TRANSFER OF MATERIAL RESOURCES TO ARMED FORMS OF THE AGRESSOR STATE: PROBLEMS OF CRIMINAL-LEGAL QUALIFICATION

Abstract

The article, using the developments of criminal law science and based on the study of judicial practice, considers the problem of qualifying the transfer of material resources to armed formations of the aggressor state. It is shown that in practice such an encroachment usually receives a criminal-legal assessment either as aiding the aggressor state or as "economic" collaborationism (Article 111-2 and Part 4 of Article 111-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (CC), respectively). Recommendations are made regarding the delimitation of the elements of crimes against the foundations of national security of Ukraine.
It is proved that: 1) the disposition of Art. 111-2 of the Criminal Code, which sequentially lists three variant actions for the relevant objects, does not provide grounds for a differentiated assessment of the collection (accumulation) of assets and their transfer to the armed formations of the aggressor state; 2) the mention in Part 4 of Article 111-1 of the Criminal Code only of the transfer of material resources does not exclude the qualification under this norm of the commission of preparatory (transfer) actions. The approach advocated by part of the judiciary, according to which the qualification of the transfer of material resources to the relevant armed formations should be determined by the ownership of these resources, has been criticized. It has been argued that the actions of a person, which consist precisely and only in the transfer of material resources to the armed formations of the aggressor state, de lege lata should be qualified under Part 4 of Article 111-1 of the Criminal Code (in the absence of signs of high treason). It is shown, in particular, that another version of the criminal law assessment would constitute a violation of the conventional requirement of predictability of a person’s conviction on the basis of the law. It is proposed to exclude from the Criminal Code, as a manifestation of excessive criminalization, the prohibition on liability for aiding an aggressor state. It is demonstrated that due to the implementation of such an initiative, the predictability of the criminal law will be achieved in that: 1) the transfer of material resources to the armed formations of the aggressor state, carried out under conditions of occupation, should be qualified under the improved Part 4 of Article 111-1 of the Criminal Code (its successor); 2) the transfer of material resources to the armed formations of the aggressor state, carried out in the absence of conditions of occupation, will be recognized as high treason in the form of providing assistance to a foreign state in carrying out subversive activities against Ukraine.