Violation of People’s Quarantine Rules: an Analysis of Composition of the Criminal Offense

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to identify problematic issues of qualification of violation of people’s quarantine rules, to establish the shortcomings of construction of Art. 44-3 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses, and to determine ways to eliminate them. The article uses a set of scientific methods, namely: terminological, system-structural, formal-logical, comparative-legal. The theoretical ground of study consists of works of Ukrainian and foreign scholars, provisions of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses, as well as practice of their application. The scientific novelty of the article is that it defines the object, the objective side, the subject, the subjective side of the administrative offense under Art. 44-3 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses as the necessary condition for effective application of this norm as a measure of administrative enforcement. Some shortcomings in structure of this offense, primarily related to its objective side, have been identified and some ways to eliminate them have been suggested. Conclusions. 1. The direct object of the administrative offense under Art. 44-3 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses should be recognized as public relations in field of public health protection against infectious diseases. 2. As to the objective side of the offense, it could be committed in the following forms: a) violation of rules on quarantine of people; b) violation of sanitary-hygienic, sanitary-anti-epidemic rules and norms provided by the Law of Ukraine «On protection of the population from infectious diseases», other acts of legislation; c) violation of decisions of local self-government bodies on issues of control of infectious diseases. 3. With regard to such various forms of the objective side the title of Art. 44-3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses should be defined more specifically, as it concerns only one act – violation of rules on quarantine of people, and therefore does not cover others. 4. The word «people» should be excluded from the title and disposition of Art. 44-3 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses because in all regulatory acts defining rules of quarantine, the term «quarantine» is used, not «quarantine of people». 5. It is worth to replace definitions of «sanitary and hygienic rules and regulations» and «sanitary and anti-epidemic rules and regulations» in the disposition of Art. 44-3 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses by «sanitary regulations», due to non-clear separation of sanitary and hygienic and sanitary and anti-epidemic rules and regulations and also because of the fact that they are types of social norms. 6. Administrative offense under Art. 44-3 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses has formal composition so the damage from such violation is not a mandatory feature of its composition. 7. Subjects of administrative offenses stipulated by Art. 44-3 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses may be both private persons and officials. 8. On the subjective side of the offense is characterized by guilt in form of intent or negligence.

Keywords: administrative liability; quarantine; coronavirus; administrative offense; infectious diseases; rules of quarantine of people.