Засуджений та особа, яка відбуває покарання, як суб’єкти ухилення від відбування покарання, не пов’язаного з позбавленням волі: нотатки на полях судового рішення

Abstract

Одним із принципів кримінальної відповідальності є її невідворотність, що забезпечує ефективність застосування кримінально-правового реагування на злочин, вчинений особою. Зазначений принцип пов’язаний із іншими принципами кримінального права. Він стосується й загальноправових принципів, до яких, зокрема, належать верховенство права та законність. На заваді реалізації кожного з указаних принципів стоїть “термінологічне невігластво” та (або) “термінологічне зловживання” законодавця, який нехтує дотриманням правил нормотворчої техніки, що розроблені та розвиваються у сучасній правовій доктрині. Подекуди використання законодавцем, здавалося б, усталеної термінології може викликати зворотний ефект – норму права на практиці застосовують або з точністю до навпаки порівняно з первинним задумом законодавця, або у різних ситуаціях по-різному. Не становлять винятку й норми ст. ст. 389, 390 Кримінального кодексу України (КК України). Te principle that criminal liability is inescapable ensures the effectiveness of legal response to the crime. It is bound up with other criminal law principles. Moreover, it is connected to general law principles as the rule of law and legitimacy ones. However, the application of these modern principles is complicated by the socalled terminological ignorance and/or terminological abuse of lawmakers who neglect the rules of law-making techniques. Sometimes the use of established terminology by law-makers can have the opposite effect, for example, the legal norm is interpreted exactly the opposite, or its application differs. Arts. 389, 390 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (CC of Ukraine) are not exceptions. Te purpose of the article to interpret the notions of “convict”, “person who serves a sentence” as the subjects of crimes given in Arts. 389, 390 of the CC of Ukraine, and to analyze the judicial decisions in case No. 390/757/16-к. To achieve this goal, the following objectives are to be accomplished: 1) to describe the notions of “convict”, “person who serves a sentence” (Arts. 389, 390 of the CC of Ukraine); 2) to understand the meaning of the notion of “evasion of serving a sentence” (p. 6 Art. 52 of the CC of Ukraine); 3) to fnd the correlation between the elements of crimes given in Arts. 389, 390 and Art. 382 of the CC of Ukraine; 4) to make notes in the margin of the judicial decision in case No. 390/757/16-к. Te study results in the following conclusions: elements of crimes given in Arts. 382, 389 of the CC of Ukraine are related, thus requiring differentiation under criminal qualifcation; both crimes given in Art. 382 and Art. 389 of the CC of Ukraine violate social relations in the sphere of the criminal executive law and are committed with direct intent, however, an actor and a subject-matter differ in these crimes. Te subject-matter of a crime given in Art. 382 of the CC of Ukraine is court verdict, decision, order, which have entered into force, and the subject-matter of a crime given in Art. 389 of the CC of Ukraine is a court decision, which has entered into force and which prescribes a fne or deprives of the right to occupy certain positions or to engage in certain activities. Te actor of a crime given in Art. 382 of the CC of Ukraine is a person, who is obliged to execute a sentence, and the actor of a crime given in Art. 389 of the CC of Ukraine is a convict who serves a sentence other than imprisonment (e.g. fne, deprivation of the right to occupy certain positions or to engage in certain activities, correctional labor). Te notions of “punishment” and “serving a sentence” are related and are in the relation of subordination as their scopes having no common elements are the part of a broader notion (criminal executive relations). In this respect, punishment is regarded as the legal activity of state authorities within criminal executive relations, and serving a sentence is obedience to terms and condition of serving a sentence by a convict. Actions of a person who tries to evade the court order on replacement of a punishment under Art. 82 of the CC of Ukraine cannot be qualifed under p. 1 Art. 382 of the CC of Ukraine, as such a person has no essential features of a special actor of a crime given in Art. 382 of the CC of Ukraine (e.g. s/he has no powers in the criminal executive sphere).