February 12, 2026

On February 11, 2026, the Second Senate reviewed the case upon the constitutional complaint of Kateryna Chernysh in the public part of the plenary session in written proceedings.

During the plenary session, the Judge-Rapporteur in the case, Oleg Pervomayskiy, presented the content of the constitutional complaint and the applicant’s arguments.  

The judge stated that Kateryna Chernysh appealed to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to review the constitutionality of Articles 309.1.9, 309.3 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (hereinafter, the “Code”).

In accordance with Articles 309.1.9, 309.3 of Code, during the pre-trial investigation, the decisions of the investigating judge on “seizure of property or refusal thereof” may be appealed.

According to Article 309.3 of Code “other decisions of investigating judge are not subject to appeal and the objection against them can be appealed during the preparatory proceeding in the court”.

The following can be inferred from the content of constitutional complaint and materials attached thereto.

By ruling dated May 29, 2024, the investigating judge of Industrial District Court of Dnipropetrovsk city (Dnipro) imposed an arrest on the part of the property owned by Kateryna Chernysh.

In 2025, the applicant’s representative, lawyer G. Chernyshov, filed a motion to the court to abolish the seizure of property. The motion was based, in particular, on the fact that the seizure of part of the house lasted for more than one year, hence in the criminal proceedings no one had been notified of suspicions, and no investigating action on property arrest had been carried out, thereby violating the rights of Kateryna Chernysh to the free possession of property.

By ruling dated July 31, 2025, the investigating judge of the Central District Court of Dnipro city denied this motion. The ruling is final and is not subject to appeal.

Disagreeing with the decision, the applicant’s representative appealed it.

The Court of Appeal refused to initiate it. The Court, in particular, stated that the provisions of Article 309.1.9 of Code stipulate the right to appeal only on the decisions of investigating judges on seizure of property or refusal to seize it. 

The Supreme Court refused to initiate the cassation proceedings.  The court justified its decision by stating that the list of decisions of the investigating judges, which may be appealed during the pre-trial investigation, is defined in Articles 309.1, 309.2 of Code. Moreover, Code does not provide the possibility to appeal the decisions of the investigating judge in accordance with Article 174 of Code, in particular, regarding the refusal to satisfy a motion to abolish the seizure of the property.

Applicant states that the refusal to initiate appeal proceedings in this category of cases violates the number of provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine.

The Judge-Rapporteur informed that he had sent the inquiry letters to the President of Ukraine, the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and the number of research institutions regarding the issues raised in the constitutional complaint. The judges will be informed of the content of the response in the in-camera part of the plenary session.

After examining the case materials,  the Court proceeded to the in-camera part of the plenary session for a decision.

The plenary session is available  on the official website of the Court in section “Video broadcast of the CCU’s sessions” – “Archive of video broadcasts of sessions”.