ON THE PROTECTION OF THE HONOR AND DIGNITY OF CITIZENS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS: STRENGTHENING ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to highlight the key issues related to legal liability for administrative offenses under article 173 and article 185 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses. The author takes as a basis the proposals of the legislator set out in the Draft Law on Amendments to the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses to protect the honor and dignity of citizens and law enforcement officers. A number of methods are used, which are determined by its purpose and objectives. Logical-semantic and formal-logical methods were used to improve the conceptual apparatus by defining the concepts of “public obscenity” and “public”, “public place”. The statistical method was used to review the dynamics of offenses in Ukraine. The comparative legal method was used in the implementation of all research objectives. The role and importance of administrative responsibility in the process of protection and protection of human rights and freedoms as an integral part of ensuring constitutional human rights in the context of аrticle 173 of the Code of Administrative Offenses and further optimization in the light of the issue under аrticle 185 of the Code of Administrative Offenses in terms of the perception of law enforcement officers as an important part of law enforcement reform, as adequate perception of police officers is associated with a high level of trust in them, with the prestige, popularity of their profession among the population. It was found that these offenses are characterized by significant fluctuations, primarily due to their latency (2010, 2015, 2018), small administrative penalties, fines, as well as the practice of combining several cases into one proceeding and imposition of sanctions under the “rule absorption” within the sanction of the norm. Judicial practice in cases of petty hooliganism and malicious disobedience is considered. The author bases the main proposals using the Unified state register of court decisions. In the conclusions, the author partially agrees with the legislator’s proposals to increase the amount of the fine. The main proposals of the author are that: 1) the combination in аrticle 173 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of such words as “public” and “obscene swearing in public places”, the single concept of “public obscene swearing in public places” does not seem very successful and is the result of the predominant use in the administrative field of these terms without interpretation; 2) аrticle 185 of the Code of Administrative Offenses should be supplemented by a combination of or insulting them in any form, which will significantly affect the positive case law. This can be explained by the fact that the article does not describe possible forms of insulting a police officer.