Liability for offenses related to interference with the activities of judges in Ukraine.

Abstract

Only the combination of two processes - criminalization and penalization - will make it possible to create an appropriate legal prerequisite for effective counteraction to a certain type of crime. The purpose of this article is to determine the forms and content of criminal liability for offenses related to encroachment on the activities of judges in Ukraine, their normative reflection and practical implementation. The analysis of sanctions of the criminal law norms on responsibility for encroachment on the activities of judges in Ukraine was carried out taking into account three main components: 1) adequacy and proportionality of the types and sizes of punishments established in the sanctions, to the nature and degree of public danger of the corresponding criminal offense; 2) taking into account the system-legal connections that arise between criminal law norms in terms of their sanctions, because the norms on responsibility for encroachment on the activities of judges are not unique and isolated; 3) the practice of using by the courts of Ukraine the possibilities of criminal-legal influence, which is laid down in the sanctions constructed by the legislator in the analyzed criminal-law norms. It has been established that the analysis of criminalization of encroachments on the activities of judges in Ukraine makes it possible to affirm the dependence of the level and intensity of repression on the type of norms in which the relevant sanctions are established. The legislator provides the law enforcer with a fairly wide arsenal of tools for criminal and legal influence on persons found guilty of assaulting judges in connection with their administration of justice. The article reveals the inconsistency of sanctions for similar (analogous) criminal offenses. This can be corrected in two main ways: 1) point changes in the criminal legislation, aimed at systematic harmonization of relevant sanctions; 2) changing the approach to the formation of criminal legislation as a whole, excluding unsubstantiated special norms and using other means of differentiating criminal responsibility. The practice of applying criminal legislation makes it possible to check the adequacy of sanctions only for one offense defined in Art. 377 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine «Threat or violence against a judge, people’s assessor or juror». Empirical research provides grounds for concluding that the appropriate sanction is adequate.