GUARANTEES FOR THE PROTECTION OF A PERSON’S ECONOMIC INTERESTS DURING A SEARCH

Abstract

The article analyzes the guarantees of protection of economic interests of a person during a search in criminal proceedings. The legal nature of a search as an investigative (search) action, accompanied by significant interference in the sphere of property rights, is revealed, and its impact on the implementation of entrepreneurial activity is determined. The relevance of the study is substantiated in connection with the prevalence of cases of restriction of economic interests of business entities. The problems of abuse of procedural powers during searches are analyzed, in particular the use of this investigative action as an instrument of pressure on business or as an element of illegal mechanisms of interference in the activities of enterprises. It is established that the greatest risks of violation of individual rights arise in cases of searches without a decision of the investigating judge in the manner prescribed by criminal procedural legislation. The peculiarities of the application of the provisions regulating the conduct of urgent searches, as well as the practice of their assessment by courts, are investigated. It was determined that the lack of clear criteria of urgency creates the prerequisites for abuses by the prosecution, and retrospective judicial control does not always provide effective protection of the rights of the individual. The need to expand procedural guarantees by involving the property owner in the consideration of relevant petitions was substantiated. Special attention was paid to the analysis of the requirements for minimizing the damage caused during the search, in particular in the context of the time of its conduct. It was established that in practice the requirement to conduct a search in a manner that least disrupts the person’s usual activities is often ignored, which negatively affects the economic interests of business entities and can cause both financial and reputational losses. Directions for improving criminal procedural legislation and law enforcement practice are proposed, in particular by clarifying the requirements for taking economic interests into account during a search, expanding the participation of interested parties in judicial control, and specifying the criteria for assessing the legality of interference. The conclusion is made about the need to ensure a real balance between the interests of criminal proceedings and the rights of business entities.