(2018) 3 Visn. Nac. akad. prokur. Ukr. 77–85
doi
Title of the article	Qualification of Failure to Satisfy the Sentence Agreed to in a Plea-bargain
Author(s)	OKSANA KNYZHENKO Doctor of Law, Professor, senior lecturer, department of criminal justice and legal studies, Special Training Institute, National Prosecution Academy of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, 2015knio@gmail.com
Short title of the journal (ISSN)	Visn. Nac. akad. prokur. Ukr.
Year	2018
Issue	3
Pages	[77–85]
Language	Ukrainian
Abstract	Due to the diametrically opposed practices of evaluating the actions of persons who fail to satisfy the sentence agreed to in a plea-bargain, as well as the lack of a unified scientific approach to resolving these issues, this publication covers the questions of criminal liability for failure to satisfy the sentence agreed to in a plea-bargain. The purpose of the article is to distinguish between acts liabilities for which are set forth in the Arts. 389 and 3891 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (CC of Ukraine) in the context of failure to satisfy the sentence agreed to in a plea-bargain. It was figured out that the Art. 3891 in the CC of Ukraine appeared due to the criminal procedure novelties and the need for criminalization: 1) failure to comply with the actions which the off ender must perform in the benefit of the victim within a specified period, as in the reconciliation agreement (Art. 471 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (CPC of Ukraine)); 2) failure to cooperate in disclosing a criminal offense committed by another person and failure to fulfill the conditions for a partial exemption from civil liability in the form of indemnification to the state during the conclusion of an agreement on the recognition of guilt (Art. 472 of the CPC of Ukraine). The Art. 3891 of the CC of Ukraine set forth the criminal liability for failure to carry out obligations provided for in the agreement. The procedure to serve the sentence envisaged under the agreement is foreseen by the Criminal Executive Code of Ukraine. It was concluded that the failure to implement the agreement, the liability for which is prescribed by the Art. 3891 of the CC of Ukraine, is possible only in case of failure to comply with obligations foreseen by the Arts. 471, 472 of the CPC of Ukraine, but not in case of failure to comply with the agreed type and scope of sentence foreseen by the Art. 76 of the CC of Ukraine. The opinion was argued that qualification of actions for the range of offenses is carried out in case the person does not fulfill both the obligations assumed and the agreed sentence. In the opposite case, the principle enshrined in Art. 61 of the Constitution of Ukraine – nobody can be brought to legal liability of the same type for the same offense twice – will be violated.
Keywords	qualification of the offense; failure to satisfy the sentence; deliberate failure to implement the agreement; agreement in the criminal proceeding.
References	REFERENCES List of legal documents Legislation 1. Konstytutsiia Ukrainy [The Constitution of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 28 chervnia 1996 roku № 254к/96-ВР. URL: (accessed: 20.07.2018) (in Ukrainian). 2. Kryminalno-vykonavchyi kodeks Ukrainy [The Criminal-Executive Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 11 lypnia 2003 roku. URL: (accessed: 20.07.2018) (in Ukrainian). 3. Kryminalnyi kodeks Ukrainy [The Criminal Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 5 kvitnia 2001 roku № 2341-III. URL: (accessed: 20.07.2018) (in Ukrainian). 4. Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy [The Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 13 kvitnia 2012 roku № 4651-VI. URL: (accessed: 20.07.2018) (in Ukrainian). 5. Pro praktyku zdiisnennia sudamy kryminalnoho provadzhennia na pidstavi uhod [About the practice of criminal proceedings by the courts on the basis of agreements]: postanova Plenumu Vyshchoho spetsializovanoho sudu Ukrainy z rozghliadu tsyvilnykh i kryminalnykh sprav [resolution of the Plenum of the Highest Specialized Court of Ukraine for the Consideration of Civil and Criminal Cases] vid 11 hrudnia 2015 roku № 13. URL: (accessed: 20.07.2018) (in Ukrainian). 6. Pro sudoustrii ta status suddiv [On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 2 chervnia 2016 roku № 1402-VIII. URL: (accessed: 20.07.2018) (in Ukrainian). Cases 7. Vyrok Dzerzhynskoho raionnoho sudu m. Kharkova [The Verdict of Dzerzhynskyi District Court of Kharkiv City] vid 25 zhovtnia 2017 roku u provadzhenni № 1-кп/638/56/17. URL: (accessed: 17.07.2018) (in Ukrainian). 8. Vyrok Frankivskoho raionnoho sudu m. Lvova [The Verdict of Frankivsk District Court of Lviv City] vid 13 chervnia 2017 roku u provadzhenni1-кп/465/546/17. URL: (accessed: 17.07.2018) (in Ukrainian). 9. Vyrok Tyvrivskoho raionnoho sudu Vinnytskoi oblasti [The Verdict of Tyvrivsk District Court of Vinnytsia Region] vid 15 hrudnia 2017 roku u provadzhenni №1-кп/145/183/2017. URL: (accessed: 17.07.2018) (in Ukrainian). Bibliography Journal articles 10. Vytiaz M, ‘Kryminalno-pravova kharakterystyka umysnoho nevykonannia uhody pro vyznannia vynuvatosti (st. 3891 KK Ukrainy)’ [‘Criminal Legal Characteristic of Deliberate Non-fulfillment of the Agreement on the Recognition of Guilt (Art. 3891 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine)’] (2014) 2 Visnyk Natsionalnoi akademii prokuratury Ukrainy 36 (in Ukrainian). 11. Yashchenko S, ‘Pidstavy ta pryntsypy vstanovlennia kryminalnoi vidpovidalnosti za umysne nevykonannia uhody pro prymyrennia abo pro vyznannia vynuvatosti’ [‘Grounds and Principles for Imposing Criminal Liability for Intentional Non-fulfillment with the Agreement on Reconciliation or the Recognition of Guilt’] (2016) 1 Nashe pravo 120 (in Ukrainian).