Review

The article deals with legal analysis of sanctions under articles 371–375 of the Criminal Code providing the liability for affecting procedural rights and interests of a suspect, accused. The author has studied the specific content of sanctions for crimes affecting procedural rights and interests of a suspect, accused; established certain patterns and drawbacks of imposing sanctions in norms provided by articles 371–375 of the Criminal Code. Herewith, it was stated that the content of sanctions may be significantly reduced in case of commitment of crime by such categories of subjects of crimes. Court is deprived from the possibility to impose under Part 1 of Article 374 of the Criminal Code such type of punishment as correctional labour, since, pursuant to Part 2 of Article 57 of the Criminal Code such type of punishment may not be imposed on pregnant women and women on maternity leave, as well as persons of retirement age and military servants, persons of ordinary and management staff of the State Service of Special Communications and Information Protection of Ukraine, officials of law-enforcement bodies, judges, prosecutors. Besides, court may not impose arrest provided in Part 1 of Article 374 of the Criminal Code as a type of basic punishment as for pregnant women and women, who have children having children under 7 years of age, pursuant to Part 3 of Article 60 of the Criminal Code. Pursuant to Part 3 of Article 61 of the Criminal Code court shall not impose restraint of liberty, provided by Part 1 of Article 374 of the Criminal Code, on minors, pregnant women and women having children under 14 years of age, persons of retirement age, military servants in active service, and persons with the first or second degree disability. Therefore, imprisonment is a universal type of punishment for such category of persons. Thus, sanction, which includes alternative types of punishment turns into «single-source».

Features of the imposition of punishment for crimes affecting procedural rights and interests of a suspect, accused, shall be considered through the prism of answers to the questions about: a) observance of the first general rule of the imposition of punishment under Item 1 of Part 1 of Article 65 of the Criminal Code by courts, as well as acting outside the sanctions in separate criminal and legal situations; b) taking into account practical circumstances characterizing the gravity of committed crime, the identity of perpetrator, mitigating or aggravating circumstances – the motivation of punishment measure chosen by court; c) taking into account the aim of punishment determined in criminal law, while choosing certain punishment. Therefore, the analysis of case law in cases on crimes provided by Articles 371–375 of the Criminal Code testifies the fact that the motivation of chosen punishment by courts in many cases is insufficient and is limited to the direct reproduction of provision of Item 3 of Part 1 of Article 65 of the Criminal Code without filling them (the provisions) with specific content. Especially, it concerns taking into account the gravity of committed crime.

The purpose of this article is to consider the issue of punishment for crimes affecting procedural rights and interests of suspect, accused.

References

1. 1. Konstytutsiia Ukrainy [Constitution of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [the Law of Ukraine] vid 28 chervnia 1996 r. № 254k/96-VR. data zvernennia 10.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
2. Kryminalnyi kodeks Ukrainy [The Criminal Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [the Law of Ukraine] vid 05.04.2001 p. № 2341-II. data zvernennia 10.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
3. Postanova Plenumu Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy vid 24 zhovtnia 2003 r. № 7 «Pro praktyku pryznachennia sudamy kryminalnoho pokarannia» [Resolution of the Supreme Court of Ukraine of 24.04.2003
4. r. Number 7 «About the practice of imposing criminal punishment by courts»] (2010) (in Ukrainian).
5. Postanova Plenumu Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy vid 4 chervnia 2010 r. № 7 «Pro praktyku zastosuvannia sudamy kryminalnoho zakonodavstva pro povtornist, sukupnist i retsydyv zlochyniv ta yikh pravovi naslidky» [Resolution of the Supreme Court of Ukraine of June 4, 2010, № 7 «On the Practice of the Application by the Courts of Criminal Legislation on the Repetition, Composition and Relapse of Crimes and Their Legal Implications»] (2010) (in Ukrainian).
6. Vyrok Kovpakivskoho raionnoho sudu mista Sumy vid 10 serpnia 2015 r. [The verdict of the Kovpakivsky District Court of Sumy, August 10, 2015]: sprava № 592/2136/14-к [Case № 592/2136/14-к] data zvernennia 10.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
7. Vyrok Pidhaietskoho raionnoho sudu Ternopilskoi oblasti vid 9 lypnia 2013 r. [The verdict of the Pidjaytsky District Court of Ternopil Oblast dated July 9, 2013]: sprava № 605/422/13-к. Case № 592/2136/14к. data zvernennia 10.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
8. Vyrok Kovpakivskoho raionnoho sudu m. Sumy vid 10 serpnia 2015 r. [The verdict of the Kovpakivsky District Court in Sumy August 10, 2015]: sprava № 592/2136/14-к [Case № 592/2136/14-к] 8. Vyrok Leninskoho raionnoho sudu m. Mykolaieva vid 7 liutoho 2014 r. . [The verdict of the Leninsky district court of the city of Nikolaev of February 7, 2014]: sprava № 489/9376/13-к [Case № 489/9376/13-к]. http://reyestr.court. gov.ua/Review/52249963 data zvernennia 10.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
9. Tatsii V ta inshi, Velyka ukrainska yurydychna entsyklopediia: 17 Т. [The Great Ukrainian Law Encyclopedia] (2017) (in Ukrainian).
10. Yatsenko S ta inshi, Naukovo-praktychnyi komentar do Kryminalnoho kodeksu Ukrainy [Scientific and practical commentary on the Criminal Code of Ukraine] (Kyiv, A.S.K 2005) (in Ukrainian).