Prosecutor’s office as a control and supervisory body of the state: problems of administrative status

Abstract

The article provides a comprehensive analysis of the administrative status of the prosecutor’s office as the leading control and supervisory body of the state in the context of modern challenges of legal regulation and the organization of its functioning.

The purpose of the study is to identify and systematize the main problems related to the institutional independence of the prosecutor’s office, its accountability in a democratic society, interaction with other state bodies, as well as the implementation of international standards in national legislation.

The methodological basis of the study is based on the application of general scientific and special legal methods, in particular analysis, comparative legal approach, systemic method, as well as methods of generalization and forecasting. Within the framework of the work, a study of the provisions of national legislation, international legal acts and scientific works of leading scientists in the field of administrative law was carried out. Special attention is paid to the analysis of the administrative and legal status of the prosecutor’s office in Ukraine with the involvement of a comparative analysis of the functioning of similar institutions in France, Germany and Poland.

The results of the study showed that, despite the reforms implemented, a number of fundamental problems remain unresolved. In particular, the imperfection of the legal mechanisms for ensuring the independence of prosecutors, the uncertainty of the administrative and legal functions of the prosecutor’s office in the context of its interaction with other state authorities, as well as the insufficient implementation of European standards in the activities of the prosecutor’s office of Ukraine were revealed. It was established that the review of the administrative status of the prosecutor’s office is a necessary condition for increasing the effectiveness of its control and supervisory functions.

The conclusions emphasize the expediency of improving the legislative regulation of the administrative status of the prosecutor’s office, taking into account the best international practices and modern challenges in the field of public administration. It is proposed to introduce a system for monitoring the integrity of the prosecutor’s corps, increase the level of transparency of the prosecutor’s office activities, as well as optimize the coordination procedures between the prosecutor’s office and other state institutions in order to strengthen the rule of law and effectively implement control and supervisory functions.