The article is devoted to the problem of protection and security of a witness in criminal proceedings, as well as the study of the experience of some foreign countries in solving this problem in criminal proceedings. In particular, to determine the essence of a witness as a subject of criminal proceedings and as a carrier of evidence in criminal proceedings, a theoretical analysis of the scientific positions of individual scholars in relation to the purpose and grounds of protection and security of witnesses, and analyzes the current criminal procedure legislation in Ukraine. establish norms for ensuring the protection and security of a witness as a participant in criminal proceedings. A separate analysis of Ukraine's positive experience of some foreign countries in building a system of protection and security of witnesses in criminal proceedings. It is established that the key feature of the procedural status of a witness, which distinguishes him from other participants in criminal proceedings, in particular the victim, suspect, accused, is the statutory obligation to provide independent impartial evidence on the merits of criminal proceedings. However, this obligation of the witness must be confirmed by the state with appropriate guarantees of his safety. The legal status of a witness is a system of normative and regulatory norms of the criminal process regarding the rights, duties and limitations of liability of a person acting as a witness, for the maximum implementation of this person's socially significant function - the implementation of criminal proceedings. However, in order to carry out this function, the state is in certain cases forced (we believe that the state is obliged) to assume the duty of witness protection. It is stated that the use of international experience is invaluable for the urgent need to improve the institution of witness immunity and its protection in Ukraine. After all, at present in Ukraine there is no such system of witness protection, except that the national police and the SBU provide personal protection if necessary. Also, back in 1993, a law was passed concerning the protection of witnesses, but it does not really work and is hopelessly outdated, it should either be updated or replaced with a new one. A proposal was made to establish a witness protection service similar to NABU's independence in Ukraine. This would help avoid competition among law enforcement agencies and prevent a lack of trust in them.
1.Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy. [Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine]. URL: http://zakon1.rada.gov.ua/ cgi. 2.Zakon Ukrainy «Pro zabezpechennia bezpeky osib, yaki berut uchast u kryminalnomu sudochynstvi» [Law of Ukraine "On Ensuring the Safety of Persons Participating in Criminal Proceedings"]. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/378212#Text. 3. Makbraid Dzh.(2010). Yevropeiska konventsiia z prav liudyny ta kryminalnyi protses [European Convention on Human Rights and Criminal Procedure].K. : K.I.S., 2010. 576 p. Konventsiia pro zakhyst prav liudyny i osnovopolozhnykh svobod vid 04.11.1950. Ofitsiinyi visnyk Ukrainy. 1998. № 13; 2006. № 32. P. 270. 4. Boiarov V.I. (1999). Pro deiaki problemy zakhystu okremykh uchasnykiv kryminalnoho sudochynstva. [About some problems of protection of separate participants of criminal proceedings]. Visnyk Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy. № 5. P. 35–37. 5. Brusnytsыn L.V. (1996). Kak obezopasyt lyts, sodeistvuiushchykh uholovnomu.[How to secure criminals]. Rossyiskaia yustytsyia. № 9. P. 48–49. 6. Hryhorev F.H. (2006). Pravo svydetelia y druhykh uchastnykov uholovnoho sudoproyzvodstva na obespechenye ykh bezopasnosty. [The right of a witness and other participants in criminal proceedings to ensure their safety]. Vestnyk Moskovskoho unyversyteta. Seryia 11 «Pravo». № 3. P. 91–103. 7. Dusheiko H.O. (2004). Problemy pravovoho zabezpechennia bezpeky osib, yaki berut uchast u kryminalnomu sudochynstvi. [Problems of legal security of persons involved in criminal proceedings]. Visnyk Zaporizkoho yurydychnoho instytutu. Zaporizhzhia, № 2. P. 209–218. 8. Veselskyi V.K. (1999). Pytannia zakhystu osib, yaki maiut informatsiiu pro zlochynnu diialnist.[Issues of protection of persons who have information about criminal activity]. Pravo Ukrainy. № 7. P. 58–61. 9. Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy. [Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine]. (2012). Naukovo-praktychnyi komentar : u 2 t. / [Ie.M. Blazhivskyi, Yu.M. Hroshevyi, Yu.M. Domin ta in.] ; za zah. red. V.Ia. Tatsiia, V.P. Pshonky, A.V. Portnova. Kh. T. 2. 664 p. 10. Good practices for the protection of witnesses in criminal proceedings involving organized crime [Good practices for the protection of witnesses in criminal proceedings involving organized crime]. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. New York : UNITED NATIONS. (2008). 112 p. Federal Rules of Evidence. (2015). URL: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre. 11. Barannik R.V. (2002). Pravo osoby na svobodu vid samovykryttia, vykryttia chleniv yii simi chy blyzkykh rodychiv u kryminalnomu protsesi Ukrainy [The right of a person to freedom from self-disclosure, exposing members of his family or close relatives in the criminal process of Ukraine]: dys. … kand. yuryd. nauk. Zaporizhzhia. 235p. 12. Belkova O.V. (2005). Pravovyi status svidka u kryminalnomu protsesi Ukrainy [Legal status of a witness in the criminal process of Ukraine]: dys. … kand.. yuryd. nauk / O.V. Belkova. Kh. 215p. 13. Maryniv V.I. (1997). Pryntsyp nedotorkanosti osoby ta yoho normatyvnyi zmist. Materialy naukovopraktychnoi konferentsii “Teoretychni ta praktychni pytannia realizatsii Konstytutsii Ukrainy: Problemy, dosvid, perspektyvy”. [The principle of inviolability of the person and its normative content. Proceedings of the scientific-practical conference "Theoretical and practical issues of implementation of the Constitution of Ukraine: Problems, experience, prospects."]. Kyiv. Kharkiv: Pravo, 212p. 14. Bastrыkyn A.Y.(1986). Vzaymodeistvye sovetskoho uholovno-protsessualnoho y mezhdunarodnoho prava.[Interaction of Soviet criminal procedure and international law]. L.: Yzdatelstvo Lenynhradskoho unta, 136 p.