THEORETICAL AND LEGAL FOUNDATIONS OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR THE PROCEDURAL ACTIVITIES OF BODIES AND INSTITUTIONS OF THE STATE CRIMINAL-EXECUTIVE SERVICE OF UKRAINE IN CASES OF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENCES

Abstract

Introduction. The effectiveness of the State Criminal-Executive Service of Ukraine (SCES) as a law enforcement authority is directly contingent upon the adequacy of its financial provision. Despite a considerable body of scholarly work devoted to the penitentiary system, the issue of financing the procedural component of administrative-jurisdictional activities remains insufficiently explored and fragmented. The relevance of this study is further reinforced by systemic violations identified in 2024, as well as by the discrepancy between budgetary expenditures and the actual level of institutional resourcing, which indicates a crisis in the existing model of resource management.

Purpose. The article aims to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the regulatory and legal framework and to provide a theoretical substantiation of the structure of financial provision for the procedural activities of SCES bodies within the sphere of administrative jurisdiction. It also seeks to identify deficiencies in the current model and to develop proposals for improving budgetary planning.

Materials and methods. The research is based on an analysis of the provisions of the Budget Code of Ukraine, the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offences, the Law of Ukraine “On the State Criminal-Executive Service of Ukraine”, as well as reports of the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights and data from the Prozorro platform for the period 2024–2025. The study employs system-structural analysis, formal-legal, and statistical methods.

Results. It is established that the financing of procedural needs within the SCES is carried out on a residual basis, which creates risks of reducing law enforcement procedures to mere formalities. Key categories of expenditure are identified, including documentation of offences, remuneration of specialists and interpreters, digitalisation, and ensuring the procedural rights of participants. It is demonstrated that the absence of a separate code within the economic classification of expenditures and a standardised methodology for calculating financial norms generates an environment conducive to corruption risks. The principles of financial provision are formulated as follows: targeted allocation, full cost compensation, transparency, adequacy of the resource base, and anti-corruption prevention.

Further research in this area. Further research should focus on developing a specific methodology for calculating budgetary appropriations based on the average number of administrative cases and on the implementation of EU Member States’ experience in the digital transformation of penitentiary proceedings.