46.4. A necessary condition for a personal search and inspection of belongings is:
UAПри особистому огляді і огляді речей необхідною умовою є:
Question without image
This exam question from the driver’s course concerns not so much the traffic rules themselves as the legal safeguards during interactions with authorized bodies. In the theoretical exam, such topics test whether future drivers understand their rights and the procedures that limit possible abuses during procedural actions, particularly when it comes to the inspection of a person or their belongings.
It is important to understand that the Traffic Rules of Ukraine do not establish the procedure for conducting a personal search or inspection of belongings, so this question actually tests knowledge from the basics of law section, which is included in the driving school curriculum. The requirements for such a procedure are defined by administrative legislation (in particular, the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses), where the presence of two attesting witnesses is a key condition for legality: attesting witnesses act as independent, disinterested persons who confirm that the inspection was conducted transparently and without violations.
When comparing the options, it is specifically the participation of two attesting witnesses that corresponds to the procedural logic of protecting rights: one attesting witness does not provide sufficient objectivity, and the wording about "two witnesses" confuses the concepts, since a witness is usually an accidental observer, whereas attesting witnesses are specifically involved to document the course of the action. The requirement for "two police officers" also does not replace attesting witnesses, because an additional officer is not an independent party and therefore does not perform the external control function that the law assigns specifically to attesting witnesses.
Traffic Rules of Ukraine: Provisions regarding “personal inspection” and “inspection of belongings”
The Traffic Rules of Ukraine do not contain clauses that define the procedural order of “personal inspection” and “inspection of belongings” (in particular, the requirement for the mandatory presence of witnesses). Such conditions are established not by the Traffic Rules, but by the norms of administrative legislation (Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses – KUoAP).
Article 264 of the KUoAP (Personal inspection and inspection of belongings)
“Personal inspection is carried out by a person of the same gender as the person being inspected and in the presence of two witnesses of the same gender.”
“Inspection of belongings is carried out in the presence of two witnesses.”
“A protocol is drawn up for personal inspection and inspection of belongings, or an appropriate entry is made in the protocol on an administrative offense or in the protocol on administrative detention.”
Thus, the correct answer is “The presence of two witnesses,” given that the Traffic Rules do not regulate the procedure for personal inspection and inspection of belongings, and the mandatory participation of two witnesses is directly established by Article 264 of the KUoAP.
When it comes to a personal search or the inspection of belongings, this is not a simple “check,” but a procedural action that can significantly affect a person’s rights. That is why the law establishes clear conditions under which such a search is permitted, to prevent abuse and disputes about what exactly happened during the inspection.
One of the key guarantees of legality is the participation of witnesses. Witnesses are not random bystanders, but specially involved impartial persons who confirm the fact and procedure of the inspection. Their presence is needed to ensure that the actions of the authorized person are transparent, and that the results of the search can be objectively confirmed in case of a complaint or legal review.
According to the requirements of legislation on administrative offenses, a personal search (and, accordingly, the inspection of belongings during it) is carried out in the prescribed manner, and the mandatory condition is the presence of two witnesses. This rule acts as a procedural “safeguard”: two independent people can confirm that the search was conducted properly, without pressure or the planting of foreign objects, and that only what was actually found was seized.
For practical understanding: if an authorized official conducts a search of a citizen’s pockets, bag, or other belongings, then two witnesses must be present during this action and can attest that the procedure was not violated. That is why options such as “one witness is enough” or “it can be done without outsiders” do not meet the procedural requirements for this type of search.
Therefore, the correct answer is "The presence of two witnesses," since a personal search and inspection of belongings is a procedural action that, by law, is conducted only with the participation of two impartial witnesses to ensure legality and objective confirmation of actions.