegal drug trafficking in the legislation of Ukraine. Law and Public Administration, 3, 65-69. doi: 10.32840/ pdu.2020.3.9.

[24] Shelikhovska, I.Yu. (2023). Supervision of detection and investigation of drug crimes as a specific area of prosecutorial activity. New Ukrainian Law, 2, 163-169. doi: 10.51989/NUL.2023.2.22.

[25] Slovinsky, T., & Brubaker, S.J. (2022). Prosecution as a “Soul Crushing” job: Emotional labor and secondary trauma in working sexual assault cases. Violence and Victims, 37(5), 588-609. doi: 10.1891/ VV-2021-0060.

[26] Solovei, V.V. (2023). International practice and foreign experience of preventing criminal offences committed by organized groups and criminal organisations in the field of illegal trafficking of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances or their analogues. Scientific Bulletin of the Uzhhorod National University, 78(2), 228-233. doi: 10.24144/2307-3322.2023.78.2.36.

[27] Soubise, L. (2023). Professional identity, legitimacy and managerialism at the Crown Prosecution Service. Legal Studies, 43(3), 425-442. doi: 10.1017/lst.2022.47.

[28] Sramel, B., & Klimek, L. (2022). The prosecutorial monopoly of the Slovak Public Prosecution Service: No access to justice for the injured party? Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, 2(14), 22-45. doi: 10.33327/ AJEE-18-5.2-a000201.

[29] Standards of professional responsibility, a statement of the main duties and rights of prosecutors, adopted by the International Association of Prosecutors. (1999). Retrieved from https://www.iap-association. org/getattachment/Resources-Documentation/IAP-Standards-(1)/Ukrainian.pdf.aspx.

[30] Voinova, A.O., & Stanich, V.S. (2021). Criminal code of the China. Kyiv: OVK.

[31] Wright, R.F., & Levine, K.L. (2021). Models of prosecutor-led diversion programs in the United States and beyond. Annual Review of Criminology, 4, 331-351. doi: 10.1146/annurev-criminol-061020-022236.

[32] Yarmaki, V.H. (2021). Combating illegal trafficking of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and precursors: Experience of foreign countries. South Ukrainian Legal Journal, 1, 70-74. doi: 10.32850/ sulj.2021.1.12.

[33] Zvarych, R.V., Druchek, O.V., & Novikova, M.M. (2023). The legal system of Ukraine in the paradigm of the Anglo-Saxon legal family in the conditions of martial law. Legal Scientific Electronic Journal, 1, 694697. doi: 10.32782/2524-0374/2023-10/168.



Анотація

Нагляд прокурора за виявленням та розслідуванням наркозлочинів: міжнародні стандарти і світовий досвід

Ірина Шеліховська

Аспірант

Національна академія внутрішніх справ

Михайло Грібов

Доктор юридичних наук, професор Національна академія внутрішніх справ

Стрімке поширення наркотизму зумовлює необхідність активізації протидії наркозлочинам (з одночасним суворим дотриманням поліцією прав людини), що можливо лише за умови ефективного прокурорського нагляду, чим і зумовлена актуальність дослідження його проблем. Мета статті - схарактеризувати стан правового регулювання та практичного здійснення прокурором нагляду за оперативно-розшуковою протидією та досудовим розслідуванням кримінальних правопорушень у сфері наркообігу в площині дотримання норм міжнародного права, а також сформулювати рекомендації щодо запозичення позитивної практики інших країн у частині такого нагляду. Послуговуючись системно-структурним, порівняльно-правовим і логіко-юридичним методами, комплексно досліджено низку актів міжнародного права та законодавства України й інших держав. Обґрунтовано, що зміст міжнародних стандартів прокурорського нагляду за виявленням і розслідуванням наркозлочинів становлять наявні в різних джерелах міжнародного права окремі положення, розроблено рекомендації щодо діяльності національних прокуратур у сфері протидії злочинності загалом і діяльності державних органів з кримінально-правової, спеціально-кримінологічної, оперативно-розшукової та кримінальної процесуальної протидії наркозлочинам. Використання зазначених методів і матеріалів надало можливість визначити, що Україна дотримується досліджуваних стандартів (навіть на вищому рівні, ніж деякі країни - члени Європейського Союзу), зокрема щодо незалежності прокуратури від виконавчої та судової влади, концентрації основних функцій у сфері кримінальної юстиції, забезпечення ефективного нагляду за досудовим розслідуванням у формі процесуального керівництва. Водночас в Україні доцільно продовжити роботу щодо: запровадження спеціалізації прокурорів на нагляді за виявленням і досудовим розслідуванням наркозлочинів, а також розробленням методик протидії наркозлочинам правоохоронними органами; розширенням дискреційних повноважень прокурора та забезпеченням реальної незалежності й самостійності їх використання; забезпеченням нагляду за дотриманням поліцією законності під час ініціативного виявлення наркозлочинів. Результати проведеного дослідження може бути використано для вдосконалення законодавства України та практики його застосування

Ключові слова: наркотичні засоби; прокуратура; законність; дискреційні повноваження; права людини; оперативно-розшукова діяльність

Размещено на Allbest.ru

...