SHORTCOMINGS OF PROTOCOLS ON ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSES UNDER ARTICLE 130 OF THE CUAO IN THE CONTEXT OF REFERENCES TO TRAFFIC REGULATIONS

Abstract

In the proposed study, the author highlights the connection between the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses (CUAO) and the Traffic Regulations (TR) with the aim of distinguishing the compositions of offenses, particularly using the example of Parts 1 and 4 of Article 130 of the CUAO. This article deals with holding individuals accountable for violating the requirements for drivers not to consume prohibited substances while operating a vehicle and for complying with the requirements for intoxication testing. The rulings of first and second instance courts for 2023-2024 have been studied, revealing the main shortcomings in the procedural drafting of protocols on administrative offenses under Article 130 of the CUAO, particularly concerning references to the Traffic Regulations. The author emphasizes the importance of correctly drafting the protocol as evidence in court. The administrative offense protocol serves not only as a source of evidence but also as a legal document that confirms the violation recorded by a competent officer of the National Police. It is noted that evidence obtained with procedural violations is inadmissible, often leading to the closure of proceedings in cases. Special attention is given to the analysis of court decisions where errors in referencing the Traffic Regulations complicate the establishment of the composition of an administrative offense. This is particularly important for ensuring the principle of legal certainty, which is necessary for organizing the defense of the accused. It is emphasized that the court does not have the right to go beyond the boundaries set by the administrative offense protocol and to change the factual circumstances or their legal qualification. Using specific cases as examples, it is shown how incorrect referencing of the Traffic Regulations leads to the protocol being recognized as inadmissible evidence. The author suggests continuing research in this area, particularly analyzing the terms of the Traffic Regulations and their significance for the correct drafting of materials in administrative offense cases. It is also recommended to analyze judicial practice to improve the procedural aspects of protocol drafting.