Особливості кримінальної відповідальності за перешкоджання професійній діяльності журналістів

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to carry out a legal analysis of the objective side of the crime under art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, to determine the limits of admissibility in the performance of professional duties of a journalist, as a condition for recognizing his activity as legitimate in the case of bringing those responsible to criminal responsibility for encroaching on the activity of the journalist. Methodology. The methodological toolkit was chosen in view of the goal, the specificity of the object and the subject of the research. The methodological basis of the study is a set of methods of scientific cognition, among which the dialectical method of cognition occupies the main place. The system of methods of scientific cognition was used: formal logic (deduction, induction, synthesis, abstraction, analogy) – to clarify the content of the issues under consideration; theoretical – in the process of research of scientific and educational-methodical literature; empirical – in the analysis of investigative and judicial practice; method of systematic analysis – to outline directions for improving the provisions of the Criminal Code of Ukraine and practice of its application. Scientific novelty is due to the need to improve the content of art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine regarding the definition of forms of unlawful influence on journalists, in order to facilitate the application of the mentioned criminal law norms in law enforcement practice, confusion in the choice of means of prevention of these crimes. The urgency of investigating the bodies of pre-trial investigation, the prosecutor’s office, the court, the legitimacy of the actions of the journalists who have been injured in the sense of art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine in the performance of their professional duties. Theoretical and practical proposals made to increase the effectiveness of the application of the provisions of art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which qualifies these crimes. Conclusions. Research into the practice of interpreting forms of obstruction to the legitimate professional activity of journalists has revealed some problematic aspects of this issue. It is stated that the disposition of art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine of several independent forms – obstruction, influence, persecution, etc., creates difficulties in the application of the said norm and in the choice of means of prevention of these crimes. At the same time, given the wide range of professional activities of journalists, it is not advisable, and it is unlikely, to determine in art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine all forms of unlawful influence on the journalist, and the use by the legislator of the generalized phrase «any other obstacle» indicates the possibility of qualification under this article and other illegal actions against the journalist. There is also an urgent need to change approaches to evaluating the actions of the journalist and the person who obstructed his or her legitimate activities. It is a matter of proper assessment by the bodies of pre-trial investigation, prosecutor’s office and court of the circumstances of the crime under art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, with regard to clarifying the legality of the journalist’s actions. In particular in: determining the public interest pursued by the injured journalist (the limits of interference with the private and family life of a person); establishing the presence/absence of an editorial assignment, media broadcasting license. The activities of authorized entities must comply with European standards in the field of freedom of speech, take into account the role of journalists in a democratic society, and not restrict the statutory rights of media workers and the guarantees of their professional activity established by international and national legislation. Keywords: media; journalist; journalist’s rights; legitimate professional activity; obstruction; harassment; illegal influence; qualification; investigation.