Abstract:
The paper is dedicated to the reflection on the body as a legal
phenomenon. Despite the fact that the body is ontologically closest to us,
from a legal point of view, it remains one of the most enigmatic phenomena.
Classical jurisprudence traditionally divides all legal entities into subjects
of law (the state, individuals, legal entities, the people) and objects of legal
relations (property, physical evidence, disputed items, etc.). However,
the body cannot be identified within such coordinates. On the one
hand, the body itself is not a subject of law. After all, purely incorporeal,
abstract entities, such as legal entities or the state, are subjects of law,
sometimes without any material embodiment. On the other hand, purely
corporeal existence does not yet guarantee legal capacity, as, for example,
the presence of a dead body does not necessarily indicate its absence.
This situation is fully reflected in the national legislation of Ukraine. Its
analysis shows that the human body is not defined as an independent
object of legal regulation, and the corresponding legal regime is absent.
The most symptomatic manifestation of the total disregard for the legal
issues surrounding the body is the absence of a corresponding term even
in special medical legislation that regulates organ transplantation, health
protection, and medical care.
Thus, the phenomenon of the body has now fallen outside the focus
of Ukrainian legal scholars. This leads to the absence of a conceptual
understanding of the body as a legal phenomenon and uncertainty
regarding its legal regulation as such. As a result, it can be stated that the phenomenon of the body should
be understood from a philosophical and legal perspective. The result of such reflection is the identification
of the following ontological features of the body as a legal phenomenon: syncretism, liminality, and
intentionality. This, in turn, provides grounds to assert that normativity is inherently inherent to the
body, where the body itself is a hypothesis and a disposition for surrounding individuals, and the inability
to communicate with it becomes a sanction. In conclusion, the author argues that the inviolability of the
body should be enshrined at the legislative level, making corresponding amendments to the Civil and
Criminal Codes of Ukraine.