The purpose of the research is to provide theoretical generalization and implementation of a complex scientific and applied task on the formation of a concept of the content of the protection of human rights and freedoms as a component of the preventive function of police forces, providing the development of proposals and recommendations aimed at improving legislation and law enforcement practice. The details of police officers' activities aimed at protecting human rights and freedoms were investigated. The methodological basis of the research was the dialectical method of scientific cognition used to visualize the legal, functional, organizational and procedural aspects of the protection of human rights and freedoms in the activities of law enforcement agencies. It is concluded that the effective performance of the task of enforcing human rights and freedoms, at least by the National Police of Ukraine, to some extent depends on the mechanism of adequate legal regulation of these activities by means of consistent laws and other normative legal acts.

The article examines the issue of the practical implementation of the possibility of continuing the preventive measure chosen during the pre-trial investigation in the form of detention under martial law, which is connected with the application by the courts of the provisions of Part 5 of Article 615 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. It has been proven that the presence of conceptual conditions defined by this norm of the criminal procedural law is necessary for the court to apply the provisions of Part 5 of Article 615 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which in turn cannot be evaluated abstractly and must be applied based on the court’s preliminary assessment of the impossibility of conducting a preliminary trial meeting. A systematic analysis of criminal procedural legislation indicates that the implementation of criminal proceedings under martial law, given the specifics of the regulatory regulation of this process, led to the establishment of special procedures, including the application of the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine as norms of direct action, however, given the novelty of the procedure, in the event that the intention of the legislator was different, all these provisions should be unified. It is emphasized that the grounds for applying the provisions of Part 5 of Article 615 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine must be set out in the court decision, with the definition of its mandatory elements, which allow the possibility to assess the correctness of the application of the provisions of Part 5 of Article 615 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine in the case of an earlier automatic extension selected preventive measure in the form of detention, in particular, regarding the impossibility of holding a preparatory court session; presence of a preventive measure in the form of detention selected during the pre-trial investigation; expiration of the decision on choosing a preventive measure in the form of detention. A mandatory element is also the establishment of the period for which the preventive measure is considered extended and which cannot exceed two months from the date of such resolution. Key words: preventive measure in the form of detention, preparatory court session, martial law.