Kotova A. Procedural order of seizure of property in criminal proceedings.

The work is aimed to in-depth study of theoretical and applied aspects of the seizure of property in criminal proceedings. The theoretical and legal bases of property seizure in criminal proceedings are analyzed. In particular, the formation of the institution of seizure of property in criminal proceedings was considered, starting with the Extensive Edition of Russkaya Pravda and the Council Code of 1649 and other monuments of law. The conclusion was made about the need to revise the theory of criminal procedural coercion, which was developed in the late twentieth century due to the significant update of domestic legislation and the adoption of the CPC 2012; its inability to conceptually and systematically reflect the modern patterns of application of measures to ensure criminal proceedings. Particular attention is paid to the legal nature of seizure of property in criminal proceedings, which determined the implementation of scientific analysis of its essential features, notion, definition of tasks, goals, grounds, conditions and functional orientation. The variability of terminology which is used in criminal procedural legislation and create legal uncertainty in establishing the procedural status of persons whose property rights may be limited during criminal proceedings has been criticized. The logical part of the work has become the consideration of the problematic issues of determining the property that can be seized. The inadmissibility of using the intersectoral concept of «property» without significant correction, given the field characteristics and purpose of seizure of property. Since the seizure of property interferes person's fundamental right to peaceful possession of property, which is protected by the Constitution of Ukraine and international legal acts, the criteria of legality of restriction of property rights during the seizure of property are considered in the dissertation through the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, its Protocol and the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. The debatable issues concerning the moment of issuing a ruling on recognizing temporarily seized property as material evidence, missing without good reason the period of seizure of property, the order of considering the motion for seizure of property and its cancellation are considered. The author's definition of the term «seizure of property», a model of algorithmization of the assessment of the legality of restricting a person's right to peaceful possession of property by the investigating judge while considering a motion for seizure of property, taking into account the case law of the ECHR and other suggestions to improve legislation.