Article 366-2 Declaration of False Information

Legislative essence of Article 366-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
This article establishes criminal liability for intentionally entering knowingly false data in a declaration for a significant amount—starting from 500 living wages and more than 2,000. Individuals may face fines up to UAH 102,000, community service, restriction or deprivation of liberty for up to 2 years, with disqualification from holding certain positions. Declarants include MPs, civil servants, and officials who have the obligation to submit electronic declarations.

High-profile court cases
Acquittals
One of the most notable cases is No. 991/6699/22 (HACC, March 16, 2023), where the court acquitted a deputy who did not declare a rented apartment worth about UAH 2 million. The court found insufficient evidence of intent, which is a key element for bringing charges under this article. This demonstrates the importance of skilled lawyers and investigators in proving intent.

Actual convictions
In case No. 991/500/23 (HACC, March 24, 2023), a deputy was convicted for incomplete declaration of land, real estate, and corporate rights. He was fined UAH 51,000 and barred from local government positions for one year. A similar situation occurred with the head of a farming enterprise, who was also fined.

Corrected declarations
Cases involving subsequently corrected declarations, such as No. 751/10686/23, show that correcting the declaration after the violation does not release one from criminal liability. Responsibility arises at the moment of filing false information, not upon correction.

Supreme Court: position on intent
A decision of the Cassation Criminal Court regarding a district council deputy stated that paying taxes and lacking computer skills are not grounds for exemption from declaration. If false information is entered to conceal it, this causes significant public harm and leads to liability.

Liability and risks for officials
Court practice is fundamentally based on proving intent and substantial differences between declared and actual assets, income, or obligations. Judgments show that even corrected errors do not guarantee avoidance of liability. At the same time, lawyers may use weaknesses in investigations or evidence collection to prove lack of intent—this often results in acquittals.

Problems of enforcement

• Establishing intent: In most cases, insufficient evidence of direct intent becomes an obstacle to convictions.
• Imperfect evidence gathering by law enforcement: Enables the defense to win high-profile cases.
• Dynamics of fines and qualifying elements.

Notable cases and public resonance
Article 366-2 has become an anti-corruption tool and frequently appears in media and political scandals. Convictions of officials in major cities, including local, regional, and Verkhovna Rada deputies, are now a reality for Ukrainian society.

How to protect yourself and act proactively?
Application of Article 366-2—especially in large sums or under competition—can pose serious risks for career and reputation. Competent legal support, timely declaration checks, proactive error correction, and professional audits can minimize the risk of prosecution.

Your chance to resolve any declaration issues
Need confident and professional support for declarations, audits, or appealing law enforcement actions? Our legal team has unique experience in defending under Article 366-2—from successful cases in HACC to complete support in preparation and submission of declarations. We not only consult—we protect. Timely, confidential, effective.
Contact us—your safety begins with expert support!

Author: Ihor Yasko, Managing Partner, WINNER Legal Company, PhD in Law.