CHANGES TO THE CRIMINAL CODE UNDER MARTIAL LAW: DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

Abstract

The article is devoted to the analysis of changes to the Criminal Code of Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Code) introduced during martial law. Attention is focused on the importance of implementing a criminal law policy in the state aimed at countering criminal manifestations in society under martial law. The ineffectiveness of some provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure in modern conditions is argued. The need and reasons for changes to the criminal legislation, which provide for harsher punishments compared to peacetime, are substantiated. Their extreme relevance, effectiveness and significance in the conditions of martial law have been proven. The article draws attention to such a shortcoming of the criminal law policy as the failure to take into account the commission of fraud in the conditions of war or state of emergency. Sufficient reasons are given to believe that in such conditions the risk of committing this criminal offense increases significantly. Therefore, an opinion is expressed regarding the expediency of including in the list of acts, the responsibility for which should be increased in case of their commission in the conditions of war or state of emergency, encroachments provided for in Article 190 of the Criminal Code. The debatable question regarding the identity of the wording “using the conditions of martial law or state of emergency” as an aggravating circumstance and committing the corresponding acts “under the conditions of martial law” was considered and an attempt was made to distinguish between these two concepts. It is clarified that the changes regarding the absence of criminal liability for the use of firearms against persons who commit armed aggression against Ukraine, if such weapons are used in accordance with the requirements of the Law, actually clarify certain provisions of Chapter VIII of the Criminal Code “Circumstances Excluding the Criminal Illegality of the Act”. The need to clarify the content of articles 435-1 (“Insulting the honor and dignity of a serviceman, threatening a serviceman”) and 436-2 (“Justification, recognition as legitimate, denial of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, glorification of its participants”) of the CC due to their limited application is emphasized in the case of involvement in hostilities on the side of the Russian Federation and other countries, and at the same time, the serviceman of Ukraine will carry out measures to ensure national security and defense, repulse and deter armed aggression of other states. It is proposed to apply the more general term “aggressor state”.