The key task faced by Ukrainian society on the way to establishing a strong, independent and rich country is overcoming the corruption in public authorities, ensuring the transparence and legality of their activity. The aim of the paper is to formulate a disposition of Article 368 of the CC of Ukraine; a disposition which would be relevant in terms of legal technique, principles of humanity and supremacy of law. The first part of the paper is devoted to drawbacks of rule-proclaiming technique in the process of criminalization of ‘bribery’. On the basis of everything mentioned above we should make the following conclusions from the first part paper: 1) in the corpus delicti specified by Article 368 of the CC of Ukraine the notion of ‘illegal profit’ expresses the object of crime which because of this is an obligatory attribute; 2) the notion ‘illegal profit’ should be understood as welfare which cannot be accessed by the subject of a crime because of restrictions or prohibitions fixed in laws; 3) acquisition of ‘legal profit’, i.e. welfare not forbidden by law does not make up corpus delicti specified by Article 368 of the CC of Ukraine; 4) to achieve the aim of the norm mentioned above it is necessary to extrapolate the attributes of illegality which are given in the disposition of Article 368 of the CC of Ukraine from the object of crime to the behavior of an offender.The second part of the present paper is devoted to inspecting the legislator’s observance of principles of humanity and supremacy of law while criminalizing the corrupt practices in Article 368 of the CC of Ukraine. On the basis of the analysis carried out in the second part of the study the following conclusions should be driven: 1) the active version of disposition of Article 368 of the CC of Ukraine doesn’t take into account either the requirements of criminal law theory or the requirements of justice, that is why it must be changed; 2) social danger of ‘acquiring illegal profit’ for doing legal deeds is considerably lower than social danger of ‘acquiring
illegal profit’ for committing illegal deeds, this should be taken into account both by the legislator while criminalizing the mentioned deeds and by judges while defining the extent of responsibility; 3) the deeds which are compared should be fixed in different articles of the law on criminal responsibility because of difference in the objects of encroachment and also because of different social danger, the punishment for such deeds should also be correspondingly differentiated; till the introduction of corresponding changes into the legislation the courts should take into account the legality of the decision which was made as a circumstance which considerably extenuates the responsibility. The fulfilled research resulted in the conclusion that the following changes should be made in the CC of Ukraine: 1. Article 368 of the CC of Ukraine should be stated as follows: «1. Illegal profit acquisition (acceptance of an offer or promise) by a public officer as well as a request to give profit for themselves or for a third party for doing or not doing by this public officer in the interests of the person who offers, promises or gives profit or in the interests of a third party an illegal deed using their power or position is punished…». 2. The CC of Ukraine should be completed by Article 368-1 of the following contents: «1. Illegal profit acquisition (acceptance of an offer or promise) by a public officer for doing or not doing by this public officer in the interests of the person who offers, promises or gives profit or in the interests of a third party
a legal deed using their power or position is punished…».
Keywords: anticorruption legislation, corruption, corruption offence, European standards, illegal profit, welfare, profit, public officer.