They ran into the TCC, beat them with axes, beat the TCC, attacked the TCC workers with axes, attacked with an ax

Today I would like to discuss a question that concerns a recent event regarding an attack on TCC and SP employees, so please subscribe to the YouTube channel: https://youtu.be/AubOx2HEeSI?si=EQiLZktcrw4nGMpQ

So, not far from one checkpoint, two residents of the Vishnytskyi district attacked employees of the recruitment center, one of them ran over an employee with a car, and then they began to hit them with axes.

This situation is worth discussing from a legal point of view.

So, when a person resists a TCC and S employee on the street, for example, as in this situation, if we look carefully, it turns out that the TCC and SP employees drove up in a car to a person who was on a horse, and he also had an ax .

This man began to communicate with the TCC employees and most likely they either wanted to give him a summons, or they offered him to go to the TCC, that is, what was unknown there, but it was clear on the video that they seemed to be trying to issue a summons.

At the same time, another person, who is most likely a friend or relative of the detained man on horseback, seeing this situation, tried to run over the TCC employees with a car.

That is, this is an attempt to cause bodily harm to TCC employees.

The driver of a VAZ 2121 car ran over a 41-year-old TCC employee. After which he turned around in this car, drove up again, got out of the car, took another ax and tried to fight off the employees with axes.

Then the second man turned the car around and stopped near the servicemen, then he hit the man with the blunt part of the ax in the forearm, the first man also struck the serviceman in the shoulder, then they hit the servicemen's car with axes.

Thus, the TCC and SP employees most likely suffered some kind of bodily harm. Then the men left.

It can be assumed that the attackers of the TCC employees were defending themselves from their illegal actions.

This situation can be interpreted in different ways, depending on which side it can be described from.

That is, on the one hand, you can protect yourself from illegal actions.

The media reported that the relatives of the man who was stopped by military personnel are serving, that is, his father allegedly served in the armed forces as a volunteer since the age of fourteen, and his son either died or went missing recently.

Therefore, such a situation arose that he was so indignant and he openly protested to the employees of the territorial acquisition center.

Based on this fact, the police reported that criminal proceedings had been initiated under Article 296 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, that is, these persons were detained for hooliganism. It shows that the car was also taken to the impound area, that is, evacuated.

But from the point of view of the law, based on what we saw in the media, in open sources, we can give our comment.

Firstly, you need to understand that hooliganism will most likely not happen in this situation. Why? Because hooliganism is causeless actions, that is, a person who hooligans, he acts, violating public order, he simply behaves cynically and impudently, his goal is to show his enthusiasm, to disrupt the normal foundations of public life.

The main thing here is intent, that is, if a person’s intent is aimed at some causeless thing, that is, a person acts without a reason, then we can say that his actions can be qualified as hooliganism.

But, in this situation, we see that the actions of these individuals against TCC employees were not without cause, that is, there was a specific reason, and the reason was clear what.

Why are the actions of TCC employees illegal? Because we have such legislation.

Everyone knows that TCC employees do not have the right to detain people on the street, do not have the right to serve and draw up summonses on the street, write them out by hand, and accordingly, hand over these summonses, that is, the law does not provide such powers to employees of territorial acquisition centers.

And a person who sees such a situation and finds himself in this situation naturally tries to protect himself.

But here the question arises: this protective measure, what they did, is it adequate or not?

Most likely, the men exceeded the necessary measure of self-defense. There may be liability for exceeding this required measure. But no for hooliganism.

That is, most likely there will be an article that provides for punishment for causing bodily harm.

We have minor, moderate and severe bodily injuries.

In this situation, if there was no fracture, the video shows that after being hit by a car, also after being hit with the back of the blunt part of the ax, it would most likely be that there were no fractures.

But we don’t know for sure, if a forensic medical examination establishes moderate bodily injuries, then, accordingly, suspicion will be brought against these persons who attacked for causing bodily harm.

The sanction for these articles is much lower than for hooliganism, but with a high degree of probability we consider this illegal, that is, the police are exceeding their proper powers, so here we definitely need to build normal defense tactics for people, take a lawyer and prove that They, well, firstly, had self-defense, and if they have it, it will be an excess of these measures of necessary defense.

Again, his car was seized as an object of causing bodily harm to a TCC employee, and perhaps not as a TCC employee, but simply as a citizen.

In this situation, in principle, there may still be, of course, additional qualifications, although now no one is announcing this and police officers are not talking about it. But there may be additional qualifications for opposing the lawful activities of military personnel or a person protecting public order or a law enforcement agency.

But we all know that TCC employees are not law enforcement officers and they do not protect public order, unless, of course, they were in the corresponding order of the commandant and did not conduct certain raids on the basis of the order of the commandant.

If they acted on the basis of the commandant’s order, then there may already be additional qualifications.

Well, let's see what will happen with this case, we think that most likely they can be released, and the classification of their actions will not be hooliganism.

And if you need legal assistance, then you can contact us in criminal cases, in cases related to detentions, illegal actions of the police, TCC, other law enforcement agencies, and migration issues.

Therefore, if you need legal assistance, please contact us.