Дроздов, О.МО.МДроздов2026-06-182026-06-182016-06-11Дроздов, О. (2016). Actual issues of the exercise protection from provocation (edition) persons to commit a crime in the light of the law of the European court of human rights. Вісник кримінального судочинства(2), 31–44.https://ir.library.knu.ua/handle/15071834/24128The paper investigates the delimitation of criteria provocation (incitement) of a person to commit a crime during the covert activities of the legal form of investigation, under the law of the European Court of Human Rights.Among the main problems in practice recently acquired acute urgency issues of the need of proof in criminal proceedings the fact of the reality of the relationship, about which being offered, was required, was obtained undue advantage. There is a need to clarify how affects fact of not prove such circumstances for the actions of a person who has received undue benefit of crime (in the absence of provocation on the part of the applicant). The European Court of Human Rights held that authorities should use special investigative techniques, especially in cases involving organized crime and corruption. In this regard, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the use of special investigative techniques – ​including surveillance of methods – ​by itself does not violate the right to a fair trial. However, given the risk of police incitement using such methods for their use should be limited by distinct limits. In order to ascertain whether it has been realized the right to a fair trial in a case involving secret agents, the European Court of Human Rights first consider whether there was a provocation («test incitement in fact»), and, if so, whether the applicant could receive protection from provocations in the national courts.According to the practice of national courts we have need of proof in criminal proceedings the fact of the reality of the relationship, about which being offered, was required, was obtained undue advantage during covert action. Fact of does not prove of such circumstances can lead to the emergence of reasonable doubt as to the proof of guilt of a person committing a crime. All doubts about the proof of guilt of a person are interpreted in favor of such personСтаття присвячена дослідженню на підставі практики Європейського суду з прав людини системи критеріїв відмежування провокації (підбурювання) особи на вчинення злочину під час негласних заходів від законних форм розслідування. З урахуванням практики національних судів доводиться необхідність доказування у кримінальному провадженні факту реальності тих правовідносин, з приводу яких пропонувалась, вимагалась, отримувалась неправомірна вигода під час проведення негласних заходів.uk: judgment of the European сourt of human rightsfair trialprovocationcovert investigation (seach) actionspre-trial investigationoperatively-search actionsevidenceprovingрішення Європейського суду з прав людинисправедливий судовий розглядпровокаціяпідбурюваннянегласні слідчі (розшукові) діїдосудове розслідуванняоперативно-розшукова діяльністьдоказидоказуванняСтаття