Automatic extension of detention violates the right to defense - Constitutional Court

The Constitution does not provide for the possibility of limiting the right to liberty and security of person, the right to judicial protection, the presumption of innocence and the right to defense. Therefore, the provision of part 6 of Article 615 of the CPC on the possibility of automatic (without a court decision) extension of detention contradicts the Basic Law.

This conclusion was reached by the Constitutional Court in its decision of 18.07.2024 No. 8-r (II)/2024 in the case of guarantees of judicial control over the observance of the rights of persons in custody. The text of the decision is available on the website of the Constitutional Court.

As a reminder, Article 615 of the Criminal Procedure Code regulates the special regime of criminal proceedings under martial law. In particular, according to its part 6, in case of expiration of the court ruling on detention and impossibility of consideration by the court of the issue of extension of the detention period in accordance with the procedure established by this Code, the chosen preventive measure in the form of detention is considered to be extended until the court resolves the relevant issue, but not more than for two months.

Ruslan Onishchenko and Dmytro Havryliuk filed constitutional complaints regarding the compliance of this provision with the Constitution of Ukraine.

When considering the case, the Constitutional Court proceeded from the fact that under the rules of Article 64 of the Basic Law, constitutional rights and freedoms of a person and citizen cannot be restricted, except in cases provided for by the Constitution. The same article specifies which rights and freedoms cannot be restricted. In particular, those provided for in Articles 29 (right to liberty and security of person), 55 (right to judicial protection), 62 (presumption of innocence), 63 (right to defense). Therefore, the Constitutional Court stated that these rights cannot be restricted under martial law.

Analyzing the compliance of Part 6 of Article 615 of the CPC with the said provisions of the Constitution, the judges noted in particular that the obstacles to access to court and violation of the right to be heard in court in such an important matter as the extension of the period of detention established by the contested provisions of the Code means that it is impossible for a person to exercise the right to defense guaranteed by Part 2 of Article 63 of the Basic Law.

Taken together with other circumstances, the Constitutional Court recognized part 6 of Article 615 of the CPC as inconsistent with the Constitution. According to the decision, this provision will cease to be effective on October 19, 2024. The Verkhovna Rada should bring the regulatory framework for extending the term of detention in line with the Constitution and this decision.

According to Article 63(2) of the Constitution, a suspect, accused or defendant has the right to a defense. And it is carried out exclusively by a lawyer (part 4 of Article 131-1 of the Basic Law).

© 2025 Unba.org.ua Всі права захищені
"Національна Асоціація Адвокатів України". Передрук та інше використання матеріалів, що розміщені на даному веб-сайті дозволяється за умови посилання на джерело. Інтернет-видання та засоби масової інформації можуть використовувати матеріали сайту, розміщувати відео з офіційного веб-сайту Національної Асоціації Адвокатів України на власних веб-сторінках, за умови гіперпосилання на офіційний веб-сайт Національної Асоціації Адвокатів України. Заборонено передрук та використання матеріалів, у яких міститься посилання на інші інтернет-видання та засоби масової інформації. Матеріали позначені міткою "Реклама", публікуються на правах реклами.