Search

Purpose. The purpose of our study is to investigate the content and legal significance of the principle of «dolus specialis» in international law, to analyze its application in proving genocidal acts, and to determine the specifics of challenges and prospects for the legal qualification of the actions of the Russian Federation in Ukraine as genocide in the context of modern international legal practice and norms. Method. The methodology includes the integrated use of general scientific methods of analysis and synthesis, as well as comparative legal analysis of international judicial practices on proving genocide. The method of historical and legal analysis was also used to study the development of the genocide doctrine and the formal logical method to assess the evidence base of the Russian Federation’s actions in Ukraine. Results. It is established that the critical condition under the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948 for qualifying actions as genocide is the principle of «dolus specialist,» which allows qualifying the actions of the accused party as a specific intent. To fully prove «dolus specialist,» it is necessary to establish the direct intent of the leadership of the Russian Federation to wholly or partially destroy the Ukrainian national group as such. This requires the collection of evidence that would confirm the link between the statements of Russian officials about the «denazification» of Ukraine and the war crimes committed. The critical aspect is to analyze public statements, official orders, and documents demonstrating these actions’ systematic nature. At the same time, it is essential to continue documenting actions that demonstrate the systematic nature and scale of crimes for further use in international trials. The principle of «dolus specialis» remains fundamental to the legal mechanism for combating genocide, ensuring the effectiveness of prosecution and prevention of crimes against humanity. Scientific novelty. The author makes a comparative legal analysis of international judicial practices on proving genocide and provides examples that allow qualifying the actions of Russians in Ukraine as an act of genocide. Practical significance. The results of the study can be used in further theoretical legal and criminal law research, as well as in the preparation of special courses.

INTRODUCTION. The article examines various aspects of the international legal qualification of offences committed against internationally protected persons. The analysis of different elements of corpus delicti was laid at the heart of the study: namely, those of actus reus (whether the offence was perpetrate in the situation of an armed conflict), mens rea (whether the perpetrator was moved by a special intent, particularly the terrorist dolus specialis), and the legal status of a perpetrator (whether he or she was a state agent).MATERIALS AND METHODS. The materials of the study encompass international conventions, rules and principles of customary international law, case law of international courts and tribunals and international legal doctrine. The paper uses the comparative method and those of analysis and synthesis. RESEARCH RESULTS. The key result of the study consists in the assumption that offences against internationally protected persons can be considered as either a conventional crime within the meaning of the 1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents (including, if a terrorist dolus specialis is established, as a crime of terrorism), or (in case of armed conflict) a violation of laws and customs of war, for this category of persons falls within the definition of protected persons by implication of Article 4 of the 1949 IV Geneva Convention, which gives grounds for the application of Article 146 of the 1949 IV Geneva Convention for purposes of the their criminal prosecution.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. Given the result of the study, it is states that the following test can be applied for purposes of international legal qualification of offences against internationally protected persons: first, it is necessary to establish whether the offence of committed in a situation of armed conflict; second, it is highly important to enquire about the intent of the delinquent. If there is a terrorist dolus specialis, the offence can be qualified as terrorism-related. Moreover, it is necessary to establish the status of the delinquent and whether the one is a state agent or a private person, or, even if the person is a state agent, whether the one is a person acting sua sponte; additionally, the status of a delinquent and its relation with the belligerent state in regard to the situation of armed conflict is also significant for the qualification of respective offences in light of international law

The article is devoted to the actual problem of the subject aspect of the unlawful carrying out of the archaeological explorations, excavations, other earth-moving and submarine works at the object of the archaeological heritage (according to the Criminal Code of Ukraine part 1,Article 298). During carrying out of the analysis of the subject aspect of the given crime such important characteristics of guilt as essence, extent of guilt, form and content of it have been revealed. The possibility of the commitment of a crime specified by the Criminal Code of Ukraine part 1, Article 298 both with the special intent and with the criminal negligence has been given grounds

Un aspecto más o menos controvertido en las figuras de aborto es el de la intención específica que se requiere para integrar la faz subjetiva de los tipos penales. En este trabajo se hace un análisis de los requisitos expresos exigidos en algunas figuras de aborto, esto es, que se actúe maliciosamente (art. 342 CP) y con abuso del oficio (art. 345 CP), en conjunto con lo que dispone la normativa extrapenal que puede tener incidencia en el punto, en particular, la regulación sanitaria respecto de un eventual aborto por razones terapéuticas. Se plantea, desde esta perspectiva, que esos tipos de aborto requieren que se actúe con la inalidad precisa de dar muerte del feto, excluyendo tanto el dolo eventual como el de consecuencias necesarias. En el contexto de la actividad médica, la conducta realizada con una inalidad terapéutica y que no tiene como objeto matar al feto, ni siquiera sobrepasa el marco del riesgo permitido.A more or less controversial figures of abortion is the specific intention to integrate the subjective face of the criminal types. In this paper an analysis of the express requirements required on some figures of abortion, that is, to act maliciously (art. 342 PC) and abuse of office (art. 345 PC), in conjunction with the extra criminal regulations which may affect the point, in particular health regulations regarding a possible abortion for therapeutic reasons. From this perspective, these types of abortion require action in order to give accurate kill to the fetus, excluding both the posible willful ignorance as the necessary consequences. In the context of medical activity, the behavior performed with a therapeutic purpose and that is not intended to kill the fetus, not even it does not go beyond the scope of allowable risk.