ПЕНАЛІЗАЦІЯ НЕЗАКОННОГО ВТРУЧАННЯ В РОБОТУ АВТОМАТИЗОВАНОЇ СИСТЕМИ ДОКУМЕНТООБІГУ СУДУ В УКРАЇНІ

Abstract

In the article the authors consider the institute of penalization in general and penalization of illegal interference in the work of the automated document management system of the court in Ukraine in particular. It is indicated that the study of sanctions of criminal law, and in particular Art. 376-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which provides for criminal liability for unlawful interference in the automated document management system of the court, allows us to conclude that the legislator does not always correctly correlate the public danger of an illegal act, its consequences for the state and society. According to the author, the concept of penalization is somewhat narrower than penalization. This can be explained by the fact that criminal law, despite all its humanity, is an instrument, first of all, punitive, and only then educational influence. In most cases, correction is achieved through punishment in its purest form. That is why the measures and means of alternative work with a criminal offender, which consists in release from punishment are very limited. Therefore, depenalization is a mirror image of penalization, in its narrower sense. The author's definition of penalization is offered, which should be understood as a component of criminal law policy, which is a set of mutually agreed principles, laid down in the content of punishment and implemented in the form of sanctions of the Special Part of criminal law. It is concluded that currently the types of penalties provided for illegal interference in the work of the automated document management system of the court are not fully effective and do not correspond to the level of public danger of the act. An important way of development for the legislator is to change the approach to the subjects of such an offense and to establish the features of its commission, all the necessary components of the subjective side of the criminal offense. Currently, one of the effective ways to solve this situation is to differentiate criminal liability depending on the type of subject (general or special).