The dissertation is a criminological study of criminal offenses provided for by Art. 376 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine and related to interference in the activities of judicial bodies. The work clarified the normative and legal support of the standard of independence of judicial bodies, identified its levels, investigated the quantitative and qualitative indicators of the specified criminal offenses, provided the criminological characteristics of the offender who interfered in the activities of the judicial body, developed a typology of the latter, highlighted the peculiarities determination of the presented encroachments in the sphere of justice, a number of promising directions and measures for their prevention are proposed.
The state of these criminal offenses is characterized by an increase in their level during 2013–2022. Every year up to 200 such facts are recorded. The coefficient of intensity of intervention in the activities of judicial bodies increased almost 10 times during the specified period. Its dynamics are negative, as evidenced by an increase in both 7 absolute and relative indicators. The level of these offenses and the level of convictions for them do not reflect the true trends of their prevalence, reproduction and, in general, criminalization of the sphere of justice in Ukraine.
Interference in the activities of judicial bodies is classified as a particularly highlatency crime. There are at least 51 unaccounted for one such registered case. Latency is mostly artificial. The main reasons for latency are considered to be: low efficiency of law enforcement agencies in detecting and investigating these offenses; passivity of GRP; reluctance of aggrieved judges to publicize the facts of interference in their activities.
A generalized criminological image of an offender who interfered or may interfere in the activities of a judicial body – these are men aged 29-39 years, rarely 40-54 years old, have complete higher and basic higher education, citizens of Ukraine, Ukrainians by nationality. The trend of recent years is an increase in cases of 8 encroachment on the independence of judges by public activists and members of public organizations. Often there is criminal complicity of a party in a case with a lawyer, in a group based on a prior conspiracy. Influence on the court is carried out according to various leading motives, which are characteristic of different categories of criminals: from the defendant's avoidance of responsibility - to selfish and careerist motives.
The determination of intervention in the activities of judicial bodies is formed by two groups of interrelated criminogenic factors - external and internal. External criminogenic factors include: instability of the socio-economic situation in the state; vulnerability of the financial system; political influence on the administration of justice; inefficiency of law enforcement agencies; corruption in state authorities and local self-government bodies; limited legal culture and legal awareness of citizens; lack of moral and ethical and professional qualities of lawyers and journalists; imperfection of the current legislation of Ukraine, etc. To the internal criminogenic factors that lead to the commission of criminal offenses provided for in Art. 376 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, attributed to: provision of social guarantees of independence of judges not in full; miscalculations in personnel, financial, material and technical support for the work of judicial bodies; shortcomings of judicial reform; insufficient level of judicial ethics; corruption in the sphere of justice; lack of proper security of courts and personal security of judges; shortcomings in the activity of judicial governance and self-governance; weak communication of judicial bodies with mass media and civil society, etc.
The structure of prevention of this phenomenon consists of general social, special criminological and victimological prevention measures. General social prevention is recognized as basic. It includes the following areas of activity: strengthening guarantees of independence of judges; judicial reform; reforming spheres and bodies related to justice.
Special criminological prevention of the specified encroachments on the independence of judges form measures of criminological prevention, diversion and termination. The first are classified according to their nature into organizational and managerial, informational, regulatory and technical.
Victimological prevention of intervention in the activities of judicial bodies is expressed in strengthening the victimological awareness of judges, increasing their professional level, victimological knowledge, skills and abilities; broad discussion of the problem of encroachments on judicial independence in collectives of courts; passing of special trainings by judges on reducing their victim vulnerability and preventing revictimization, etc
