CRIMINAL LAW ASSESSMENT OF VIOLATIONS OF THE PROCEDURE FOR STORAGE AND USE OF MILITARY PROPERTY IN CONDITIONS OF ARMED CONFLICT

Abstract

The article presents a comprehensive legal and doctrinal analysis of criminal violations related to the storage and use of military property in the context of armed conflict, with consideration of current law enforcement practice, legislative trends, and wartime challenges. It is substantiated that, under conditions of full-scale military aggression against Ukraine, the legal regime of military property has become critically important as a component of national defense capability and as an object of heightened criminal risk. It is found that a significant portion of crimes against the established procedure of handling military property is classified under Articles 410–414 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine; however, in practice, their differentiation from related offenses poses difficulties. The article provides a detailed examination of typical violations, such as unauthorized use of equipment, careless storage of ammunition, lack of proper inventory control, damage or loss of military property due to negligence. An empirical overview of criminal proceedings initiated between 2022 and 2024 is provided, drawing on materials from the State Bureau of Investigations, the Military Prosecutor’s Office, and open judicial decisions. The research includes a structural model of common violations and a generalizing table of examples, indicating legal qualification and consequences. A comparative legal analysis of approaches to protecting military property in NATO member states, particularly in the Armed Forces of the USA (UCMJ), Germany (Wehrstrafgesetz), and others, is presented. It is shown that international military systems rely on regulated, systematized inventory management supported by legislation and internal regulations. Based on the analysis, a set of proposals is developed for improving Ukrainian criminal legislation, including the legal definition of “military property,” introduction of qualifying features for acts committed in combat zones, expansion of current statutory provisions in extraordinary circumstances, and implementation of electronic inventory systems. The article concludes that unification of national legislation with NATO standards is essential for improving the legal response to such offenses. The findings contribute to practical recommendations on the protection of military property, improvement of criminal qualification, and strengthening of military discipline during martial law.