Аннотации:
The article is devoted to the analysis of the
legislative decision on strengthening criminal
liability for looting. According to the results of the
study, firstly, he presented his own vision of those
controversial provisions, the mastery of which can
cause the greatest difficulties for both ordinary
citizens and law enforcement, and secondly,
identified and proposed proposals to eliminate
inherent shortcomings of the Act. will most likely
have a negative impact on the effectiveness of the
relevant criminal law prohibitions.
In particular, it is proved that under parts four of
Articles 185, 186, 187, 189, 191 of the Criminal Code
of Ukraine as «committed under martial law (state of
emergency)» should be qualified as the terrain and
circumstances of their commission, ie whether they were
directly related to the use of the mentioned conditions
(in case of martial law or state of emergency).
At the same time, it was concluded that the
differentiation of liability should be associated only with
the commission of criminal offenses against property in
question «using the conditions of martial law or state
of emergency», which should be mentioned in the
improved versions of the ban in question. provisions».
In addition, the provision is substantiated that the
list of acts provided for by the Law of Ukraine of March
3, 2022, for which responsibility should be strengthened
in case of their commission in martial law or state of
emergency, should be supplemented by violations
of Article 190 («fraud»), 262 (« illegal possession of
firearms (except smooth-bore hunting), ammunition,
explosives, explosive devices or radioactive materials»)
and 289 («illegal possession of a vehicle») of the
Criminal Code of Ukraine.
