International legal experience of implementing measures to ensure criminal proceedings in special periods

In this article we analyzed the international legal experience of implementing measures to ensure criminal proceedings in the conditions of special periods, and we formulated proposals for improving this area of legal regulation in the criminal process of Ukraine. We highlighted the experiences of Lithuania, Estonia, Armenia and Turkey regarding detention and detention during special periods. We investigated how courts provided during special periods in Estonia, Latvia, Georgia, Turkey, France and Ukraine. We have described the regulatory and legal regulation of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia regarding some aspects of the criminal process in the conditions of special periods of legislation. We have studied the legislation of Latvia, which specifies the choice of the simplest type of criminal process during martial law. We think that corresponds to the specific circumstances of the martial law and it is also the most adaptable to the circumstances of a special period and non-bureaucratized. We analyzed the specifics of the application of preventive measures against military personnel on the example of Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Moldova, Armenia, Georgia, and Israel. We have concluded that, based on the results of the analysis of the experience of foreign countries in the implementation of measures to ensure criminal proceedings in special periods, it is possible to formulate such proposals for the improvement of the relevant sphere of legal regulation in the criminal process of Ukraine. We propose to review the duration of detention of persons in conditions of special periods - following the example of Lithuania, Estonia, Armenia and Turkey. We also plan to introduce the possibility of choosing the simplest type of criminal process that corresponds to specific circumstances - following the example of Latvia. We propose to introduce special types of preventive measures against military personnel who are able to ensure the performance of the tasks of criminal proceedings. Nevertheless, such measures should not be associated with deprivation of liberty, minimally limit rights and freedoms, and not have a negative impact on the state’s defense capability - following the example of Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Moldova, Armenia, Georgia and Israel.