Commission, psychologist and expertise in bullying cases

The article examines certain aspects of police involvement in the work of commissions investigating cases of bullying, the involvement of psychologists, and the conduct of expert examinations in proceedings related to bullying in educational institutions. It is determined that the commission is created with the aim of preventing and overcoming manifestations of bullying in educational institutions, and therefore its decisions are of a recommendatory nature and are not key evidence in the proceedings. It is emphasised that it is the police officer who carries out the initial legal assessment of the act, and the final decision is made by the court. The correlation between the commission’s working period and the period for drawing up a report on an administrative offence is analysed, which necessitates prompt and reasonable action by the police officer, as well as their timely and effective response to incidents of bullying without waiting for the commission’s decision. Particular attention is paid to the role of the psychologist. It is concluded that the involvement of a psychologist in bullying cases ensures compliance with child-friendly justice standards, can help to prove the objective side of the offence, and can also form an adequate evidentiary basis. The expediency of developing a standard psychologist’s conclusion, which would contain a unified title, structure, assessment of the behaviour of the parties to the conflict, as well as the creation of a mechanism for involving specialists through a system of free legal aid, following the example of a pilot project involving psychologists in criminal proceedings involving minors and juveniles, is justified. The article examines certain aspects of the participation of police officers, psychologists and experts in proceedings related to bullying in educational institutions. It is determined that the commission is created with the aim of preventing and overcoming manifestations of bullying in educational institutions, and therefore its decisions are advisory in nature and are not binding. The article analyses court practice regarding the appointment of expert examinations in bullying cases. It is proven that expert examinations should only be appointed in exceptional cases when it is really necessary for an objective clarification of the circumstances of the case. Such cases include situations where there are doubts about the sanity of a person or the need to determine a child’s ability to understand the nature of their actions, in particular when the child has not reached the age of administrative responsibility and the report is drawn up against one of their legal representatives. Based on the study, it is proposed to amend Article 38 of the Code of Administrative Offences and increase the period for imposing administrative penalties to six months.