Document substituting the indictment in the scope of obligation of effective investigation

Prosecution phase begins with the acceptance by the court of the indictment issued by the public prosecutor who has reached sufficient suspicion that a crime has been committed. Some laws on criminal procedure stipulate regulations contrary to this rule. Referring to Supreme Criminal Tribunal, decision to final investigation about certain public officials, crime report, trail, complaint submit to the enforcement court and foreign plea are documents substituting the indictment. These documents differ from the indictment in that they have the power to directly initiate a public prosecution without the need to be accepted by the court as there is no stage of assessment of accusation and the public prosecutor is not involved in the investigation phase. In the case of a public prosecution initiated by documents substituting the indictment, investigators other than the public prosecutor conduct the investigation. In addition, since the regulations in the law are extremely incomplete, the solution of the problem by analogy has been adopted by the practice. However, the issue of whether the conditions of analogy are sufficient for the application in this procedure has not been examined. Therefore, there is a need to fill the gap in the literature. In the study, the issue is examined on the basis of the basic principles of criminal procedure law and the obligation of effective investigation. There are many problems such as the non-returnability of the documents substitutes the indictment, the fact that they don't have the effect of suspension of prescription, the fact that the investigation is carried out by non-lawyers, and the fact that people are directly put into the status of defendant without being labelled as suspects. Taking into account the examples of comparative law, the procedure of filing a public case with a document substitutes the indictment has been evaluated and solutions have been proposed for de lege ferenda.