Proposed Reforms to Ukraine's Criminal Procedure Code by NABU and SAP
Ukraine's National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAP) have submitted a proposal to amend the country's Criminal Procedure Code (CPC). The key aim is to abolish judicial oversight for extending pre-trial investigation deadlines and to remove the legal grounds for closing criminal cases due to the expiration of these deadlines. These proposals were sent to the Cabinet of Ministers late last year.
The joint appeal from the heads of NABU and SAP outlines several significant changes:
- Eliminating the requirement for court approval to extend pre-trial investigation deadlines.
- Granting the SAP prosecutor, rather than a judge, the authority to approve extensions of investigation timelines.
- Removing Article 295, paragraph 1 of the CPC, alongside amendments to Articles 294 and 295.
- Stripping the legal basis for terminating criminal proceedings solely because investigation deadlines have passed.
In their letter, the agencies argue that
"judicial oversight for extending pre-trial investigation deadlines is, in our view, counterproductive. When a prosecutor extends a deadline up to 12 months, they are bound by this timeframe and must complete all necessary procedural actions within it."
Furthermore, the proposal seeks to cancel the basis for closing cases due to lapsed deadlines, which is currently stipulated in Part 1, Clause 10 of Article 284 of the CPC. According to NABU and SAP, defense teams have filed motions to dismiss over 70 criminal cases on these grounds. This suggests the proposed reforms could significantly impact the efficiency and duration of pre-trial investigations in Ukraine. These changes are part of a broader, Western-supported effort to reform Ukraine's justice system and strengthen its capacity to prosecute high-level corruption.
Consequently, the NABU and SAP proposals could mark a pivotal step in reforming criminal justice. They are designed to reduce the number of cases closed on procedural technicalities, which should, in turn, enable more effective anti-corruption investigations. By streamlining procedures, the amendments would allow law enforcement to focus on the substance of cases rather than navigating complex legislative formalities, potentially strengthening the long-term fight against corruption.