SOME CONSIDERATIONS CONCERNING THE REFORMATION OF DEPRIVATION OF RIGHT TO HOLD CERTAIN OFFICES OR TO UNDERTAKE CERTAIN ACTIVITY PUNISHMENT (IN THE CONTEXT OF ARTICLE 1111 OF THE CC OF UKRAINE)
Authors: Burdin Volodymyr 
Published: August 2022

The author emphasizes that neither the system of punishments and their kinds, nor the contents of certain kinds of punishments are the constant phenomena. Due to the development of society, when the social status of a person in the certain state is being changed, the system of punishments and their filling with the specific restrictions are being altered as well. These changes are influenced by the numerous factors that form the state criminal legal policy at the certain stage. The researcher underlines that the understanding of vengeance as the coercive sufferings that are the integral part of punishment in the light of all the contemporary humanistic tendencies is inseparably related to the changes of social values within the society. The author analyzes the emergence of the new Article 1111 of the CC of Ukraine that foresees criminal liability for collaborative activity. In general, the emergence of this Article doesn`t cause any particular objections concerning the necessity of regulating criminal liability for such «silent subversion» activity during the war. At the same time, the wording of the dispositions of the certain parts of Article 1111 of the CC of Ukraine, as well as of their sanctions, cause a plenty of questions. At first, certain corpora delicti that are fixed in Article 1111 of the CC of Ukraine in fact comprise such a form of high treason as the transition of a citizen of Ukraine to the side of the enemy under martial law or in the form of assistance to a foreign state, foreign organization or their representatives in carrying out subversive activities against Ukraine. Moreover, if one compares the sanction of Article 111 of the CC of Ukraine fixing criminal liability for high treason with the sanction of Article 1111 of the CC of Ukraine foreseeing criminal liability for collaborative activity, one can arrive at the conclusion that legislator due to the unclear reasons has foreseen the privileged corpus delicti of high treason in Article 1111 of the CC of Ukraine. As to the sanctions of Article 1111 of the CC of Ukraine, there is one more question concerning such kind of punishment as deprivation of right to hold certain offices or to undertake certain activity that needs to be reformed. The author substantiates that having foreseen the punishment of deprivation of right to hold certain offices or to undertake certain activity in the sanctions of Article 1111 of the CC of Ukraine, the legislator potentially did lay down the idea of reforming this kind of punishment by the way of widening the sphere of its application that unfortunately had not been realized yet by appropriate altering of Article 55 of the CC of Ukraine. It is stated that in Article 1111 of the CC of Ukraine it goes about the so-called political criminal lawbreaking, so that the consequences for the person should be of the politically restrictive character, in particular, it goes about the prohibitions to dwell in certain places, to take part in the elections and referenda, to be the member of political parties etc. The opinion of the scholars that the content of punishment should be deduced from and correspond the nature of criminal lawbreaking is supported.