CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE TRANSFORMATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR COMMITMENT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Abstract

The article considers separate issues of the transformation of administrative responsibility for domestic violence. It is emphasized that the war in Ukraine intensified the problem of domestic violence, however, the aggravation of the problem of domestic violence and violence in partner relationships was felt by foreign countries and Ukraine during the coronavirus pandemic. It is emphasized that in the vast majority of cases the victims of violence are women and children. The scientific novelty of the proposed article consists in establishing, through the prism of administrative and criminal liability, the nuances of the transformation of administrative liability depending on the signs of an illegal act into criminal liability or, in the case of insignificance, exemption from liability. Emphasis is placed on evidence and proof. It is noted that the objectivity and completeness of the investigation of the circumstances of the case should be manifested in a detailed examination of each offense, providing an assessment of the evidence for each specific episode of the illegal act. Attention is drawn to the fact that the practice of the European Court of Human Rights indicates the need to evaluate evidence based on the criterion of proof "beyond a reasonable doubt". Such a proof must derive from a set of signs or irrefutable presumptions that are sufficiently weighty, clear and mutually agreed upon. It is concluded that the transformation of administrative responsibility for domestic violence can be carried out in two directions: by releasing the offender from administrative responsibility if the offense committed is insignificant, the guilty party sincerely repents, there are no negative consequences of the committed act and aggravating circumstances; by transforming administrative liability for domestic violence into criminal liability in the case of a systematic, socially dangerous act and with the corresponding necessary evaluation of evidence guided by the criterion of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt”. An essential aspect of the transformation is precisely the subjective assessment of the law enforcer when considering a specific case. The practice of the European Court of Human Rights and international conventions are the proper quality of its consideration.