AGREEMENTS IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE OF UKRAINE: DOCTRINAL FOUNDATIONS, CASE LAW, EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS STANDARDS

Abstract

Abstract. The article offers a comprehensive analysis of agreements in the criminal procedure of Ukraine, focusing on doctrinal foundations, domestic case law, and the standards of the European Court of Human Rights. Agreements are conceptualized as a manifestation of the dispositive principle within a public-law proceeding; their admissibility and fairness, however, depend on robust procedural safeguards. Based on the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, the paper differentiates types of agreements and maps the stages of initiation, negotiations, recording of terms, and judicial scrutiny. It defines minimum requirements for verifying voluntariness and informed consent, the court’s duty to ascertain a factual basis for the agreement, and the obligation to provide a fully reasoned decision either approving or rejecting it. Special attention is paid to the role of the victim, the proportionality of the agreement’s consequences, and safeguards against covert pressure during negotiations. The paper proposes procedural filters in the form of practical checklists for judges, prosecutors, and defense counsel, covering the assessment of voluntariness, the reality of legal assistance, the sufficiency of corroborating evidence, compensation for harm, the balance between private and public interests, and the completeness of judicial reasoning. A separate section examines agreements on the application of criminal-law measures to legal entities, setting requirements for confirming corporate will and representation, screening conflicts of interest, ensuring access to case materials, and assessing proportionality and potential effects on shareholders, employees, and creditors. Drawing on relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the study formulates integrity criteria for agreements: voluntary and informed waiver of procedural rights, effective assistance of counsel, absence of coercion, genuine judicial control, verification of the factual basis, and conformity with the public interest. The article synthesizes recurrent enforcement problems in Ukrainian practice and advances targeted proposals for legislative refinement and judicial approaches aimed at increasing predictability, transparency, and adjudicative quality in the conclusion and approval of agreements.

Keywords: plea agreement; reconciliation agreement; criminal procedure; right to a fair trial; dispositive principle; adversarial proceedings and equality of arms; judicial scrutiny; pre-trial investigation.