Conflict of interest of an official responsible for those apprehended According to Article 212§1 of the CPC of Ukraine, one or more officials responsible for keeping those apprehended shall be designated in the pre-trial investigation agency’s station. The only unit of the pre-trial investigation agency is the investigations unit. Therefore, responsibility for apprehended persons lies with the official of investigations unit. Even though paragraph 2 of this article states that investigators may not be designated to be responsible for keeping those apprehended, such person will still be an official of the investigations unit. As a result, the unit conducting investigation is simultaneously responsible for the persons suspected of crime. This situation creates room for abuse of rights and freedoms of an apprehended person. The legislation does not provide the manner of performing duties foreseen by the CPC of Ukraine by the official responsible for apprehended persons There are no legal regulations defining the manner in which an official responsible for apprehended persons has to record all actions involving the apprehended persons, as well as where (which registries/journals) this official has to register the apprehended person etc. Every internal affairs body has a number of registries and journals for recording information on the stay of apprehended persons at the unit and procedural actions with his/her participation. In addition, there are procedural documents to be drawn up immediately after apprehension (for instance, report on apprehension, report on personal search and inspection of belongings etc.). However, there is no “unified personal file” for recording all actions involving the apprehended persons from the onset of apprehension, including time and motives for deprivation of liberty, time of advising the person on his/her rights, recording injuries or signs of mental illnesses etc.; the time of notification of the next of kin/consul or attorney, as well as the time when they visit the apprehended person; the time when food was offered; the time of interrogation, and the time of transfer to another facility or release etc. Such unified document could ensure control of observance of the rights of apprehended persons from the moment of actual apprehension. By the way, some information related to the persons stay at the IAB can be entered into the “unified personal file” by the official responsible for apprehended persons. Shortcomings of the legislation of Ukraine on administrative detention In the case of the constitutional submission by the Ukrainian Parliament Human Rights Commissioner on constitutionality of Article 11§1(5)(8) of the Law of Ukraine “On Militsiya”, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in its decision #17-рп/2010 dated 29 June 201049 noted that “one of the elements of the rule of law is the principle of legal certainty stating that restrictions of basic rights of persons and citizens and 49 http://zakon4.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v017p710-10 98