Gaps in the application of the measure of restraint in the form of home arrest in criminal proceedings

This article is devoted to the problems of applying house arrest in domestic criminal proceedings. Statistics show that the use of this measure of restraint is small in contrast to detention. Normative fixing of the specified measure of restraint in the criminal procedure legislation allows to speak about humanization of criminal policy, and the examined measure of restraint had to become acceptable alternative to detention as also significantly restricts freedom of the person, answering the purposes of application of measures of restraint in criminal process, in particular the person constantly is in premises, with installation of the specialized equipment, its communication with the third parties including by means of telephone or other communication can be limited by court, as well as his presence outside the premises, whether it is a walk or a visit to the store for the purpose of purchasing food and other necessities, receiving household and other necessary services. The article presents the features of the court’s resolution of applications for election and extension of the term of detention under house arrest, as well as a number of problems that arise in practice when applying house arrest. In particular, this is the imperfection of control over the person in respect of whom house arrest was elected, determining the place of serving a preventive measure, establishing certain prohibitions and their implementation in practice, and their resolution will increase the statistics of the use of house arrest in practice.