The Constitutional Court of Ukraine will deliver a verdict on the complaint regarding the inaction of investigators: legal consequences

Judicial proceedings in the Constitutional Court of Ukraine

According to Конституційний суд: The Second Senate of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine held a hearing on March 11, 2026, regarding the constitutional complaint of Tatyana Pomirko. The subject of the review was the constitutionality of the second part of Article 303 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, which regulates the procedure for appealing the inaction of investigators at the pre-trial stage of the investigation. The open plenary session in the format of written proceedings was led by the reporting judge Oleg Pervomaysky.

The proceedings in the case were initiated by the resolution of the Third Collegium of Judges of the Second Senate dated December 23, 2025. The focus was on the provision according to which complaints regarding the decisions, actions, or inactions of an investigator, investigator, or prosecutor are not considered during the pre-trial investigation and can only be reviewed at the stage of preparation for judicial proceedings according to the rules of Articles 314-316 of the CPC. Such legal collisions often become the subject of disputes in Ukrainian judicial practice, affecting citizens' rights to defense.

Case circumstances

Tatyana Pomirko submitted a statement about the commission of a crime to Police Department No. 1 of the Lviv District Police Department No. 2 on March 4, 2025. By the decision of the investigating judge of the Lviv Railway District Court on March 11 of the same year, the police were obliged to consider this appeal. The lawyer's petition was satisfied on March 24, and on March 28, the investigator entered information into the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations.

Nevertheless, by the resolution of the investigating judge of the same court dated May 21, 2025, the police department was again obliged to consider the petition, but on July 23, the opening of proceedings on the lawyer's complaint was denied. This decision was left unchanged by the Lviv Appellate Court in its resolution dated August 4, 2025.

Lawyer Vladimir Dytrenko participated in the plenary session. A key position voiced during the proceedings was the remark of the Lviv Appellate Court:

"The mere fact of the investigator's incomplete presentation of the circumstances of the alleged crime in the extract from the URDR cannot be the subject of appeal to the investigating judge."

The video recording of the plenary session will be published in the "Archive of Video Broadcasts of Sessions" section on the official website of the CCU.

The outcome of this case has the potential to create an important precedent for the human rights sector, defining the boundaries for appealing the actions of investigators and influencing the effectiveness of pre-trial investigation. The Court's decision may lead to a reconsideration of approaches to ensuring citizens' rights in the criminal process, especially concerning oversight of law enforcement agencies. The conclusions of the constitutional proceedings may form the basis for future legislative changes and new law enforcement practices in Ukraine.