Services on Demand
Journal
Article
English (pdf)
Article in xml format
Article references
Automatic translation
Send this article by e-mailIndicators
Cited by SciELO 
Access statistics
Related links
Cited by Google 
Similars in
SciELO 
Similars in Google
Share
Permalink
Justicia
Print version ISSN 0124-7441
Abstract
LEHEZA, Yevhen et al. Foreign experience of legal regulation of illegal influence on the results of official sports competitions. Justicia [online]. 2022, vol.27, n.41, pp.205-214. Epub June 30, 2022. ISSN 0124-7441. https://doi.org/10.17081/just.27.41.5362.
The purpose of the research is devoted to the criminological description and explanation of the state of illegal influence on the results of official sports competitions in Ukraine. Main content. An ultra-high level of latency of crimes according to Art. 369-3 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine is found, which is at least 99% of their actual level. The structure of match-fixing was revealed and analyzed depending on the type of sport, the method of illegal influence on the results of official sports competitions, as well as the subjects of bribery. The characteristic of the corresponding structural units is given.
Methodology:
Materials and methods research based on the analysis of documentary sources. the basis is the dialectical method of cognition of the facts of social reality, on which the formal legal and comparative legal approaches are largely based.
Conclusions:
The most intense criminal match-fixing is practiced in such kinds of sports as football, futsal, basketball and volleyball. Among the ways to encourage athletes to commit illegal acts, bribery predominates (75%). Approximately at the same level in terms of prevalence with small fluctuations in specific weight are structurally located such ways of influencing athletes as incitement (10%), conspiracy (8%) and coercion (7%). In general, illegal influence on the results of official sports competitions on bribery is directed directly at athletes. In total, the share of such influence is 78% with a slight predominance of bribery of several athletes (players) of one team (40%) over bribery of an individual player (38%). In second place in terms of ranking - bribery of members of the coaching staff (10%). Then bribery of judges (5%), owners of sports clubs (5%), support staff of clubs (2%).
Keywords : sports; official sporting events; influence; corruption; bribery; latency; structure.
