Criminal proceedings for tax evasion are initiated relatively easily and pose significant risks to businesses, particularly affecting their reputation and commercial activities. Even in the absence of a formal notice of suspicion of committing a criminal offense under Article 212 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, the conduct of procedural actions (such as interrogations and temporary access to items and documents) effectively confers on a person the status of a participant in the proceedings, along with the corresponding rights of defense.<\/p>\n
Such cases are typically \u201cpersonalized\u201d in nature and, from the outset, are directed at specific officials (for example, a director or an accountant). The application of measures to secure the proceedings indicates reasonable suspicion, which may imply the emergence of a de facto status of suspect even without the formal service of a notice of suspicion.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
We consider that, from this point, the calculation of the investigation time limits begins in accordance with the principle of \u201creasonable time,\u201d with a benchmark of two months from the date on which the relevant procedural actions are carried out by the pre-trial investigation authorities.<\/p>\n
In the event of undue delay in the proceedings, a person has the right to initiate their completion or closure, including by filing motions with the investigator, the prosecutor, or the court. In the event of a final refusal, the possibility of applying to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine with a constitutional complaint regarding the unconstitutionality of the legal provision as applied in such refusal cannot be excluded. There are also certain prospects for bringing this matter before the European Court of Human Rights.<\/p>\n
Thus, even in the absence of formal suspect status, a taxpayer is not without protection and may actively use procedural mechanisms to safeguard their rights and to terminate unjustified criminal prosecution.<\/p>\n