The article examines some elements of the objective side of the composition of the criminal offense provided for in Part 1 of Art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which describes the obstruction of the legitimate professional activity of journalists. Three forms of obstruction of journalistic activity were considered: 1) intentional obstruction of the legitimate professional activity of journalists, including in one of the ways described in the criminal law (Part 1 of Article 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 2) influencing a journalist to prevent him from fulfilling his professional duties (part 2 of Article 171 of Ukraine); 3) persecution of a journalist in connection with his legitimate professional activity (Part 2 of Article 171 of Ukraine). It is emphasized that the objective side of the investigated criminal offense consists of socially dangerous actions (actions or inactions), which limit the possibility or even make it impossible for journalists to fulfill their professional. Three main methods of criminally unlawful obstruction of a journalist’s activity, which is prescribed in Part 1 of Art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, are considered: 1) illegal seizure of materials and technical means collected, processed, and prepared by a journalist, which the journalist uses in connection with his professional activity; 2) illegal denial of journalist’s access to information; 3) illegal prohibition of coverage of certain topics, showing of certain persons, criticism of the subject of authority. It is emphasized that the current criminal law enshrines a wide list of actions that can be considered obstruction, taking into account the wording “any other intentional obstruction.” This makes it possible to cover various practical situations in which obstacles are created for journalists in the performance of their professional duties. The article separately analyzes the normative definitions governing the confiscation of property and the specifics of denial of access to information, as well as examples of judicial practice illustrating the illegal seizure of materials and other restrictions on the professional activities of journalists. Special attention is paid to the interpretation of concepts related to the ban on coverage of certain topics or criticism of subjects of authority; situations, where such prohibitions may manifest themselves in the form of state censorship or other illegal influences, are also described. The author substantiates the need to optimize the norms of the law and exclude unnecessary repetitions, such as the use of the term “illegal”, in order to avoid tautology and improve guidelines for law enforcement. The conclusions emphasize the importance of improving the practice of applying criminal law and the possible directions of such improvement in order to ensure the protection of journalists’ rights and freedom of speech in Ukraine.
Read full abstract