Legal characteristics of forms of collaboration involving the voluntary occupation of positions in illegal authorities on the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine

This article presents a comprehensive analysis of the forms of collaboration involving the voluntary occupation of positions within illegal authorities operating in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine. It examines the unique construction of the objective element of collaboration-related offences, which – unlike the traditional understanding of qualifying circumstances as aggravating factors of the basic offence – encompasses autonomous forms of unlawful conduct, each with varying degrees of public danger. The relevance of analysing the forms of collaboration defined in parts 2, 5, and 7 of Article 111-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine is substantiated. These provisions reflect the most direct and active forms of cooperation with the occupying regime, creating substantial challenges for law enforcement due to difficulties in proving voluntariness and their close links with other criminal offences against the foundations of national security, thereby raising complex issues of cumulative qualification. The article offers a detailed examination of the shared features of the analyzed forms of collaboration: the socially dangerous conduct manifested in the voluntary occupation of a certain position; the territorial scope limited to temporarily occupied areas; and the existence of a special subject – namely, a citizen of Ukraine. The key differences among these forms lie in the nature of the positions held: those that do not involve managerial or administrative-economic functions (Part 2); those that do (Part 5); or positions within unlawful judicial or law enforcement bodies (Part 7). The formal structure of the criminal offence stipulated in Part 2 of Article 111-1 is explored, which is classified as a criminal misdemeanour. It is established that for this offence to be constituted, the mere fact of voluntarily accepting a certain position in a temporarily occupied territory – without exercising managerial or administrative-economic functions – is sufficient. Based on an analysis of judicial practice, the article identifies problematic aspects in the application of legislation on collaboration, particularly in determining the criteria for the «voluntariness» of the accused’s actions in temporarily occupied territories. It is revealed that courts typically presume voluntariness in the absence of direct evidence of physical coercion, while often failing to adequately consider the influence of psychological pressure under occupation.