No abstract

No abstract

The aim: Complex analysis of theoretical and practical aspects of study of mental derangement as a mandatory element of limited sanity and development of new approaches to such state's assessment. Materials and methods: An analysis of criminal legislation and researches made by scientists from Brazil, Denmark, Great Britain, Portugal and the USA concerning mental derangements of persons who committed crimes and were considered as having limited sanity, publications in mass media, analytical materials, judicial practice (with the purpose to define certain types of crimes and types of mental derangements of such group of people) has been made. For comparison analysis within the framework of study of problems of mental derangement as a mandatory element of limited sanity 1422 court verdicts were selected from Unified Register of Court Rulings of Ukraine (as of August 2020) concerning persons who committed criminal offences under circumstances which allow to consider such persons as having limited sanity. The methods of statistical analysis, system structural method, method of legal phenomenon system analysis and comparative method were applied during the research. Conclusions: Due to significant increase of quantity of people with mental derangements it is necessary to envisage legally types of mental derangements qualified as limited sanity. This will allow to oblige bodies of criminal justice to conduct mandatory psychiatric examinations after all kinds of crimes when there are grounds to assume that the person during criminal offence commitment was not able to fully understand his (her) actions and (or) control. Consequently, every person having mental derangement and considered as having limited sanity should be subject of compulsory measures of medical care during sentencing, and duration of such care should be legally stipulated with regard to the type of mental derangement. To prevent commitment another crimes by persons with mental derangement and considered as having limited sanity it is necessary to develop correlation programs with certain schemes of treatment, separate categories of people in need of psychiatric help, relevant financing and coordination mechanisms for interaction between the law enforcement bodies and local governance.

In connection with the ratification of the Convention of the Council of Europe on the prevention of violence against women and domestic violence and the fight against these phenomena (Istanbul Convention), the issue of the practice of prosecution under Art. 126-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The article notes that the problem of combating domestic violence constantly attracts the attention of not only forensic scientists, but also judges, lawyers, and human rights defenders. Statistical data on the number of cases of domestic violence were considered. It is emphasized that when interpreting the concept of "criminal offenses related to domestic violence", referring to them only Art. 126-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine is not entirely correct and correct, since the concept of "domestic violence" enshrined in the Council of Europe Convention on the prevention of violence against women and domestic violence and the fight against these phenomena and the Law of Ukraine of December 7, 2017 No. 2229-VIII "On prevention and combating domestic violence" is broader than the law of Ukraine on criminal liability. The existing approaches to the interpretation of such a mandatory feature of the composition of a criminal offense as "systematic perpetration of physical, psychological or economic violence" were studied and the lack of unity in judicial practice regarding its interpretation was noted. Attention is focused on the decision of the Supreme Court dated February 25, 2021 in case No. 583/3295/19, where its interpretation is given and problematic issues of the use of this decision by the courts are considered. A conclusion was drawn on the need to generalize judicial practice (as of November 6, 2022 – the total number of verdicts in the first instance is 2,137) and to take into account the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in this category of cases when sentencing.

No abstract