LEGAL DESTRUCTION OF AMNESTY: CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF LAW NO. 743-VII IN THE CONTEXT OF CONSTITUTIONAL AND CRIMINAL LAW PRINCIPLES

Abstract

This article provides a legal analysis of the Law of Ukraine No. 743-VII of February 21, 2014, which exempts individuals involved in the mass protests of 2013–2014 from criminal liability. The political dominance over legal criteria, as well as the public taboo surrounding professional legal assessments of the “Maidan” events, have made any objections to this law vulnerable to accusations of “treason” or “counterrevolution.” Despite this, the author reveals contradictions between the provisions of this law and fundamental principles of the Constitution of Ukraine, criminal law, and criminal procedure law – in particular, the principles of individualization of punishment, legal certainty, and fair trial guarantees.The article examines the legal consequences of a hastily adopted normative act of Ukrainian legislation, which, in the author’s opinion, constitutes an example of legal regression contradicting both the Constitution of Ukraine and the fundamental principles of criminal justice. In response, the article offers conceptual approaches to reviewing legislation in this area.The author emphasizes the need for a systematic reassessment of special legislation possessing the features of amnesty, with the involvement of independent legal expertise, as well as the implementation of individualized legal assessment mechanisms for each specific case. Such an approach is aimed at restoring the balance between political stability and legal accountability, and at ensuring the conformity of national legislation with European legal standards.Accordingly, the article underscores the need for institutional reflection and reconfiguration of legal responses to conflict-related socio-political events, in order to avoid further erosion of the legal system and the decline of public trust in the judiciary and state institutions as a whole. The study highlights the necessity of conducting a “legal audit” of the law in question, enabling an objective and transparent evaluation of the circumstances of past events without ideological pressure.Furthermore, the article draws attention to the institutional responsibility of members of parliament for violations of parliamentary procedures and includes original analytical diagrams, tables, and comparative models of amnesty.The positions advanced are supported by official transcripts of plenary sessions of the Verkhovna Rada. The research findings can be used in further legislative activity, including in the preparation of a constitutional submission to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, as well as in the development of strategies for legal revision aimed at eliminating normative gaps and contradictions arising from crisis-driven political decisions. The article may also be of practical value for the human rights community, international monitoring missions, and legal professionals working in the fields of criminal law, constitutionalism, and human rights protection.