{"references": ["1.\tChycha, R. P. (2010). Doslidzhennya obstavyn, shcho kharakteryzuyut\u02b9 osobu obvynuvachenoho pry obranni zapobizhnoho zakhodu [Investigation of circumstances characterizing an accused person when choosing a preventive measure]. Vid hromadyans\u02b9koho suspil\u02b9stva do pravovoyi derzhavy: Tezy dopovidey p'yatoyi Mizhnarodnoyi naukovo-praktychnoyi konferentsiyi. Kharkiv: KHNU im. Karazina (s. 176\u2013180) (in Ukr.).", "2.\tPopelyushko, V. O. (2012). Zapobizhni zakhody v novomu KPK Ukrayiny: ponyattya, meta, pidstavy, poryadok ta sub'yekty zastosuvannya [Preventive measures in the new CPC of Ukraine: concept, purpose, grounds, procedure and subjects of application]. Advokat, (9). 4\u20136 (in Ukr.).", "3.\tFomina, T. H. (2018). Obstavyny, shcho vrakhovuyut\u02b9sya pry obranni zapobizhnoho zakhodu [Circumstances that are taken into account when choosing a preventive measure]. Forum Prava, (1). 95\u2013104. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1239021 (in Ukr.).", "4.\tLukashkina, T. V. (2014). Umovy ta pidstavy zastosuvannya zapobizhnykh zakhodiv za chynnym KPK Ukrayiny [Terms and conditions of application of preventive measures under the current CPC of Ukraine]. Pravove zhyttya suchasnoyi Ukrayiny: materialy Mizhnar. nauk. konf. prof.-vykl. ta aspirant. skladu. Odesa: Feniks, T.1 (s. 683\u2013686) (in Ukr.).", "5.\tKastarnov, D. B. (2015). Znachennya obstavyn, shcho kharakteryzuyut\u02b9 osobu obvynuvachenoho, dlya obrannya zapobizhnoho zakhodu [The significance of the circumstances characterizing the person accused to choose a precautionary measure]. Yurydychnyy chasopys Natsional\u02b9noyi akademiyi vnutrishnikh sprav, (2). 100\u2013113 (in Ukr.).", "6.\tAshworth, Andrew, & Zedner, Lucia. (2015). Preventive Justice: Oxford University Press.", "7.\tSigrid van Wingerden, Johan van Wilsem & Brian D. (2016). Offender's Personal Circumstances and Punishment: Toward a More Refined Model for the Explanation of Sentencing Disparities, Justice Quarterly, 33:1, 100-133, DOI: http://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2014.902091.", "8.\tBusel, V. T. (2005). Velykyy tlumachnyy slovnyk suchasnoyi ukrayins\u02b9koyi movy [Great explanatory dictionary of modern Ukrainian language]. Kyiv., Irpin\u02b9: VTF \"Perun\" (in Ukr.).", "9.\tKushnir, L. V. (2016). Zabezpechennya zakhystu chesti, hidnosti, dilovoyi reputatsiyi ta imidzhu lyudyny v kryminal\u02b9nomu provadzhenni [Ensuring the protection of the honor, dignity, business reputation and image of a person in criminal proceedings]. Pravo i suspil\u02b9stvo, 3(1). 183\u2013187 (in Ukr.).", "10.\tTitko, I. A. (2010). Otsinni ponyattya u kryminal\u02b9no-protsesual\u02b9nomu pravi Ukrayiny: monohrafiya [Valuable concepts in the criminal-procedural law of Ukraine: monograph]. Kharkiv: Pravo (in Ukr.).", "11.\tBandurka, O. M., Blazhivs\u02b9kyy, YE. M., & Burdol\u02b9, YE. P. et. al.; Tatsiy, V. YA., Pshonka, V. P., & Portnov, A. V. (Reds.). (2012). Kryminal\u02b9nyy protsesual\u02b9nyy kodeks Ukrayiny: naukovo-praktychnyy komentar [Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine: scientific and practical comment]. u 2 t. T. 1. Kharkiv: Pravo (in Ukr.).", "12.\tPro deyaki pytannya poryadku zastosuvannya zapobizhnykh zakhodiv pid chas dosudovoho rozsliduvannya ta sudovoho provadzhennya vidpovidno do Kryminal\u02b9noho protsesual\u02b9noho kodeksu Ukrayiny [On some issues of the order of application of precautionary measures during pre-trial investigation and court proceedings in accordance with the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine]. Lyst Vyshchoho spetsializovanoho sudu Ukrayiny z roz\u2022hlyadu tsyvil\u02b9nykh i kryminal\u02b9nykh sprav vid 04.04.2013 No 511-550/0/4-13. Retrieved from: http://zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v0511740-13 (in Ukr.).", "13.\tPro sudovu praktyku zastosuvannya sudamy pershoyi ta apelyatsiynoyi instantsiy protsesual\u02b9noho zakonodavstva shchodo obrannya, prodovzhennya zapobizhnoho zakhodu u vyhlyadi trymannya pid vartoyu [On the judicial practice of the courts of the first and appellate courts of the procedural legislation on the election, the extension of the preventive measure in the form of detention]. Postanova Plenumu Vyshchoho spetsializovanoho Sudu Ukrayiny z roz\u2022hlyadu tsyvil\u02b9nykh i kryminal\u02b9nykh sprav vid 19.12.2014 No 14. Retrieved from: http://sc.gov.ua/ua/postanovi_za_2014_rik.html (in Ukr.).", "14.\tMyronenko, O. (2014). Vplyv spetsial\u02b9nykh umov zastosuvannya ta obstavyn, yaki pry ts\u02b9omu vrakhovuyut\u02b9sya, na obrannya zapobizhnoho zakhodu [The impact of special conditions of use and circumstances taken into account in the selection of a precautionary measure]. Publichne pravo, (2). 89\u201397 (in Ukr.).", "15.\tHrytsyuk, I. V. (2015). Zapobizhni zakhody v systemi zakhodiv protsesual\u02b9noho zabezpechennya uchasti osib u dosudovomu rozsliduvanni [Preventive measures in the system of measures for the procedural provision of participation of persons in pre-trial investigation]. Pravo.ua, (3). 84\u201387 (in Ukr.).", "16.\tChycha, R. P. (2012). Realizatsiya danykh pro osobu obvynuvachenoho u protsesual\u02b9nykh rishennyakh slidchoho: monohrafiya [Realization of data about the person of the accused in the procedural decisions of the investigator: monograph]. Kharkiv: SPDFO Chal\u02b9tsev O. V. (in Ukr.).", "17.\tVan\u02b9, I., & Vyshnevs\u02b9kyy A. et al. (2015). Metodychni rekomendatsiyi dlya advokativ shchodo zdiysnennya zakhystu, harantovanoho derzhavoyu: Diyi zakhysnyka pry vyrishenni pytannya pro obrannya, prodovzhennya, skasuvannya abo zminu zapobizhnoho zakhodu [Methodical recommendations for advocates for the implementation of state-guaranteed protection: The actions of the defense counsel in deciding on the choice, continuation, cancellation or modification of a preventive measure]. Knyha druha. Kharkiv: Faktor (in Ukr.).", "18.\tKastarnov, D. B. (2016). Dokazuvannya obstavyn, yaki kharakteryzuyut\u02b9 osobu obvynuvachenoho (pidozryuvanoho), u kryminal\u02b9nomu provadzhenni [Evidence of circumstances characterizing an accused person (suspect) in a criminal proceeding]. Candidate's thesis (12.00.09). Kyiv (in Ukr.)."]}

Визначені сутність та особливості збору інформації про репутацію особи як обставини, що враховується при обранні запобіжного заходу. Проаналізовані питання оцінки репутації особи в кримінальному провадженні. Досліджено окремі аспекти отримання документів, що містять інформацію про репутацію підозрюваного. Виконано аналіз вимог закону щодо вивчення репутації підозрюваного та її врахування при обранні запобіжного заходу. Зроблено висновок, за яким репутація, як обставина, що характеризує особу, має оціночний характер та підлягає обов’язковому врахуванню при прийнятті низки процесуальних рішень в кримінальному судочинстві. Проведено порівняльний аналіз окремих нормативно-правових актів, де зустрічаються поняття "репутація" та "ділова репутація". Визначено, що закон не надає поняття "репутація", але в юриспруденції існують інші варіанти використання цієї дефініції. Так, у різних нормативно-правових актах вживається поняття "ділова репутація", під якою стосовно юридичної або фізичної особи, наприклад, розуміється оцінка їх підприємницької, громадської, професійної чи іншої діяльності, яку здійснює така особа, як учасник суспільних відносин. An attempt to define the nature and characteristics of gathering information about the reputation of a person as circumstances taken into account while choosing a preventive measure is made in the article. A number of issues of assessing the reputation of a person in criminal proceedings are analyzed. Some aspects of obtaining documents that contain information about the reputation of the suspect are studied. Requirements of the law concerning the study of a suspect’s reputation and its consideration in choosing a preventive measure are analyzed. The author has made a conclusion, according to which the reputation as the fact that characterizes a person, has estimated nature and is a subject of mandatory consideration in making a number of procedural decisions in criminal proceedings. Besides, the authors have conducted a comparative analysis of some regulatory acts, where there are notions of "reputation" or "business reputation". It has been determined that the law does not provide the concept of "reputation", but there are other options in jurisprudence for using this definition. Thus, various regulatory acts use the term "business reputation". The business reputation of legal entities or individuals, for example, is understood as the assessment of their entrepreneurial, public, professional or other activity performed by such persons as participants in public relations. During the research, the authors have found out that the term "reputation" is used only by the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine only three times. Besides, all cases of the application of the term "reputation" refer to the reputation of a person – a subject of criminal proceedings, a suspect, an accused and a witness. Referring to the latter, it is necessary to pay attention to the term used by the legislator and which is in the same plane with a reputation – it is the dishonesty of a witness, which by its nature also has an estimated character. Specific features of taking into account the reputation of a suspect, an accused while choosing a preventive measure, is the fact that the duty to collect such information lies, first of all, with an investigator, a prosecutor, a judge, and the court; other interesting subjects of criminal proceedings have the right to submit documents and evidence containing such information in accordance with general procedure. The range of information that has a reputational nature is not determined by the law therefore, an investigating prosecutor, judge, and other subjects may collect and provide information, which in their opinion contains data that is reputable in nature. Such data may include characteristics, behavioral information, information from court decisions, from media, social networks, the testimony of witnesses, results of journalistic investigations, etc.