1 February 2023
On February 1, 2023, the Second Senate of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine at the public part of the plenary session in the form of written proceedings considered the case upon the constitutional complaint of Ruslan Onischenko on the constitutionality of Article 615.6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine (hereinafter – the Code).
During the plenary session the judge-rapporteur in the case – judge of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine Vasyl Lemak reported, in particular, on the content of the constitutional complaint.
He noted that the complainant applied to the Constitutional Court to check the constitutionality of Article 615.6 of the Code, which establishes that in case of expiration of the effect of the court ruling on holding in custody and impossibility for a court to consider an issue on extending the term of holding in custody in the manner prescribed by this code, the chosen preventive measure in the form of holding in custody shall be considered to be extended until the relevant issue is resolved by the court but no more than for two months.
In substantiating the constitutional complaint the complainant argued that as a result of application of Article 615.6 of the Code in his case his constitutional rights had been violated, in particular the right to freedom and personal inviolability, access to court, legal aid, protection, consideration of the case by an independent court with observance of the fundamental principles of criminal proceedings. To prove these statements on the unconstitutionality of the disputed provisions of the Code, the complainant argued that according to Article 64.2 of the Constitution, the rights and freedoms enshrined in Articles 29, 55, 59 and 63 of the Constitution may not be limited even in conditions of martial law.
The judge–rapporteur also informed that in order to ensure comprehensive and objective consideration by the Court of the case, relevant inquiries had been sent to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, a number of higher education and academic institutions and the Court’s special advisors to provide their position on the issues raised in the constitutional complaint.
During the plenary session, the Second Senate of the Court examined the case files at the public part and proceeded to the in-camera part.
At the plenary session of the Second Senate the subjects of the right to constitutional complaint Ruslan Onischenko and his representative Vadym Kostenko were present.
The public part of the plenary session is available at the following link: “Archive of video broadcast of sessions”.
