FAILURE TO SUBMIT E-DECLARATION: CASE LAW

Judicial practice, to date, shows that most of the sentences under Art. 366-1 of the Criminal code of Ukraine, for submission by the declaring subject of knowingly unreliable information in the declaration or intentional non-submission by the declaring subject of the specified declaration, are guilty.

 Today, for a conviction under Art. 366-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, judges only need to prove the fact that the person committed an act in the form of failure to submit, late submission of the declaration or submission of inaccurate information in the declaration. Thus, as a rule, judges do not investigate the form of guilt with which a person acted, immediately presuming the presence of intent, but not always the person commits these actions with intent.

 The defense must focus on the lack of intent in the actions of the accused, as this is the main reason for the court to acquit.

 Consider the case where the defense emphasized the absence of guilt in the actions of the declarant as a sign of the subjective side of the act.

 On September 27, 2018, the Zhovtnevy District Court of Dnipropetrovsk sentenced a company inspector of the 7th Battalion of the 2nd Patrol Police Department in Dnipro to the Patrol Police Department of the National Police of Ukraine to a fine in the amount of UAH 51,000. and deprivation of the right to hold positions in government for a period of 2 years.

 The inspector was accused of not submitting an electronic declaration during the service for the protection of anti-corruption legislation.

 The Dnepr Court of Appeal, taking into account the arguments of the defense regarding the lack of intent, overturned this sentence, because the actions of the person do not constitute a criminal offense under Art. 366-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.

 On September 10, 2019, the Supreme Court reviewed the decision of the first and second instance and concluded that the decision of the Dnieper Court of Appeal is lawful and reasonable, and the cassation appeal of the prosecution is to be rejected.

 The Supreme Court based its decision on the fact that the actions of the police inspector did not constitute a crime due to lack of intent in his actions. The lack of intent is evidenced by the fact that this person was informed about the need to submit an annual electronic declaration for 2016, and the latter was not warned about the obligation to file a declaration upon dismissal. This fact confirms that the person was unaware of the need to file such a declaration, which can not indicate an intentional form of guilt in the actions of the person.

 With such a rank, like bachimo, the visibility of the mind in the days of the individual is the main argument for the corpulence of the whole day, for which the party is guilty.

 The Prikhodko and Partners Law Company has a positive practice of resolving disputes with NAPC. If you need help, get ready to go to the professional.