Criteria for differentiating refusal to fulfill a legal duty and inaction

The paper comprehensively examines the concepts of «refusal to perform a legal duty» and «omission» in the criminal law of Ukraine, identifying their key differences in terms of form, mechanism of manifestation, temporal characteristics, and psychological content. Based on the analysis of doctrinal approaches, provisions of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, and international legal standards, as well as generalization of national judicial practice, the author substantiates that these forms of socially dangerous behavior, despite certain common features, have fundamentally different legal natures. Refusal is characterized by active, conscious, and categorical will expression, often demonstrative, aimed at deliberate non-performance of a duty established by law or other regulatory act, while omission constitutes passive abstention from actions that a person had both the real opportunity and legal obligation to perform. Special attention is paid to the objective and subjective elements of each form, including the type and degree of will expression, the temporal limits of the act, and the presence or absence of direct intent. The research highlights problematic aspects of law enforcement, particularly in cases where the external manifestations of behavior are similar, leading to difficulties in qualification and risks of misinterpretation. The study emphasizes the importance of unified approaches to interpretation, systematization of court decisions, and the need for legislative definition of these concepts in the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The proposed methodological recommendations and illustrative examples are aimed at improving the uniformity, stability, and predictability of law enforcement practice, ensuring compliance with the principles of legality, justice, and individualization of criminal liability.