The study analyzes criminal law characteristics of terrorism in Ukraine, highlighting implications for national security and legal compliance.
The article presents a comprehensive criminal law study of terrorism as one of the most dangerous crimes against the foundations of Ukraine’s national security and international legal order. Special attention is given to the analysis of the objective and subjective elements of the crime provided for in Article 258 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In particular, the categories of public danger posed by terrorist attacks, the motives and purposes of their commission – such as intimidation of the population, influence on state authorities, foreign governments or international organizations – as well as the methods of carrying out terrorist acts, including the use of firearms, explosives, and information and communication technologies, are examined. The article explores the specifics of qualifying terrorist acts during wartime. Distinctions are made between terrorist groups, organizations, and associations and other forms of organized crime, such as armed formations, criminal gangs, and illegal paramilitary structures. The criminal law aspects of liability are considered not only for committing terrorist acts but also for undergoing training for terrorist activities, creating terrorist groups or organizations, financing, aiding, and participating in transnational terrorist networks. The article also identifies the problems arising in law enforcement practice, particularly in proving terrorist intent and establishing the link between an individual’s actions and international terrorist networks. An analysis is conducted of Ukraine’s legislation on the prevention and counteraction of terrorism in terms of its compliance with international legal standards set out in UN conventions, UN Security Council resolutions, and European Union acts, as well as compared with the practices of certain European countries. The need for further improvement of national legislation is substantiated, taking into account challenges in the security sector and geopolitical instability, as well as for expanding mechanisms of interagency coordination and institutional capacity of security forces to enhance the effectiveness of prevention and counteraction to terrorist activities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kovalchuk et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: