An emergency search without a warrant? What changes are advocates proposing to the CPC

The Verkhovna Rada is preparing a consolidated draft of amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code regarding searches in urgent cases without a prior ruling by an investigating judge. The UNBA insists that judicial oversight following such a search must be effective, and that homeowners must be full participants in the procedure.

UNBA representatives expressed this position at a meeting of the working group of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on law enforcement, which took place on October 20.

The group, chaired by the deputy chairman of the Verkhovna Rada Committee Maksym Pavliuk was established to review draft laws on searches and prepare a coordinated version of amendments that will strengthen guarantees of the inviolability of a person’s home or other property in criminal proceedings and clarify the grounds for urgent searches. Representatives of the Supreme Court, the High Anti-Corruption Court, the Verkhovna Rada Commissioner for Human Rights, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the UNBA were invited to join the group. The UNBA was represented by the chairman of the UNBA Committee on criminal law and procedure Anzhelika Moiseyeva and a member of that Committee Volodymyr Matsko.

The working group is reviewing the main draft law dated August 7, 2026, No. 15488, «On amendments to Article 233 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine regarding the clarification of grounds for entering a person’s residence or other premises in urgent cases», four alternative versions thereof (No. 15488-1, No. 15488-2, No. 15488-3, No. 15488-4), as well as the previously registered No. 13044, No. 13430 and No. 13599. These proposals pertain, in particular, to the requirements for a ruling by an investigating judge issued after a search has already been conducted, and to strengthening the protection of human rights during searches.

UNBA representatives paid particular attention to draft law No. 15488-1, «On amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine regarding the strengthening of guarantees of the inviolability of a person’s home or other property in criminal proceedings», submitted by People’s Deputy Serhiy Vlasenko. In their view, the document has a clear structure: it defines both the grounds for an urgent search and the actions that the pre-trial investigation authority is required to take following such an infringement of a person’s rights.

A. Moiseyeva emphasized that the amendments must take into account the rights of individuals who are not involved in an urgent search, even though it affects their interests — primarily the owners of homes and other premises. «They are not involved either during the conduct of an urgent search or during the decision-making process regarding the seizure of property. Consideration of this issue is largely of a formal and procedural nature and does not ensure the adversarial nature of the proceedings», - the Committee chairman noted.

V. Matsko pointed out that law enforcement agencies often resort to urgent searches to overcome procedural gaps in the pretrial investigation. He cited an example where a pretrial investigation agency conducted an urgent search in a premises that had already been searched pursuant to a court order because the investigators had mistaken the address. According to the advocate, even when granting permission for the first search, the investigating judge relied not on information from the State Register of Real Property Rights but on an operational report. When validating the results of the urgent search, the court failed to properly assess whether there were indeed grounds to consider it urgent, even though the investigation had received the order with the incorrect address in advance. In V. Matska’s opinion, this is precisely where the formalistic and procedural approach that A. Moiseyeva had warned against became evident.

«The institution of urgent procedural actions has been introduced in many European countries. When proposing amendments to criminal procedural law, we must understand that this concept is cumulative: it encompasses a series of criteria, the presence of which allows for the conduct of urgent investigative actions. Another issue is ensuring proper judicial oversight, during which the court will examine the circumstances that served as the basis for the urgent search, determine the extent and grounds for interference with human rights, provide a legal assessment of such actions, and ensure the participation of all those whose rights and interests have been affected by this procedural action. It is precisely this procedure that will meet the standards of the rule of law», - emphasized V. Matsko.

Members of the UNBA Committee on criminal law and procedure will continue working on the draft laws as part of a working group.