The general legal characteristics of war crimes allow to comprehensively study the indicated acts, to understand their essence, which in turn should facilitate and improve the quality of criminal qualification of criminal offenses against performing the established procedure of active service. The need to form general legal characteristics of war crimes is due to the fact that the sphere of public relations related to active service is intersectoral, since it is simultaneously regulated by the norms of various branches of law. The authors have found out the main features of war crimes and have carried out their characteristics by determining the specific features of their regulation both by criminal and other branches of law. The authors have provided an analytical basis for this in order to evaluate the provisions of regulatory legal acts regulating the procedure of active service and determine the main features of war crimes. The findings of the research was that war crimes infringe the statutory order of performing active service, and the subjects of such illegal acts are military personnel, persons liable to military duty and personnel with reserve obligations during the battle assembly. The general legal characteristics of war crimes is formed taking into account criminal and legal features of the specified criminal offenses and defines specific features of active service; the established procedure for performing active service; military personnel, persons liable to military duty and personnel with reserve obligations during the battle assembly as subjects of crime.

No abstract

The article examines the problems of improving the punishment system and the effectiveness of the penitentiary system of Ukraine under martial law. Some new legislative proposals regarding the improvement of the domestic penal system are analyzed, which are aimed at improving the efficiency of the Ukrainian penitentiary system in the conditions of martial law. It has been established that among the proposals on the effectiveness of the Ukrainian penitentiary system under martial law, special attention is drawn to those that propose expanding the list of types of punishments alternative to imprisonment in the current Criminal Code of Ukraine, as well as establishing a new type of punishment "probation supervision". Peculiarities of such types of punishment as restriction of will and proposed probationary supervision are analyzed. It was determined that the ideas about the punitive properties of restraint of will and its possible replacement by probation supervision are built on the following grounds: restraint of will has lost its punitive potential and effective application in the penitentiary system; the lack of a correct understanding of the order of appointment, execution and serving of punishment in the form of restraint of will gives rise to a false opinion about the similarity of this type of punishment with probation supervision. It has been established that the new type of punishment in the form of probation supervision, although it represents a new perspective on the procedure for the execution and serving of punishment in the case of a person committing criminal misdemeanors and minor crimes, but cannot completely replace the restriction of free will. It has been proven that punishment in the form of probationary supervision cannot replace the restriction of will, however, it may well occupy an independent place in the system of punishments under the Criminal Code of Ukraine, the innovation should also be marked in the relevant provisions of the Criminal Executive Code of Ukraine, regarding the order and conditions of execution and serving a sentence in the form of probation supervision, as well as finding a logical continuation in the adoption of relevant changes in the Law of Ukraine "On Probation".

The article examines topical issues of establishing subjective signs for leaving in danger, namely the essence, interpretation and definition of subjective signs for qualification under Art. 135 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. Such subjective signs of Art. 135 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, as guilt and the subject of a criminal offense. It has been established that among the complex issues that arise in law enforcement activities in the qualification of Art. 135 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine there is the establishment of the second alternative sign of this norm - putting the victim in a state of danger to life and health and leaving him without help, as well as the correct interpretation of the expression of the legislator "he himself put the victim in a state of danger to life", when the issue is resolved through mutual fault . It is proved that among the topical issues of subjective signs of being left in danger, there are certain difficulties in the established forms of guilt (intention or negligence) in each specific case. Attention is drawn to such topical issues in the qualification of Art. 135 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, as establishing the type of subject of a criminal offense, especially when it is necessary to determine the type of subject where the victim was left in a dangerous condition caused by a traffic accident. An analysis of the relevant issue provided grounds to assert that the subjects of being left in danger can be not only persons obliged to take care of the victim, but also those who are obliged to provide the necessary assistance to persons in a dangerous state, based on their profession, the requirements of regulatory enactments. It is also essential to determine the types of subjects of a criminal offense under Art. 135 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in a situation in which the victim was left in a dangerous condition caused by a traffic accident, since it is the definition of a specific type of subject that affects the final qualification.

The article examines certain legislative problems regarding the establishment and interpretation of public influence as a means of public control over the observance of the rights of convicts during the execution of criminal sentences. On the basis of certain articles of the Criminal and Executive Code of Ukraine, in particular part 3 of Art. 6 and Part 2 of Art. 25 of the Criminal and Executive Code of Ukraine analyzes the regulation of public control over the activities of bodies and institutions that carry out criminal punishments. It has been established that among the problematic issues related to public control are issues of theoretical and legislative interpretation of public influence as one of the means of public control over the observance of the rights of convicts during execution of criminal punishments. Attention is drawn to the fact that the current Criminal-Executive Code of Ukraine does not fix the definition of public influence on the convicted person, only refers to the need for its application, in particular indirectly indicates some forms of this work in the Criminal-Executive Code of Ukraine. This situation allows subjective and broader interpretation of this remedy, which leads to violations in law enforcement practice. In addition, the Criminal Executive Code of Ukraine indicates the application of the entire set of correctional means only in relation to punishment in the form of deprivation of liberty. It has been proven that public influence is one of the most effective methods, which, unfortunately, is not given due attention. The participation of public and religious organizations (public influence) is an integral part of the process of resocialization of convicts and key elements of the practical component of the implementation of the principles of democracy within the framework of criminal law. The imperfection of national legislation in the field of public control, in particular public influence, negatively affects the development of a democratic, social and legal state. For the full and comprehensive implementation of the institution of public influence in practical activities, as well as the avoidance of double interpretation, it is necessary to establish at the legislative level, in the norms of criminal law, the definition of the institution of public influence on convicts, disclosure of its content, conditions of application to each specific type of punishment, which will contribute to justified and timely application of this remedy, including when executing punishments that are not related to the isolation of the convicted person from society.