PROBLEMS RELATING TO PETTY HOOLINESS AND THE RIGHT OF A PERSON TO EXPRESS POLITICAL OPINIONS

Abstract

Abstract. The article, based on the application of scientific methods of analysis, synthesis, classification, description, induction and deduction, analyzes the complexity of qualifying petty hooliganism in the context of the right to self-expression and the expression of a person’s political views, and also analyzes the practice of the European Court of Human Rights on this issue. In addition, ways to solve the problem of the difficulty of qualifying petty hooliganism, which is related to the right to express political views of a person, are proposed, as well as a comparison is made between hooliganism, which is a criminal offense, and petty hooliganism, which falls under the concept of an administrative offense. In particular, the article emphasizes the problem of the «evaluative concept» of «petty hooliganism», as well as the difficulty of determining the appropriate sanction for committing such an act. In addition, it is emphasized that a special role is played by the purpose of committing such actions, as well as the identity of the possible subject of the offense. The article also examines the concept of «law and order», which is implied in Article 173 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses. The absolute necessity of conducting regular and mandatory training for judges on the above-mentioned issues is emphasized, because hooliganism and petty hooliganism, by their legal nature, cannot be absolutely clearly defined only by a normative document. Thus, this duty belongs to refereeing practice, and therefore the correct decision requires special refereeing skills, which can be developed thanks to special training activities. In our opinion, taking into account Ukraine’s desire to join the European Union, as well as the goal of our state to support its democracy and high standards for justice in national courts. It is also necessary to highlight the unprecedented demand of Ukrainian society for justice and fairness, as well as its love for freedom and hatred for groundless «disproportionate» restrictions. Thus, in our opinion, the topic of this article is particularly relevant today.