PRISONER OF WAR: SPECIAL STATUS IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF UKRAINE AND THE RIGHT TO EXCHANGE

IF 0.7 Q2 LAW
O. Kaplina
{"title":"PRISONER OF WAR: SPECIAL STATUS IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF UKRAINE AND THE RIGHT TO EXCHANGE","authors":"O. Kaplina","doi":"10.33327/ajee-18-5.4-a000438","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. This article is devoted to the relevant issue of the creation of appropriate normative regulation of criminal prosecution of prisoners of war who were captured during the armed conflict in Ukraine and their exchange. Despite the positive dynamics of destabilisation processes taking place all over the world, and in some places connected with the outbreak of military conflicts of an international nature, insufficient attention is paid to the issue of legitimising the process of exchange of prisoners of war in national legal systems.\nMethods: The problem is complicated by the need to coordinate national legal mechanisms with the norms of international humanitarian and human rights laws, which cannot be competitive, but instead should have an integrative effect on national legal systems. Relying on the norms of international humanitarian law, the author concludes that prisoners of war, as legal participants in an armed conflict, due to the immunity (privilege) of the combatant, do not bear individual responsibility for the initiation of an aggressive war or participation in it and must be repatriated after its end, with the exception of cases where they committed so-called ‘general criminal’ crimes or violated the laws and customs of war. Moreover, the author’s position is illustrated by a concrete practical example of the first sentence of the Ukrainian court against a combatant.\nGiven that until July 2022, the Ukrainian criminal procedural law lacked a proper mechanism aimed at the exchange of prisoners of war, it is quite logical to direct the legal policy of the state to the development of the relevant procedural legislation.\nResults: Considering the significant dangerous challenges that Ukraine has faced, and the amendment of the legislation, the author refer to the analysis of the factors that determined the special normative regulation of the procedural order of prisoners of war; analyse the criminal procedural status of the suspect-prisoner of war; and point to the differentiation of the procedural orders of such an exchange, the key criterion for the division of which is the procedural status of the person. Using the example of the first sentence in Ukraine to a Russian prisoner of war and relying on the norms of international humanitarian and national law, the author illustrate the specifics of the criminal liability of combatants. Evaluating the procedure of exchange of prisoners of war and criminal proceedings in absentia which were positively introduced in the legislation of Ukraine, it was concluded that the exchange is not an act of forgiveness, but an opportunity to return Ukrainian citizens, which is of the utmost importance in the hierarchy of values for the state.","PeriodicalId":40329,"journal":{"name":"Access to Justice in Eastern Europe","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Access to Justice in Eastern Europe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33327/ajee-18-5.4-a000438","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background. This article is devoted to the relevant issue of the creation of appropriate normative regulation of criminal prosecution of prisoners of war who were captured during the armed conflict in Ukraine and their exchange. Despite the positive dynamics of destabilisation processes taking place all over the world, and in some places connected with the outbreak of military conflicts of an international nature, insufficient attention is paid to the issue of legitimising the process of exchange of prisoners of war in national legal systems. Methods: The problem is complicated by the need to coordinate national legal mechanisms with the norms of international humanitarian and human rights laws, which cannot be competitive, but instead should have an integrative effect on national legal systems. Relying on the norms of international humanitarian law, the author concludes that prisoners of war, as legal participants in an armed conflict, due to the immunity (privilege) of the combatant, do not bear individual responsibility for the initiation of an aggressive war or participation in it and must be repatriated after its end, with the exception of cases where they committed so-called ‘general criminal’ crimes or violated the laws and customs of war. Moreover, the author’s position is illustrated by a concrete practical example of the first sentence of the Ukrainian court against a combatant. Given that until July 2022, the Ukrainian criminal procedural law lacked a proper mechanism aimed at the exchange of prisoners of war, it is quite logical to direct the legal policy of the state to the development of the relevant procedural legislation. Results: Considering the significant dangerous challenges that Ukraine has faced, and the amendment of the legislation, the author refer to the analysis of the factors that determined the special normative regulation of the procedural order of prisoners of war; analyse the criminal procedural status of the suspect-prisoner of war; and point to the differentiation of the procedural orders of such an exchange, the key criterion for the division of which is the procedural status of the person. Using the example of the first sentence in Ukraine to a Russian prisoner of war and relying on the norms of international humanitarian and national law, the author illustrate the specifics of the criminal liability of combatants. Evaluating the procedure of exchange of prisoners of war and criminal proceedings in absentia which were positively introduced in the legislation of Ukraine, it was concluded that the exchange is not an act of forgiveness, but an opportunity to return Ukrainian citizens, which is of the utmost importance in the hierarchy of values for the state.
战俘:在乌克兰刑事诉讼中的特殊地位和交换权
背景本条专门讨论制定适当的规范性法规,对在乌克兰武装冲突中被俘的战俘进行刑事起诉及其交换的相关问题。尽管世界各地都在发生积极的破坏稳定进程,在一些地方也与爆发国际性质的军事冲突有关,但在国家法律体系中,对战俘交换进程合法化的问题关注不足。方法:由于需要将国家法律机制与国际人道主义法和人权法的规范相协调,这一问题变得更加复杂,因为这些法律不能具有竞争性,而应该对国家法律体系产生综合影响。根据国际人道主义法准则,提交人得出结论,战俘作为武装冲突的合法参与者,由于战斗人员的豁免权(特权),对发动侵略性战争或参与侵略性战争不承担个人责任,必须在战争结束后遣返,但犯下所谓“一般刑事”罪行或违反战争法律和惯例的情况除外。此外,乌克兰法院对一名战斗人员的第一个判决的具体实例表明了提交人的立场。鉴于在2022年7月之前,乌克兰刑事诉讼法缺乏一个旨在交换战俘的适当机制,将国家的法律政策引导到相关程序立法的制定是非常合乎逻辑的。结果:考虑到乌克兰面临的重大危险挑战,以及立法的修订,作者参考了对决定战俘程序秩序特殊规范性规定的因素的分析;分析了战争嫌疑犯的刑事诉讼地位;并指出这种交换的程序顺序的区别,其划分的关键标准是人的程序地位。作者以乌克兰对一名俄罗斯战俘的第一个判决为例,依据国际人道主义法和国内法的规范,阐述了战斗人员刑事责任的具体情况。评估了乌克兰立法中积极引入的战俘交换程序和缺席刑事诉讼,得出的结论是,交换不是一种宽恕行为,而是一种遣返乌克兰公民的机会,这在国家价值体系中至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
50.00%
发文量
62
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信