The solicitation of an undue advantage: theoretical and practical problems caused by the legislative virus, and their comprehensive solution

Василь Миколайович Киричко

Abstract


There is a legislative virus in the system of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. It concerns articles 154, 368, 368-3, 368-4, 369, 369-2. The virus exists in the form of such legislative provisions, according to which the specified articles of the Criminal Code of Ukraine cover actions that should be recognized as lawful. As a result of the virus, those persons who must be recognized as victims of a crime are convicted of crimes.

The legislative virus is associated with the notion of “solicitation of an undue advantage” contained in Articles 15, 16, 18, 21 of the UN Convention against Corruption and the notion of “request of any undue advantage” contained in Articles 2, 8, 12 of the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS 173).  In accordance with conventions, these concepts do not include the threat of causing harm to human rights. In the aforementioned articles of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, there are two types of “solicitation/request of an undue advantage”. The first kind is the same as in the conventions. The second type is always combined with the threat of violation of rights. The virus belongs to the second of these values.

The negative consequences of the legislative virus are the condemnation of persons who were giving of any undue advantage to protect their rights from threats and did not intend to persuade another person to violate their official duties. As a result of the legislative virus, those who did not commit corrupt acts and who should be recognized as victims of a crime are condemned for committing a crime. Such a violation of the rights of citizens is subject to legislative provisions that the author considers to be false and requires correction.

The solution to the theoretical and practical problems caused by the specified virus is possible only by introducing several changes to the system of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. Projects of such changes are developed by the author and reflected in the publication. In case of their adoption, the specified legislative virus will be completely eliminated.


Keywords


corruption; corruption crimes; undue advantage; solicitation/request of an undue advantage; legislative virus

References


Kyrychko, V.M. (2016). Zakonodavchyi virus u systemi KK Ukrainy: vyznachennia i aktualizatsiia problemy na prykladi st. 368-2 KK «Nezakonne zbahachennia» [Some state – Legislative virus in the system of the Criminal Code of Ukraine: definition and actualization of the problem on the example of Article 368-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine]. Problemy zakonnosti – Problems of Legality, issue 133, 142–151. DOI: 10.21564/2414-990x.133.70893 [in Ukrainian].

Mykhailenko, D.H. (2010). Pravova pryroda vymahannia khabara ta nepravomirnoi vyhody. Aktualni problemy derzhavy i prava Actual problems of state and law, issue 55, 395401 [in Ukrainian].

Dudorov, O.O., Ryzak, Ia.V. (2015). Problemni pytannia vymahannia nepravomirnoi vyhody pry vchynenni pidkupu sluzhbovoi osoby yurydychnoi osoby pryvatnoho prava. Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstvaBulletin of criminal proceedings, 1, 180–191 [in Ukrainian].

Kyrychko, V.M. (2013). Kryminalna vidpovidalnist za koruptsiiu. Kharkiv: Pravo [in Ukrainian].

Kyrychko, V.M. (2015). Pro vidsutnist suspilnoi nebezpechnosti v diiakh osoby, yaka proponuvala, obitsiala abo nadala nepravomirnu vyhodu vnaslidok vymahannia takoi vyhody, ta neobkhidnist vdoskonalennia ch. 2 st. 11 ta punktu 5 prymitky do st. 354 KK Ukrainy. Visnyk asotsiatsii kryminalnoho prava UkrainyBulletin of the Association of Criminal Law of Ukraine, 2 (5), 278–289. URL: http:// http://nauka.nlu.edu.ua/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/18_Киричко.pdf [in Ukrainian].

Khavroniuk, M.I. (Ed.). (2016). Nastilna knyha detektyva, prokurora, suddi: komentar antykoruptsiinoho zakonodavstva. Kyiv: VD «Dakor» [in Ukrainian].


GOST Style Citations


  1. Киричко В. М. Законодавчий вірус у системі КК України: визначення і актуалізація проблеми на прикладі ст. 3682 КК «Незаконне збагачення». Проблеми законності. Харків. 2016. Вип. 133. С. 142–151. DOI: 10.21564/2414-990x.133.70893.
  2. Михайленко Д. Г. Правова природа вимагання хабара та неправомірної вигоди. Актуальні проблеми держави і права. Одеса. 2010. Вип. 55. С. 395–401.
  3. Дудоров О. О., Ризак Я. В. Проблемні питання вимагання неправомірної вигоди при вчиненні підкупу службової особи юридичної особи приватного права. Вісник кримінального судочинства. 2015. № 1. С. 180–191.
  4. Киричко В. М. Кримінальна відповідальність за корупцію. Харків: Право, 2013. 424 с.
  5. Киричко В. М. Про відсутність суспільної небезпечності в діях особи, яка пропонувала, обіцяла або надала неправомірну вигоду внаслідок вимагання такої вигоди, та необхідність  вдосконалення ч. 2 ст. 11 та пункту 5 примітки до ст. 354 КК України. Вісник асоціації кримінального права України. 2015. № 2 (5). С. 278–289. URL: http://nauka.nlu.edu.ua/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/18_Киричко.pdf.
  6. Настільна книга детектива, прокурора, судді: коментар антикорупційного законодавства / за ред. М. І. Хавронюка. Київ: ВД «Дакор», 2016. 496 с.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.21564/2414-990x.140.123614

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2018 Василь Миколайович Киричко

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

ISSN 2224-9281