CUSTOMS OFFICIALS’ ADMINISTRATIVE LIABILITY FOR THE VIOLATION OF THE PROCEDURE OF INFORMATION PROVISION: PROBLEMATIC ASPECTS OF LEGAL REGULATION

  • Ilona Mishchenko National University “Odessa Law Academy”
Keywords: administrative responsibility, informing, violation of information rights, customs consulting, customs official

Abstract

The article considers the problematic issues of bringing to administrative responsibility Ukrainiancustoms officials for violation of customs subjects’ information rights. The consequences ofnon-fulfilment and/or improper fulfilment of the Customs Code of Ukraine on advising on thepractical application of certain provisions of customs legislation, as well as on the improperproviding of information on customs rules to interested persons are analyzed. The grounds andpossibilities of bringing to administrative responsibility for violation of the procedure of customsconsulting and informing by customs authorities are compared. The legal provisions on suchliability are compared, depending on whose right (individuals or legal entities) to informationhas been violated by customs officials. The procedural features of bringing customs officers tosuch responsibility are analyzed, including the factors that complicate or make it impossible tobring them to justice. The author concludes that it is actually impossible to bring customs officialsto administrative responsibility for failure to provide customs advice, if it is initiated by a legal entity. These legal relations do not belong to the scope of the Law of Ukraine “On Citizens’Appeals”. It is emphasized the possibility of applying administrative penalties to customs officialsonly for violation of provisions of the Law of Ukraine “On Access to Public Information” inthe context of informing about customs rules. Based on the analysis of statistics, a conclusionabout the inefficiency of the entities authorized to draw up protocols on administrative offensesunder Article 212-3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of Ukraine is made. The reasons ofthe inefficiency are the small number of such entities compared to the number of offenses, lackof prompt response for notification of violations, complicated procedure for such response, etc.The author proves the invalidity of some provisions of the Customs Code on the responsibility ofcustoms officials and suggests ways to solve this problem.

References

1. Міщенко І.В. Консультування з питань державної митної справи: проблемні аспекти правового регулювання. European Political and Law Discourse. 2019. Vol. 6, Issue 4. С. 121–127.
2. Про звернення громадян : Закон України від 02.10.1996 № 393/96-ВР. Відомості Верховної Ради України. 1996. № 47. Ст. 256.
3. Mishchenko I. Organizational and legal bases of customs and tax consultancy: a comparative analysis. Customs Scientific Journal. 2019. No. 2. Pp. 83–89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32836/2308-6971/2019.2.7.
4. Митний кодекс України від 13.03.2012 р. № 4495-VI. Відомості Верховної Ради України. 2012. № 44–45; № 46–47; № 48. Ст. 552.
5. Щорічна доповідь Уповноваженого Верховної Ради України з прав людини про стан додержання та захист прав і свобод людини і громадянина в Україні. 2020 рік. URL: https://ombudsman.gov.ua/ua/page/secretariat/docs/presentations/&page=5 (дата звернення: 25.04.2021).
6. Порядок роботи зі зверненнями у Секретаріаті Уповноваженого Верховної Ради України з прав людини : Наказ Уповноваженого Верховної Ради України з прав людини від 17.05.2019 № 46.15/19. URL: https://ombudsman.gov.ua/ua/page/applicant/legislation/acts/(дата звернення: 25.04.2021).
Published
2021-07-23
How to Cite
MishchenkoI. (2021). CUSTOMS OFFICIALS’ ADMINISTRATIVE LIABILITY FOR THE VIOLATION OF THE PROCEDURE OF INFORMATION PROVISION: PROBLEMATIC ASPECTS OF LEGAL REGULATION. Administrative Law and Process, (3(30), 17-26. https://doi.org/10.17721/2227-796X.2020.3.02
Section
Special administrative law