The research of the issues of abuse of rights is one of the most relevant in the theory of law, because the spheres of legal relations are rather diverse in which abuses are manifested. Preconditions and causes of such legal phenomenon in information relations are of particular interest in the process of so-called “sanctions cases”, when special economic and other restrictive measures are introduced against certain legal entities and private individuals.

The purpose of the article is to elicit the preconditions of emergence of such legal phenomenon as abuse of law on the example of realization individuals` rights in the sphere of information relations and granting recommendations for elimination of such preconditions.

The legal nature and content of the category of subjective law as a measure of freedom and possible behavior is analyzed, which is characteristic for subjects of private law and private legal relations. It is more correct to apply the term of power to state bodies. The existence of so-called discretionary powers is the most similar category to the category of subjective law, as it contains freedom of choice versions of  behaviour. The possibility abusing of law is inherent in the very nature of private law and the content of subjective law and the nature of discretion. The example of consideration the category of cases on appeal of sanctions applied by the President`s Decrees of Ukraine clearly illustrates the imperfection of legal regulation of relations on referring information to the category of information with limited access. The list of information that is state secret and the procedure of referring information to this category are analyzed. The example of pretrial investigation information shows the abstractness of legal regulation of the list of information that is the information of pre-trial investigation and at the same time can be the information related to state secret. It is concluded that abstruseness of wording the law gives public authorities extensive opportunities to abuse their discretionary powers in part of groundless dissemination of state secret at documents that must be evidence in administrative case only to delay the consideration of a case. The recommendations are conceded for improving the current legal regulation and expanding the list of information that cannot be state secret by information on essence of offence and legal norms violated by the subject to which a state applies any coercive measures.

It is given an interpretation of the provisions of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine and the Law of Ukraine “On State Secret”. The priority of effect of the provisions of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine over the provisions of the Law of Ukraine “On State Secret” under the rule of lex posterior derogate priori in the part of possibility of a party of trial to have access to the information, containing state secret and is evidence in a case.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Gribanov V, Predely osushhestvlenija i zashhity grazhdanskih prav (Rossijskoe pravo 1992) (in Russian).

2. Kot O, Zdiisnennia ta zakhyst sub’iektyvnykh tsyvilnykh prav: problemy teorii ta sudovoi praktyky (Alerta 2017) (in Ukrainian).

3. Kulakov V, Objazatel’stvo i oslozhnenija ego struktury v grazhdanskom prave Rossii (Volter Kluver 2010) (in Russian).

Websites

 4. ‘Zakhyst natsionalnoi bezpeky ne povynen zdiisniuvatysia za rakhunok porushennia prav liudyny: na VI Mizhnarodnomu forumi iz zakhystu biznesu obhovoryly sanktsii’ (Pravo.ua, 10.09.2021) <https://pravo.ua/zakhyst-natsionalnoi-bezpeky-ne-povynenzdiisniuvatysiaza-rakhunok-porushennia-prav-liudyny-na-vi-mizhnarodnomu-forumiizzakhystu-biznesu-obhovoryly-sanktsii> (accessed: 01.06.2022) (in Ukrainian).

5. ‘Pozovy shchodo sanktsii RNBO “zamorozheni” – holova Verkhovnoho Sudu poiasnyv prychynu’ (Ukrinform, 15.12.2021) <https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubricsociety/ 3369356-pozovi-sodo-sankcij-rnbo-zamorozeni-golova-verhovnogo-sudupoasnivpricinu.html> (accessed: 01.06.2022) (in Ukrainian).

6. ‘Rozghliad sprav pro sanktsii RNBO u Verkhovnomu Sudi halmuietsia cherez SBU, – suddia KAS Khokhuliak’ (Informator.press, 11.02.2022) <https://informator.press/ rozghliad-sprav-pro-sanktsii-rnbo-u-verkhovnomu-sudi-halmuietsia-cherez-sbusuddiakas-khokhuliak> (accessed: 01.06.2022) (in Ukrainian).

7. Bakonina O, Zastosuvannia sanktsii do telekanaliv: VS prodovzhyv rozghliad odniiei iz sprav YuRLIHA (JurLiga, 23.06.2021) <https://jurliga.ligazakon.net/news/204404_ zastosuvannya-sanktsy-do-telekanalv-vs-prodovzhiv-rozglyad-odn-z-spra> (accessed: 01.06.2022) (in Ukrainian). 8. Kamenev M, ‘Imenem prezydenta. Yak pratsiuie mekhanizm personalnykh sanktsii i khto oskarzhuie yikh u sudi’ (Graty, 30.12.2021) <https://graty.me/uk/imenemprezidentayak-praczyuie-mehanizm-personalnih-sankczij-i-hto-oskarzhuie-ih-u-sudi> (accessed: 01.06.2022) (in Ukrainian). 9. ‘Sanktsiini nadra: pershe rishennia sudu pro spetsdozvil, anulovanyi RNBO’ (Nadra.info, 11.11.2021) <https://nadra.info/2021/11/sanctional-subsoils-the-first-court-decision-in-thecaseof-a-special-permit-annulled-by-rnbo-decree-has-been-published> (accessed: 01.06.2022) (in Ukrainian).