Analysis of the legislative decision on strengthening criminal liability for looting

Abstract

The article is devoted to the analysis of the legislative decision on strengthening criminal liability for looting. According to the results of the study, firstly, he presented his own vision of those controversial provisions, the mastery of which can cause the greatest difficulties for both ordinary citizens and law enforcement, and secondly, identified and proposed proposals to eliminate inherent shortcomings of the Act. will most likely have a negative impact on the effectiveness of the relevant criminal law prohibitions.
 In particular, it is proved that under parts four of Articles 185, 186, 187, 189, 191 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine as "committed under martial law (state of emergency)" should be qualified as the terrain and circumstances of their commission, ie whether they were directly related to the use of the mentioned conditions (in case of martial law or state of emergency).
 At the same time, it was concluded that the differentiation of liability should be associated only with the commission of criminal offenses against property in question "using the conditions of martial law or state of emergency", which should be mentioned in the improved versions of the ban in question. provisions".
 In addition, the provision is substantiated that the list of acts provided for by the Law of Ukraine of March 3, 2022, for which responsibility should be strengthened in case of their commission in martial law or state of emergency, should be supplemented by violations of Article 190 ("fraud"), 262 (" illegal possession of firearms (except smooth-bore hunting), ammunition, explosives, explosive devices or radioactive materials") and 289 ("illegal possession of a vehicle") of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.