THE STATE OF RESEARCH OF THE CONCEPT OF OFFENSE IN THE CRIMINAL LAW DOCTRINE OF UKRAINE

Authors

  • Iryna Tsyb Dnipropetrovsk State University of Internal Affairs

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31733/2078-3566-2023-3-334-340

Keywords:

definition, law, statute, crime, authority of the state, state symbols, insult, ridicule, identity, criminalization.

Abstract

As of now, not only in Ukraine but all over the world, the issue of combating crime has become a pressing matter for state authorities and local self-government bodies. In Ukraine's domestic policy, a top priority is the resolution of this issue in its digital equivalent by reducing the percentage of crime statistics related to public order and morals, as well as crimes against the authority of state bodies, local selfgovernment bodies, and citizens' associations. Recently, there has been a widespread practice in pre-trial investigation bodies of detecting and investigating criminal offenses specified in Article 297 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine and Article 338 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. This necessitated the development and approval of an appropriate methodology for investigating these categories of criminal offenses, with a focus on the legal and criminological characteristics of the crimes. The basis of the content analysis in this article is the examination of the practical activities of pre-trial investigation bodies regarding the mentioned categories of crimes from January 1, 2015, to February 1, 2022. It also includes an analysis of the provisions of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (2001) and the Criminal Code of the Ukrainian SSR (1960), which allowed for the identification of characteristic features of these crimes. The article emphasizes that the accurate definition of the elements of a crime, particularly the establishment of its subjective and objective aspects, influences the further qualification of the criminal offense. Therefore, in order to correctly define the elements of crimes involving insult, it is necessary to develop a legal interpretation of the term insult. It is important to consider that the subjective side of a crime consists of mandatory and optional elements. Mandatory elements include guilt, which can be expressed as intent or negligence according to Article 23 of the Criminal Code. Optional elements include motive and purpose. Taking into account the specifics of the criminal offenses outlined in Article 297 and Article 338 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, it can be said that they are crimes with a formal composition, and a characteristic feature of these crimes is guilt in the form of direct intent. The perpetrator of the crime understands the socially dangerous nature of their actions and intends to commit them. Based on judicial practice, it has been established that in most cases of the mentioned category of crimes in court rulings, the courts focus on the fact that the perpetrator of the crime has intentional guilt (64,5 % of cases). Additionally, there are no instances in judicial practice where it has been established that a person who committed an act of insulting the state symbols of Ukraine or a grave acted negligently. It has been determined that a mandatory element of the subjective side of the composition of a socially dangerous act involving insult to the state symbols of Ukraine or a grave is guilt expressed in the form of intent, specifically direct intent.

References

1. Карман В. В. Суб’єктивна сторона наруги над державними символами України. Науковий вісник публічного та приватного права. 2019. Вип. 6. С. 261–267.

2. Академічний тлумачний словник української мови. URL: http://sum.in.ua/s/narugha (дата звернення: 26.05.2023).

3. Кримінальний кодекс Української РСР. URL: https://ips.ligazakon.net/document/view/kd0006?an=480034&ed=1968_10_02 (дата звернення: 28.05.2023).

4. Кримінальний кодекс України. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2341-14#Text (дата звернення: 28.05.2023).

5. Навроцький В. О. Основи кримінально-правової кваліфікації. Юрінком Інтер, 2006.704 с.

6. Коржанський М. Й. Кваліфікація злочинів : навч. посіб. 2-ге вид. Київ : Атіка, 2002. 640 с.

7. Вереша Р. В. Умисел і його види (коментар до ст. 24 КК України). Вісник Академії адвокатури України. 2010. № 3(19). С. 73–82.

8. Науково-практичний коментар Кримінального кодексу України станом на 20 січня 2018 року / за заг. ред. Глунька В. В. Київ : Видавничий дім «Професіонал», 2018. 784 с.

9. Куц В., Бондаренко О. Зміст вини у злочинах з формальним складом. Вісник Національної академії прокуратури України. 2009. № 3. С. 36–40.

10. Напиральська В. І. Проблемні питання кваліфікації злочинів за статтею 338 Кримінального кодексу України. URL: http://law.stateandregions.zp.ua/archive/1_2013/37.pdf (дата звернення: 15.06.2023).

11. Науково-практичний коментар до Кримінального кодексу України / за заг. ред. П. П. Андрушка, В. Г. Гончаренка, Є. В. Фесенка. 2-е вид., перероб. та допов. Київ : Дакор, 2008.1428 с.

12. Сафонов Д. А. Криміналістична характеристика наруги над могилою. Право і Безпека. 2009. № 4. С. 130–134.

13. Про судову практику у справах про хуліганство : Постанова Пленуму Верховного Суду України від 22.12.2006 р. № 10. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/main/va010700-06 (дата звернення: 20.06.2023).

14. Кримінальний кодекс України від 05.04.2001. URL: http://zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2341-14 (дата звернення: 20.06.2023).

Published

2024-10-08

How to Cite

Tsyb, I. (2024). THE STATE OF RESEARCH OF THE CONCEPT OF OFFENSE IN THE CRIMINAL LAW DOCTRINE OF UKRAINE. Scientific Bulletin of Dnipro State University of Internal Affairs, (3), 334–340. https://doi.org/10.31733/2078-3566-2023-3-334-340