PROBLEMS OF THE PRACTICE OF SEIZURE OF THINGS AND DOCUMENTS FROM BUSINESS ENTITIES BY PRE-TRIAL INVESTIGATION AUTHORITIES

Abstract

Based on the analysis of court practice, analyzed features of the mechanisms of seizure things and documents from business entities by pre-trial investigation authorities in this article. The author identifies the most common shortcomings in the organization of such activities based on the content of petitions submitted by pre-trial investigation authorities to the investigating judge to obtain permits for temporary access to things and documents, searches, seizure of property and its arrest. The author examines the content of certain measures to ensure criminal proceedings and investigative (search) actions with a view to obtaining the necessary information for the evidentiary process contained in accounting and tax reporting documents. The author emphasizes the need to clearly understand the document flow used by a business entity in its activities and which documents are subject to seizure. This list of doc-uments depends on the type of criminal offense, the way it was committed and the method of concealing the traces of the crime, experience in conducting financial and business oper-ations, criminal record, etc. It is important to properly execute the application for temporary access to things and documents or for a search and to accurately and completely reflect in the application the list of documents to be seized. Attention is drawn to the need to return to the owner (business entity) the temporarily seized property that was, in particular, seized during the search and was not specified in the application for permission to conduct it. Analysis of court practice has shown that the investigating judge refuses to satisfy a motion for temporary access or permission to conduct a search if the motion does not con-tain indications of which specific documents the prosecution wishes to obtain temporary access to or seize during the search. The main mistake of the pre-trial investigation author-ities is that the motion does not specify a specific list of primary, accounting and tax report-ing documents to which access or removal is requested. The author identifies the peculiarities of temporary access to electronic information systems, computer systems or parts thereof, mobile terminals of systems at the disposal of business entities and highlights the shortcomings in the execution of procedural documents.