Movchan R., Hel A. Criminal liability for interfering with the legal professional activities of journalists (art. 171 of the Criminal Code): a scientific and practical comment

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33098/2078-6670.2024.17.29.269-281

Purpose. Scientific and practical commentary on certain provisions of Art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In order to achieve the declared goal, an appropriate methodology was chosen, in particular, philosophical, general scientific and specifically scientific methods were used. Based on the results of writing the article, firstly, recommendations were formulated for solving those debatable issues, the lack of answers to which can prevent effective law enforcement of Art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, secondly, the shortcomings inherent in the corresponding norm were identified, the presence of which already negatively affects its effectiveness, and proposals were made for their elimination. The scientific novelty lies in the fact that new recommendations on qualifications and proposals for improving certain provisions of Art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In particular, it was proven that cases of mental or physical pressure on the journalist’s close relatives should not be qualified under Art. 171, and according to Art. 345-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. Additional arguments are presented in favor of the fact that instead of enumerating the forms of obstruction to the legal professional activity of a journalist in the analyzed criminal law norm, it would be appropriate to point to the single generalizing term “obstruction”, which, among other things, included the concept of “influence”. Recommendations for distinguishing the investigated criminal offense from criminal offenses against life and health have been developed. The proposal of the researchers to present Part 3 of Art. 171 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine in the following wording: “Actions provided for in part 1 or part 2 of this article, if they were committed by an official using his official position or with the prior conspiracy of a group of persons”. Practical significance. Formulated conclusions can be used in rule-making, law enforcement and scientific activities.

Key words: journalist, obstruction, influence, harassment, legitimate professional activity, information, threat, destruction or damage to property, violence, criminal responsibility, criminal offense, official, constitutional rights, authority of bodies.

References

1.   Pop, K. V. (2017). Ustanovlenyi poriadok zdiisnennia zakonnoi profesiinoi diialnosti zhurnalistiv yak ob’iekt kryminalno-pravovoi okhorony [The established procedure for carry        ing out the legal professional activity of journalists as an object of criminal legal protection]. Visnyk Asotsiatsii kryminalnoho prava Ukrainy, 1, 132–139. (in Ukrainian)

2.   Pysmenskyi, Ye. O. (2016). Zlochyny u sferi profesiinoi diialnosti zhurnalistiv u konteksti zabezpechennia potreb ukrainskoho suspilstva na suchasnomu etapi yoho rozvytku [Crimes in the field of professional activity of journalists in the context of meeting the needs of Ukrainian society at the current stage of its development]. Visnyk Kryminolohichnoi asotsiatsii Ukrainy, 1, 90–103. (in Ukrainian)

3.   Horova, O. B., et al. (2021). Pravovi zasady vzaiemodii viiskovosluzhbovtsiv Upravlinnia derzhavnoi okhorony Ukrainy z predstavnykamy zasobiv masovoi informatsii [Legal principles of interaction between servicemen of the State Security Office of Ukraine and representatives of mass media] : navch. posib. Uzhhorod : RIK-U. (in Ukrainian)

4.   The verdict of the Halytskyi District Court of Lviv of February 26, 2014 in case No. 461/11113/13-k. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/37325948 (in Ukrainian)

5.   Ruling of the Court of Appeal of Lviv region of March 25, 2015 in case no. 461/11113/13-к. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/43431744 (in Ukrainian)

6.   Zaiets, I. S., Marko, S. I. (2020). Osoblyvosti kryminalnoi vidpovidalnosti za pereshkodzhannia profesiinii diialnosti zhurnalistiv [Peculiarities of criminal liability for obstructing the professional activity of journalists]. Naukovyi visnyk Natsionalnoi akademii vnutrishnikh sprav, 1, 19–30. (in Ukrainian)

7. Verdict of the Chyhyrynskoho raionnoho sudu Cherkaskoi oblasti vid 14 lypnia 2017 r. u spravi № 708/338/17. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/67735822 (in Ukrainian)

8.  Pavlykivskyi, V. I. (2017). Criminal law enforcement of freedom of speech and professional activities of journalists: Сandidate`s thesis. Kharkiv. (in Ukrainian)

9.   Ruling of the Supreme Court composed of the panel of judges of the Third Judicial Chamber of the Criminal Court of Cassation of August 19, 2020 in case No. 214/4970/18. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/91089431 (in Ukrainian)

10. Bezpala, Ya. S. (2013). Kryminalno-pravovi problemy vyznachennia poterpiloho vid pereshkodzhannia zakonnii profesiinii diialnosti zhurnalistiv [Criminal law problems of determining the victim of interference with the legal professional activity of journalists]. Forum prava, 3, 22–27. (in Ukrainian)

11. Dudorov, O. O., Pysmenskiy, Ye. O. et al. (2012). Kryminalne pravo. Osoblyva chastyna [Criminal law. Special part]. (Vol. 1.) Luhansk: Vydavnytstvo «Elton–2» (in Ukrainian)

12. Pylypenko, Ye. V. (2018). Obstruction of activity in the criminal law of Ukraine: Сandidate`s thesis. Sievierodonetsk. (in Ukrainian)

13. Trostiuk, Z. A. (2003). Poniatiinyi aparat Osoblyvoi chastyny Kryminalnoho kodeksu Ukrainy [Conceptual apparatus of the Special part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine]: monohrafiia. Kyiv: Atika. (in Ukrainian)

14. Ovcharuk, Yu. V. (2018). Okremi problemni pytannia kryminalnoi vidpovidalnosti za pereshkodzhannia zakonnii profesiinii diialnosti zhurnalistiv [Separate problematic issues of criminal liability for obstructing the legitimate professional activity of journalists]. Naukovyi visnyk Lvivskoho derzhavnoho universytetu vnutrishnikh sprav, 2, 280–288. (in Ukrainian)

15. Pakhnin, M. L. (2021). Vykorystannia abstraktnoho ta kazuistychnoho pryiomiv pry konstruiuvanni kryminalnykh pravoporushen u sferi svobody slova ta zhurnalistskoi diialnosti [The use of abstract and casuist techniques in the construction of criminal offenses in the field of freedom of speech and journalistic activity]. Yevropeiski perspektyvy, 4, 90–95. (in Ukrainian).

16. The verdict of the Ivano-Frankivsk City Court of Ivano-Frankivsk Region of February 28, 2022 in case No. 344/3120/22. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/103579055 (in Ukrainian)

17. The verdict of the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv of November 25 in case No. 757/35613/21-к. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/102402394 (in Ukrainian).

18. Zaiets, I. S. Formy proiavu pereshkodzhannia zakonnii profesiinii diialnosti zhurnalistiv. Retrieved from: https://elar.naiau.kiev.ua/items/891057ae-abd3-40d5-babb-e56dcfb66925 (in Ukrainian)

19. Opryshko, L. V., Vdovenko, O. M. (2019). Problemy rozsliduvannia ta sudovoho rozghliadu kryminalnykh sprav, pov’iazanykh iz porushenniam profesiinykh prav zhurnalistiv v Ukraini [Problems of investigation and trial of criminal cases related to violation of professional rights of journalists in Ukraine]: analitychnyi zvit. Kyiv: HO «Platforma prav liudyny» (in Ukrainian)

20.                The verdict of the Marhanets City Court of Dnipropetrovska oblast of June 12, in case No. 180/1669/16-k. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/67094019 (in Ukrainian)

21. The verdict of the Irpin City Court of Kyiv region of June 13, 2014 in case No. 367/120/14-k. Retrieved from: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/ Review/39314043 (in Ukrainian)

22. The verdict of the Korolevsky District Court of Zhytomyr of August 23, 2022 in case No. 296/2948/22. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/105853237 (in Ukrainian)

23. Verdict of the Kyiv-Svyatoshynskyi District Court of Kyiv Region of March 16, 2020 in case No. 369/1586/17. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/88208911 (in Ukrainian)

24. Ruling of the Kyiv Court of Appeal of September 30, 2021 in case No. 369/1586/17. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/102369130 (in Ukrainian)

25. Ruling of the Supreme Court composed of the panel of judges of the Second Judicial Chamber of the Criminal Court of Cassation of October 6, 2022 in case No. 369/1586/17. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/106788061# (in Ukrainian)

26. Veprytskyi, R. S., Hladkova, Ye. O. (2016). Kryminalno-pravovyi analiz zlochynnykh posiahan na svobodu slova ta pereshkodzhannia profesiinii diialnosti zhurnalistiv [Criminal-legal analysis of criminal encroachments on freedom of speech and obstruction of journalists’ professional activities]: naukovo-metodychni rekomendatsii. Kharkiv : Kharkivskyi natsionalnyi universytet vnutrishnikh sprav. (in Ukrainian)

27. The verdict of the Mukachevo City District Court of the Transcarpathian region of May 29, 2018 in case No. 303/3534/17. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/74283983 (in Ukrainian)

28.                Spodaryk, Yu. V. (2022). Criminal law protection of legitimate professional activities of journalists in Ukraine: Сandidate`s thesis. Lviv. (in Ukrainian).

29. The verdict of the Drohobych City District Court of Lviv Region of February 19, 2018 in case No. 442/4140/17. Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/72513040 (in Ukrainian).