CERTAIN ISSUES OF PROSECUTION FOR COMMITMENT OF MILITARY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSES

Abstract

Introduction. Administrative responsibility of military personnel is an important tool for maintaining law and order and military discipline in the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The relevance of the study is enhanced by the conditions of martial law, which led to a rapid increase in the number of cases of military administrative offenses. In this context, there is an urgent need to ensure a balance between the severity of disciplinary requirements and compliance with fundamental human rights, which requires impeccable quality of regulatory regulation.

Purpose. The purpose of the work is a comprehensive analysis of the current legislation (in particular, the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses (CUaP) and departmental acts of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine to identify legal conflicts and gaps in the procedure for holding military personnel accountable for military administrative offenses. The study is aimed at clarifying the legal nature of existing contradictions, based on which an attempt is made to provide scientifically substantiated proposals for improving the legislation in order to implement the principle of legal certainty.

Materials and methods. The study is based on an analysis of the provisions of the CuaP, the Disciplinary Statute of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the departmental regulatory framework, in particular Orders of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine No. 329 dated 10/23/2021 and No. 604 dated 11/29/2018. The methodological basis is made up of general scientific and special methods: system-structural analysis was used to study the correlation of the norms of the law and subordinate acts; comparative legal and historical methods etc.

Results. The analysis revealed a significant legal inconsistency between the Code of Administrative Offenses and departmental instructions. Article 15 of the Code of Administrative Offenses establishes a special procedure for the liability of military personnel (under disciplinary statutes), however, Part 1 of this article contains a list of exceptions when liability arises on general grounds. The study revealed that military administrative offenses (Chapter 13-B of the Code of Administrative Offenses) are actually not included in this legislative list of exceptions. Instead, their consideration in a general manner (with the preparation of a protocol and judicial review) is provided for only at the level of a by-law of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine.

The author proves that such an approach contradicts the principle of legal certainty, since the procedure for bringing to responsibility should be determined by law, and not by a departmental act. The need to amend Part 1 of Article 15 of the Code of Administrative Offenses by directly including a reference to Chapter 13-B is substantiated. KUaAP.

Prospects. Further scientific research should be aimed at a detailed study of the administrative and legal status of military personnel as specific subjects of responsibility. Special attention should be paid to improving the procedural aspects of compiling protocols and collecting evidence in cases of military offenses, as well as analyzing judicial practice in order to unify approaches to considering this category of cases in conditions of ongoing armed aggression.