Короткий опис(реферат):
Здійснено огляд процедурних положень Конвенції про кіберзлочинність. Проаналізовано актуальний стан кримінального процесуального законодавства на наявність норм, що кореспондують процедурним положенням Конвенції про кіберзлочинність. Висвітлено порядок денний десятої сесії Верховної Ради України восьмого скликання на предмет наявності законопроектів щодо імплементації процедурних положень Конвенції про кіберзлочинність до Кримінального процесуального кодексу України (далі – КПК України). Зазначені законопроекти досліджено на предмет охоплення ними усієї системи відповідних процедурних положень Конвенції про кіберзлочинність.
Суть розробки, основні результати:
The criminal procedural regulation of the pretrial investigation authorities' powers in order to create the conditions for the effective activity of the pretrial investigation bodies regarding the collection of evidence related to computer data and their processing in electronic information systems has been described. The procedural provisions of the Cybercrime Convention have been analyzed and their comparisons are made with the powers of the prosecution party under the current CPC of Ukraine. Relevant bills on the implementation of the relevant procedural provisions of the Convention to the CPC of Ukraine have been reviewed. The current CPC of Ukraine is interpreted as providing for inspection, search of the computer system, its parts, computer media, computer data, penetration (articles 233-237 of the CPC), temporary access to the computer. computer system, part or computer media, copy and save copies of computer data
(articles 170, 159 of the CPC). An analysis of the relevant bills has led to the conclusion that they have the following procedural provisions of the Cybercrime Convention: the preservation of computer information, including by blocking access to relevant information resources; temporary blocking (limitation) of access to a certain (identified) information resource (service) in information and telecommunication networks (systems).
The bills analyzed do not pay sufficient attention to the implementation of the following procedural powers: urgent retention of certain computer data; the obligation of the person to maintain the integrity of the computer data; the obligation of the individual to maintain the confidentiality of the fact; urgent disclosure of data flow; extending a search or similar access to a computer system, part of it, accessible to the first system but physically located outside the object being searched but within the territory of the State to which the pre-trial investigation authority is subject; prohibiting the access or removal of computer data from a computer system that was accessed
