How to qualify banditry: Does truth arise from argument?

In the literature and court practice, two opposing viewpoints exist on the qualification of attacks committed as part of a gang or jointly with it. According to the first one, the attacks are fully covered by the elements of banditry and do not require additional qualifications. Proponents of the second approach consider it necessary to qualify all attacks separately and charge banditry itself. The first approach is more common in scientific publications, while the other appears in court practice. The authors hold different views on the qualification of banditry, which distinguishes this article from other co-authored publications. In a polemical manner, each author presents and justifies his legal position on qualifying banditry and invites the reader to decide which position deserves to prevail. The relevant issues are examined through the prism of several principles, including the non bis in idem principle, the in dubio pro reo principle, legal certainty, and the completeness and accuracy of criminal qualification. The authors point to the differentiation of responsibility, the multiplicity of crimes, the so-called composite corpus delicti, and the "absorption" of one corpus delicti by another. In addition, the article provides a brief analysis of court verdicts under Article 257 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, available in the Unified State Register of Court Decisions, and illustrates the significant shortcomings of this register. The difference in approaches to applying criminal law does not preclude the consensus on the future of criminal law proposed in the conclusions.