Reasonableness as a vector of proper prioritization in the «intrusive segment» of criminal proceedings

The relevance of this study is conditioned the increasing intensity of state interference with individual rights and freedoms within criminal proceedings, particularly in its intrusive segment, as well as the ongoing digitalization of procedural activity, which amplifies the risks of excessive or formalized application of procedural coercion. Formal compliance of decisions with the requirements of legality and proportionality does not always guarantee their fairness, optimality, or protection against arbitrariness, which necessitates reconsidering reasonableness as an autonomous standard of law enforcement. The purpose of the article is to provide a theoretical and legal substantiation of reasonableness as a system-forming principle of criminal proceedings, to determine its correlation with proportionality, and to justify the expediency of its normative consolidation. The methodological framework includes dialectical and systemic approaches, formal-legal analysis of procedural norms, logical methods of generalization and argumentation, as well as comparative legal analysis of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights concerning the criteria of necessity of interference and the sufficiency of its justification. The study demonstrates that proportionality constitutes a necessary but not exhaustive element of the broader standard of reasonableness, which encompasses the assessment of optimality of means, minimization of harm, proper reasoning, and the existence of effective safeguards against abuse. The concept of “digital reasonableness” is substantiated, requiring consideration not only of the scope but also of the qualitative characteristics of interference with privacy, including the technical features of access to electronic data, the duration of its storage, and the potential for secondary use. Reasonableness is defined as an indicator of procedural integrity and a mechanism for limiting discretion, transforming formally permissible interference into a model of “permissible only to the extent necessary.” The practical value of the research lies in substantiating the proposal to normatively enshrine the requirement of reasonableness as a universal criterion for assessing procedural decisions and actions in order to strengthen human rights guarantees and affirm the human-centered orientation of criminal procedure.

reasonableness; prioritization; intrusiveness; digitalization; criminal proceedings; discretion; procedural integrity