September 25, 2024
On September 25, 2024, the First Senate has been deliberating the case upon the constitutional complaint of Vitalii Maklashevskyi in the public part of the plenary session in the form of written proceedings.
According to the judge-rapporteur in the case, Viktor Kryvenko, the applicant appealed to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to verify the compliance of Articles 14-3.1, 132-1.2, 258.8, 279-5.4 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offences (hereinafter, the “Code”) with the Constitution of Ukraine.
These provisions of the Code provide for:
- “administrative liability for offences in the field of road transport safety, <...> recorded by means of photography, filming, video recording, including in automatic mode, <...> shall be borne by the responsible person – an individual or the head of the legal entity in whose name the vehicle is registered, <...> and if the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, Individual Entrepreneurs and Public Organisations does not contain information about the head of the legal entity in whose name the vehicle is registered at the time of the request – a person acting as a head of such a legal entity”(Article 14-3.1);
- „exceeding the dimensional and weight standards established by law when large and heavy vehicles are moving on highways, streets or railway crossings shall result in a fine <...>”(Article 132-1.2);
- in case of detection of an administrative offence in the areas of ensuring <...> road transport safety, recorded by means of photography, filming, video recording, including in automatic mode, <...> a protocol on an administrative offence is not drawn up, and a resolution on an administrative offence is delivered without the participation of the person being brought to administrative liability <...>” (part eight of Article 258.8);
- a resolution on imposing an administrative penalty for offences under Article 132-2 of the Code and offences in the field of road transport safety recorded by means of photography, filming, video recording, including in automatic mode, may be issued without the participation of the person being brought to administrative liability (Article 279-5.4).
The author of the complaint, substantiating his position, believes that the disputed provisions of Articles 14-3 and 132-1 of the Code applied by the courts do not comply with the constitutional principles of the state governed by the rule of law, individualisation of legal liability, presumption of innocence, and violate his right to private property.
He also claims that the application of Article 258.8, Article 279-5.4 of the Code in his case violates his rights to defence and legal assistance.
The judge-rapporteur informed that Vitalii Maklashevskyi is the Director of “BELOHVI” LLC (hereinafter, the “Company”), which owns vehicles and uses them in its business activities. In the period from December 2021 to February 2022, the State Service of Ukraine for Transport Safety sent Vitalii Maklashevskyi 403 resolutions to bring him to administrative liability for committing an administrative offence under Article 132-1.2, namely: exceeding the regulatory parameters specified in paragraph 22.5 of the Traffic Rules of Ukraine by vehicles owned by the Company.
The applicant was imposed an administrative fine in the total amount of 4,828,000 hryvnas, and in accordance with the requirements of Article 300-2 of the Code, a double fine in the amount of 9,656,000 hryvnas.
Disagreeing with this, the applicant and the Company filed a lawsuit with the court of first instance to cancel the resolutions on the administrative offence. The court dismissed the administrative claims.
The court of appeal also dismissed the applicant’s appeal and upheld the decision of the first instance court.
The judge-rapporteur informed that the Court has several cases pending on similar issues.
After examining the case files in public part of the plenary session, the Court proceeded to the in-camera part of the plenary session to further discuss issues related to the constitutional proceedings in this case.
The plenary session was attended by a representative of the subject of the constitutional complaint, lawyer Andrii Sydorenko.
The video recording of the plenary session is available on the official website of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in the Section “Archive of video broadcasts of the sessions”.
