The thesis is the first comprehensive comparative legal study of the criminal law characteristics of the deliberate illegal destruction, destruction, or damage of cultural heritage objects under the legislation of Ukraine and Eastern European countries. The dissertation put forward and substantiated several new theoretical and important in a practical sense provision, reflecting its scientific novelty, in particular, for the first time: based on a historical analysis of normative legal acts and historiographic achievements, periods of the formation of the criminal legal protection of cultural heritage objects in Ukraine are highlighted 1) imperial - early XX - 1917; 2) the period of the national liberation movement - 1917-1921; 3) Soviet - 1921-1991; 4) modern - from 1991 to the present. By the beginning of the twentieth century, there had been a gradual process of accumulation of material values created by mankind, as well as a rethinking of culture and its material forms as a necessary aspect of the development of communities and societies.
It is established that the objective side of the analyzed crime under the criminal law of Ukraine and Eastern Europe is characterized by an alternative indication of several possible forms: 1) destruction or 2) damage or 3) demolition. In addition, the use of three forms in Art. 298 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine is superfluous. We offer the word « demolition» to exclude from the text of Part 2 of Art. 298 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
The criminal legislation of the countries of Eastern Europe offers different approaches to determining the content of objects of legal protection. In these countries, such objects of criminal encroachments as objects of cultural heritage have different names: cultural monuments (Criminal Code of Slovakia, Republic of Bulgaria), cultural works (Criminal Code of Albania), cultural values (Criminal Code of Croatia), national values (Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania), cultural heritage (Criminal Code of North Macedonia), etc. In some countries of Eastern Europe, the subject of the crime under investigation is not only cultural or historical values (monuments), but also natural objects, for example, in the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Protection of cultural heritage under the legislation of Eastern Europe is fragmented. Destruction of cultural heritage in countries that changed their legislation after the signing of international conventions is usually punished as a war crime as well as a crime against property. The protection of cultural heritage is carried out with the help of the norms of criminal law on the protection of cultural heritage during armed conflicts, martial law and peacetime.
It was highlighted that under the legislation of Ukraine and most Eastern European countries, subjectively, the crime of destruction, or damage of cultural heritage sites is characterized by an intentional form of guilt. The criminal law of other Eastern European countries is characterized by the existence of a separate rule on liability for negligent damage or destruction of cultural heritage sites (Republic of Belarus).
The subject of the crime of destruction or damage of cultural heritage objects is, as a rule, a natural sane person who has reached a certain age at the time of commission the crime. On the basis of comparative legal research of qualifying features of crimes encroaching on objects of archeological and cultural heritage according to the legislation of Ukraine and the countries of Eastern Europe the qualifying features of destruction or damage of objects of cultural heritage are systematized.
The following bases (criteria) of systematization are allocated: 1) on objective signs: on the grounds of the objective side of the act (action, consequence); 2) on subjective grounds: depending on the purpose; according to the characteristics of the subject.
Based on the analysis of the main varieties of qualifying signs of deliberate illegal destruction or damage of cultural heritage objects according to the legislation of Ukraine and the countries of Eastern Europe, it was established that the norm of Art. 298 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, as well as most of the qualified types of such crimes, are not typical for the legislation of the countries of Eastern Europe.
