How to challenge an investigator’s or prosecutor’s inaction

When this is needed

Use this guide if a pre-trial in­ves­ti­ga­tion body fails to enter in­for­ma­tion in the URPTI, con­sid­er a motion, take a pro­ce­dur­al action, or issues a res­o­lu­tion that may be ap­pealed to an in­ves­ti­gat­ing judge. A common example is when a report of a crim­i­nal offense was ac­cept­ed, but no URPTI extract or clear pro­ce­dur­al re­sponse was pro­vid­ed.

In Lviv, avoid filing a general com­plaint “about the police.” The in­ves­ti­gat­ing judge reviews spe­cif­ic in­ac­tion under the Crim­i­nal Pro­ce­dure Code: what was sub­mit­ted, when the body had to act, what it failed to do, and what order the ap­pli­cant seeks.

If this con­cerns an ad­min­is­tra­tive fine, a traffic police ruling, or another matter under the Code of Ukraine on Ad­min­is­tra­tive Of­fens­es, a dif­fer­ent route may apply. See the sep­a­rate guide on chal­leng­ing an ad­min­is­tra­tive fine and the dead­line cal­cu­la­tor.

Applicable deadline or procedure

The Crim­i­nal Pro­ce­dure Code sets a 10-day dead­line to com­plain about an in­ves­ti­ga­tor’s or pros­e­cu­tor’s de­ci­sion, action, or in­ac­tion. If chal­leng­ing a res­o­lu­tion, the period runs from the day its copy is re­ceived. Use the in­ves­ti­ga­tor in­ac­tion com­plaint dead­line cal­cu­la­tor for a quick check.

Under the or­di­nary pro­ce­dure, in­for­ma­tion must be entered in the URPTI without delay and no later than 24 hours after a report or no­ti­fi­ca­tion is filed. If it is not entered, the ac­tion­able in­ac­tion arises when those 24 hours expire; that in­ac­tion is the ref­er­ence event for the 10-day com­plaint period under Article 304 of the Crim­i­nal Pro­ce­dure Code. Under Article 115, the day those 24 hours expire is ex­clud­ed when count­ing days. Waiting for a police re­sponse or later ob­tain­ing ev­i­dence of non-entry does not restart that period.

Check the timing with the URPTI entry dead­line cal­cu­la­tor and review proof of filing in the ap­pli­cant’s guide. During martial law, point 1 of part one of Article 615 of the Crim­i­nal Pro­ce­dure Code applies where there is an actual lack of tech­ni­cal access to the URPTI: the in­ves­ti­ga­tion is started by a formal res­o­lu­tion and in­for­ma­tion must be entered in the reg­is­ter at the first op­por­tu­ni­ty. Check whether that ob­sta­cle existed and whether a res­o­lu­tion was issued. Martial law alone does not remove the duty to start an in­ves­ti­ga­tion; absence of an extract does not by itself prove non-entry.

Venue depends on the pre-trial in­ves­ti­ga­tion body. A com­plaint is usually filed with an in­ves­ti­gat­ing judge at the local court as­so­ci­at­ed with that body, not simply at the ap­pli­cant’s or lawyer’s address.

How to proceed step by step

First, collect proof of filing. This may be a receipt slip, stamp, in­com­ing ref­er­ence number, postal item, elec­tron­ic con­fir­ma­tion, or another doc­u­ment. Without it, it is dif­fi­cult to show when the body’s duty to act arose.

Next, define the subject of the com­plaint. For the URPTI, de­scribe the failure to enter in­for­ma­tion after a report of a crim­i­nal offense. For a motion, iden­ti­fy the pro­ce­dur­al action not taken. For a res­o­lu­tion, attach a copy and proof of receipt.

Then cal­cu­late the dead­line for the spe­cif­ic subject of your com­plaint: for URPTI non-entry, use the in­ac­tion arising after the 24-hour period; for a res­o­lu­tion being chal­lenged, use receipt of its copy. For other forms of in­ac­tion, check the dead­line for the par­tic­u­lar pro­ce­dur­al action that was not taken. Pre­serve proof of filing and all rel­e­vant dates. If the 10-day period has expired, file a motion to restore it with the com­plaint under Ar­ti­cles 117 and 304 of the Crim­i­nal Pro­ce­dure Code, ex­plain­ing valid reasons and pro­vid­ing ev­i­dence. Learn­ing of non-entry later may support that motion, but does not au­to­mat­i­cal­ly restart or restore the period: the court as­sess­es the reasons.

Finally, prepare the com­plaint. Iden­ti­fy the body, chronol­o­gy, ap­plic­a­ble Crim­i­nal Pro­ce­dure Code pro­vi­sion, spe­cif­ic in­ac­tion, re­quest­ed order, and at­tach­ments. If filing through the elec­tron­ic court system, court reg­istry, or by mail, keep proof of the filing time.

What to check before filing

Check whether the report ac­tu­al­ly de­scribes a crim­i­nal offense. If the doc­u­ments show only a civil, family, or com­mer­cial dispute without crim­i­nal-law in­di­ca­tors, the body may contest its duty to enter in­for­ma­tion in the URPTI.

Check the court sep­a­rate­ly. In Lviv and Lviv region, dif­fer­ent in­ves­ti­ga­tion bodies may fall under the ju­ris­dic­tion of dif­fer­ent in­ves­ti­gat­ing judges. Choos­ing the wrong venue will not resolve the problem, and the com­plaint dead­line is short.

If there is a par­al­lel account freeze, en­force­ment pro­ceed­ing, or other non-crim­i­nal dispute, do not mix the reme­dies. En­force­ment matters may require a com­plaint against an en­force­ment officer, not a Crim­i­nal Pro­ce­dure Code com­plaint.

When to consult a lawyer

Consult a lawyer if the dead­line is close, you lack proof of filing, the body gave an unclear re­sponse, the matter borders on a civil dispute, or it is dif­fi­cult to iden­ti­fy the in­ves­ti­gat­ing judge. A weak com­plaint can waste time without pro­duc­ing a pro­ce­dur­al result.

For a Lviv case, a con­sul­ta­tion before filing helps check the base date, the 10-day dead­line, the URPTI 24-hour period, venue, and the relief re­quest­ed in the com­plaint.