Correlation of the definition of “child” in international legal acts and Ukrainian legislation during the armed conflict

The article studies the definition of "child" at two levels: international and national.The author analyzes both international legal acts (the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (2000), the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (1949) and its Additional Protocol (1977), etc.) and domestic legal acts (the Constitution of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine "On Protection of Childhood", the Civil Code of Ukraine, Family Code of Ukraine).The author analyzes the peculiarities of Ukrainian legislation regarding such categories as "minimally capable" and "minor", which endows a person with different rights and obligations.The article focuses on the possibilities for a minor to obtain the rights of an adult before reaching the age of 18 and the scope of his/her rights and obligations thereafter.The author pays attention to the "novelties" of the national legislation on the definition of a "child" during an armed conflict.In particular, in the Laws of Ukraine "On Protection of Childhood" (2001) and "On Social Protection and Support of Children Affected by the Armed Aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine" (2024), the Procedure for Granting the Status of a Child Affected by Military Operations (2017) and Armed Conflicts and the Amendments to Procedure for Evacuation in the Event of a Threat or Occurrence of Emergency Situations (2023), Procedure for the identification, return, support and reintegration of children deported or forcibly displaced as a result of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine (2024), approved by the resolutions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, etc.Based on a comparison of the existing definitions of the concept of "child", the author concludes that there is no single approach to this issue.The national legal framework does not take into account the peculiarities of the existing division of "childhood" into minimally capable and minors when formulating the current legal framework.On the one hand, the state thus provides more protection to persons under 18, regardless of whether they already have full legal capacity.On the other hand, will the state thus not restrict persons who have acquired the rights of an adult before reaching the age of 18?In the future, this may lead to double interpretations in the formation and application of child protection mechanisms during armed conflict.