Анотація

The article examines the disciplinary offense as a basis for the disciplinary liability of a prosecutor in the context of ensuring professional ethics, proper performance of official duties, and maintaining the authority of the prosecutorial system. The purpose of the article is to reveal the essence of a prosecutor’s disciplinary offense through an analysis of its features and structure.

The author emphasizes the need for a comprehensive approach to defining the content and structure of a disciplinary offense, based on the combination of legal, ethical, and functional aspects of prosecutorial activity. The article aims to clarify the concept of a prosecutor’s disciplinary offense by analyzing its essential features and structural elements, as well as to propose recommendations for improving the legislative regulation of disciplinary liability of prosecutors.

The study highlights that a disciplinary offense is a specific form of legal liability aimed not only at punishing the guilty person but also at ensuring public trust in the prosecutor’s office as an institution. The article identifies the key features that characterize a disciplinary offense of a prosecutor: an unlawful act or omission, the presence of guilt, a causal link between unlawful behavior and adverse consequences, as well as the consequences themselves (which may consist of undermining the reputation of the prosecutor’s office, loss of public trust, or creating obstacles to the administration of justice). Based on these criteria, the author proposes a definition of a prosecutor’s disciplinary offense as a culpable, unlawful, and socially dangerous act (or omission) that violates service discipline, prosecutorial ethics, and harms the authority of the prosecution service.

Particular attention is devoted to examining the structure of a prosecutor’s disciplinary offense . The article defines the range of its subjects, which includes prosecutors at all levels, and outlines the specific features of their legal status. The subjective element of the disciplinary offense is analyzed, with guilt—manifested in the form of intent or negligence, most often expressed as official carelessness—identified as its main characteristic. The content of the concepts «gross violation of prosecutorial ethics» and «gross disciplinary offense» is revealed, as these have special significance for assessing the degree of guilt of the prosecutor and determining the appropriate disciplinary sanctions.

The article also addresses the problem of legislative uncertainty in defining criteria for assessing disciplinary offenses and emphasizes the need to align national norms with international standards, particularly the recommendations of the Council of Europe and the Venice Commission on the independence of prosecutors. To increase the effectiveness of the disciplinary procedure, it is proposed to amend the Law of Ukraine «On the Prosecutor’s Office» by clarifying key definitions: «disciplinary offense of a prosecutor,» «gross disciplinary offense,» and «acts that disgrace the title of a prosecutor and may raise doubts about his or her objectivity, impartiality, and independence, as well as the integrity and incorruptibility of the prosecution service.» According to the author, such amendments would contribute to a clearer delineation between disciplinary, administrative, and criminal liability and would strengthen the guarantees of integrity and professional responsibility within the prosecutorial corps.

Key words: prosecutor, disciplinary offense, disciplinary liability of a prosecutor, composition of a prosecutor’s disciplinary offense, dismissal.