For the completed offence of organizing illegal border crossing under Article 332 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, it is not necessary that the person intended to cross the border actually did so - SC CrimCC

In this criminal proceeding, the courts of previous instances found the defendant guilty and convicted him under part 1 of Article 332 and part 3 of Article 369 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The conviction was based on the fact that he organized the illegal crossing of the state border of Ukraine by his son and provided the head of a border service district inspectors’ unit with an undue advantage in the amount of UAH 70,498 for assisting him and his son in illegally crossing the state border outside designated checkpoints. In the cassation appeal, the defence challenged the conclusions of the lower courts regarding the proof of the defendant’s guilt, in particular with respect to the commission of the offence under part 1 of Article 332 of the Criminal Code.

Upholding the decisions of the lower courts, the Supreme Court stated that illegal crossing of persons through the state border of Ukraine consists of actions by a person aimed at ensuring the crossing (transportation or escort) of the state border by other individuals. The organization of such illegal crossing includes actions such as developing plans, determining the place and time of the illegal crossing, recruiting accomplices, forming an organized group, financing or arming it, etc.

For the organizer’s actions to constitute the completed offence under part 1 of Article 332 of the Criminal Code, it is not required that the person who, according to the plan, was supposed to cross the border actually did so. Criminal liability for the organizer arises from the very fact of organizing, directing, providing advice, means, or other forms of assistance.

In this criminal proceeding, the court of first instance established that the defendant sought a way to cross the state border of Ukraine outside checkpoints for himself and his son and asked a previously unknown person to assist him in exchange for monetary reward. Understanding that the witness was an official with authority and information regarding border protection, the defendant provided that person with an undue advantage in exchange for assistance in illegally crossing the state border for himself and his son. On the same grounds, the prosecution considered it proven that the defendant organized the illegal crossing of his son (born November 23, 1998) through the state border of Ukraine with the assistance of the witness.

The trial court’s judgment sets out the specific circumstances and method by which the defendant committed the criminal offenсe under part 1 of Article 332 of the Criminal Code. The fact that none of the persons he attempted to illegally transport across the state border was actually apprehended does not affect the legal qualification of his actions under this part of the article.  

Resolution of the Criminal Cassation Court of the Supreme Court dated December 16, 2025, in case No. 714/1508/22 (proceedings No. 51-2413км25) – https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/132692283.

This and other legal positions of the Supreme Court can be found in the Database of Legal Positions of the Supreme Court - https://lpd.court.gov.ua.