GUARANTEES OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AS A TOOL FOR RESTRAINING PROCEDURAL COERCION

Abstract

The article is devoted to a comprehensive scientific analysis of guarantees of human rights and freedoms in criminal proceedings through the prism of the application of procedural coercive measures. Based on the fact that criminal proceedings are one of the most intensive forms of state interference in the sphere of personal freedom, private life and property rights of individuals, the paper substantiates the thesis about the decisive role of procedural guarantees as an instrument of restraining state coercion and ensuring the legitimacy of criminal justice. The article demonstrates that the protection of human rights and freedoms in criminal proceedings is not limited to declarative provisions or a formal list of procedural rights, but constitutes a multi-level mechanism of legal protection with normative, institutional, and functional dimensions. It is argued that it is precisely through the system of procedural guarantees that coercive measures are transformed from potentially repressive instruments into legal means of ensuring the objectives of criminal proceedings. It is emphasised that the absence or formal nature of the implementation of such guarantees leads to “formal legality”, in which external compliance with procedural form is not accompanied by real protection of individual rights. The paper analyses the provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine, the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, and the practice of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, the Supreme Court, and the European Court of Human Rights. Particular attention is paid to the standards of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the proportionality of interference, effective judicial control, and the inadmissibility of transforming temporary procedural restrictions into hidden forms of punishment prior to the adoption of a guilty verdict. The conclusion is justified that guarantees of human rights and freedoms in criminal proceedings serve as a systemic limiter of public authority, define the limits of permissible state intervention, and form the criteria for the legitimacy of procedural coercion measures. In conclusion, it is argued that the effectiveness of criminal proceedings should be assessed not only in terms of the effectiveness of the investigation, but above all in terms of the level of respect for human rights, which is a key indicator of the democratic nature and fairness of criminal justice.