scholarly journals Guilt in compositions of crimes against bases of national safety of Ukraine: problem questions of theory and fixing in a law on criminal responsibility

2019 ◽  
pp. 136-150
Author(s):  
R. Chorniy
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Direct Indication ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Law ◽  
Transfer Of Information

The article is devoted to the investigation of forms and types of guilt in the composition of crimes against the basics of national security of Ukraine. The presence of a number of unresolved issues at the theoretical and legal level on this issue actualizes the need for its scientific elaboration and formulation of proposals to improve the provisions of the law on criminal liability. The purpose of the article is to investigate the problematic issues of forms and types of guilt in crimes against the bases of national security of Ukraine, ways of fixing them in the articles of Section I of the Special part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine and to develop sound proposals for their solution based on the provisions of the doctrine of criminal law. The article presents the existing approaches of doctrinal interpretation by scientists of the provisions on wine, its forms and types, through which the research of this feature in the crimes under Art. Art. 109 - 114-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. It is proved that the most reasonable is the psychological concept of guilt, which promotes the insertion of forms and types of guilt in crimes against the basics of national security with a formal composition, the elucidation of forms of guilt in the warehouses of crimes provided by articles of section I of the Special part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in which the legislator directly does not say that it is one of the preconditions for the proper qualification of the act committed by the person. It is proved that the basis for the conclusion about the intentional form of guilt is based on: 1) a direct indication of it in the norm of the law (Part 1 of Article 110 and Part 1 of Article 111 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 2) indication of the specific purpose or motives of the criminal behavior (Part 1 of Article 109, Note 1, Part 1 and Part 2 of Article 110-2, Article 113, Part 1 of Article 114 and Article 112 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) ; 3) combination of the above mentioned features in one norm (Part 1 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 4) interpretation of terms used in the dispositions of certain articles and / or through the description in the law of the features of the crime (Part 1 of Article 110, Part 2 of Article 109, Part 1 of Article 110, Part 1 of Article 111, Article 112, Article 113, Part 1 of Article 114 and Part 1 of Article 114-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 5) interpretation of terms used in other articles of the Special (espionage as a part of state treason) or articles of the General part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (conspiracy to commit the actions provided for in part 1 of Article 109 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (Article 26 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine), attempted murder state or public figure (Article 112 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) (part 1 of Article 15 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 6) the orientation of socially dangerous acts. The specifics of constructing all these norms testify to the direct intent of the person who committed the respective crime. On this basis it is substantiated that the lack of specification of intent in part 1 of Art. 111 and Part 1 of Art. 110 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine does not contribute to the clarity of the provisions of the Criminal Code in the specified part, and the direct intent in the composition of these crimes is evidenced by: 1) special purpose (Part 1 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code); 2) the terms used in the dispositions of the said articles (“violation of the order… established by the Constitution of Ukraine” (part 1 of Article 110), “transfer of information…, transition to the enemy's side, rendering… assistance in carrying out subversive activities against Ukraine”) ( Part 1 of Article 111); 3) the focus of socially dangerous action. In order to eliminate the ambiguous interpretation of the provisions of Part 1 of Art. 110 and Part 1 of Art. 111 of the Criminal Code it is proposed to amend them accordingly. The forms and type of guilt in the warehouses of crimes with material composition (Part 3 of Article 110, Part 3 and 4 of Article 110-2, Part 2 of Article 114-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) were not clearly reflected in the relevant rules of the law. It is substantiated that the subject's attitude to socially dangerous consequences (deaths of people (h. 3 Art. 110, h. 2 Art. 114-1), other grave consequences (h. 3 Art. 110, h. 4 Art. 110- 2, Part 2 of Article 114-1) Causing considerable property damage (Part 3 of Article 110-2) can be intentional or negligent.

ON THE FORMAL ASPECT OF REGULATION OF THE CRIMINAL LEGAL IMPACT IN RESPECT OF MILITARY PERSONNEL IN THE RF CRIMINAL CODE

2021 ◽  
pp. 5-11
Author(s):  
R. V. Zakomoldin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Military Personnel ◽  
Military Service ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The paper analyzes special norms and provisions of the RF Criminal Code reflecting the specifics of criminal law impact towards such a particular subject as military personnel. The author studies the nature, meaning, and varieties of special criminal law norms. The paper highlights the diversity of such norms and their presence in General and Special parts of the criminal law. In this respect, the author explains that these norms have a dual purpose: they are applied both instead of general norms and along with them, supplementing and specifying them. The author emphasizes the certainty, necessity, and reasonability of special norms and provisions in criminal law. The study pays special attention to military criminal legislation as a special criminal legal institution and a set of special rules and provisions that allows differentiating and individualizing criminal responsibility and criminal punishment of servicemen, taking into account the specifics of their legal status and the tasks they perform in the conditions of military service. The author considers special norms and provisions of the General Part of the RF Criminal Code regulating particular military types of criminal punishment and the procedure for their imposition (Articles 44, 48, 51, 54, 55), as well as the norms and provisions of the Special Part of the RF Criminal Code on crimes against military service (Articles 331–352). Besides, the study identifies close interrelation and interdependence of special norms and provisions of the criminal law with the criminal procedure and criminal executive legislation because they are the elements of a single mechanism of criminal law impact on military personnel, and only their combination ensures the effectiveness of such impact. Based on the analysis, the author formulates the conclusions and proposals to introduce amendments and additions to the RF Criminal Code concerning military criminal legislation. First of all, the author proposes highlighting the section “Criminal liability of military personnel” and the chapter “Features of criminal liability and punishment of military personnel” in the General part of the RF Criminal Code and abandoning the provision of part 3 of Art. 331 in the Special part.

scholarly journals Genesis of regulation of special forfeiture in Ukraine

2021 ◽  
pp. 18-23
Author(s):  
Vadym SAMOILOV
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Law ◽  
Second Period ◽  
Current Stage ◽  
Made In

Introduction. This paper analyzes the development of norms on the implementation of special forfeiture in Ukraine since its independence. The purpose of the paper is determining the main periods of development of legal regulation of special forfeiture in Ukraine and highlighting the main features of each period. Results. According to the criterion of development of features of structural placement of norms on special forfeiture in the Criminal Code of Ukraine, three main periods of regulation of the specified measure of criminal character are allocated. The main features of the first period of regulation of special forfeiture, which is the regulation of the implementation of the specified measure of criminal nature at the level of norms of the Special Parts of the Criminal Codes of Ukraine of 1960 and 2001, are characterized. The main problems concerning the law enforcement of the rules on special forfeiture, which arose in connection with the legislative approach to special forfeiture at this stage, are described. The peculiarities of the second period of development of regulation of special forfeiture are described, during which the latter was carried out at the level of both the General Part of the Criminal Code and its Special Part. The conflicts between the provisions of the General and Special Parts of the Criminal Code regarding special forfeiture that arose at this stage are described, as well as some inconsistent legislative steps to amend the provisions of the law on criminal liability relating to special forfeiture. The main features of the current stage of legal regulation of special forfeiture are described. The problems of making changes to the legislation related to the adoption of laws that do not take into account the peculiarities of the development of legal regulation of special forfeiture are described. Conclusion. Relevant conclusions have been made, in particular, that special forfeiture, contrary to stereotypical views, is not a fundamentally new (implemented over the last decade) measure of a criminal nature in the criminal law of Ukraine. The stages of development of norms on special forfeiture are singled out. The chronological boundaries of each of the stages are set.

scholarly journals Criminal responsibility for public appeals to committing crimes against national safety in foreign legislation

2021 ◽  
pp. 403-410
Author(s):  
Vladyslav Kubalskyi
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Foreign Experience ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article is devoted to research of positions of foreign legislation, that envisage criminal responsibility for public appeals to committing crimes against national safety. Attention is accented on the problems of improving of legislation of Ukraine in this sphere. The suggestions of the Ukrainian scientists, related to improving of norms of Division І Special part of the Criminal code of Ukraine, that regulate responsibility for public appeals to committing crime against bases of national safety, are analyzed. The purpose of the article is to identify the main ways to improve the criminal legislation of Ukraine, which provides for liability for public appeals to commit crimes against national security, based on doctrinal approaches of domestic scholars and foreign experience of criminal liability for such crimes. In modern conditions, the problem of improving criminal law for public appeals to commit crimes against the foundations of national security of Ukraine, criminal liability for which is provided for in Part 2 of Art. 109 and Part 1 of Art. 110 of the Criminal code of Ukraine. Research on these issues without an analysis of foreign experience in this sphere seems to be extremely limited. It is proposed to supplement the Criminal сode of Ukraine with the article «Public appeals to actions aimed at harming the foundations of national security of Ukraine». The expediency of combining crimes, the responsibility for which is provided by Part 2 of Art. 109, part 1 of Art. 110, part 1 of Art. 2582, art. 295, art. 436, part 2 of Art. 442 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in one criminological group under the general name «public calls to commit crimes against national security».

scholarly journals MEASURES OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO PROHIBITIONS IN THE FIELD OF TRAFFIC SAFETY AND VEHICLE OPERATION: SOME ASPECTS OF REGULATORY CERTAINTY AND PRACTICE OF USE

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 59-68
Author(s):  
A. Iashchenko
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Traffic Safety ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Primary Role ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Vehicle Operation ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
Criminal Justice Response

The article is devoted to the research of measures of criminal justice response to prohibitions in the field of traffic safety and vehicle operation. It is noted that the primary role in state response to violation of criminal justice prohibitions in the field of traffic safety and vehicle operation is given to punishment, but no less important role is paid to other alternative to prohibition measures of criminal justice nature based on the concussion (special confiscation) or the encouragement (exemption from criminal responsibility or serving a sentence). It is concluded that the normative regulations of threats of application of certain punitive measures of criminal justice nature in sanctions of the articles of this section of the Special part in which the legislator defines the threat of application of various types of punishment for committing the crimes stipulated in crimes’ dispositions, needs specification from the point of view of the system interconnection, along with the provisions of the General Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, whereas the practice of application of special confiscation its further distribution and development, considering the proposed recommendations of its delimitation with the so called criminal procedural confiscation as means of criminal procedural concussion. In particular, it is noted that such clarification may be implemented either by enforcing additional penalties specified in the sanctions of Part 1, 2, 3 of Article 286, part 1 of Article 287 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, to the common list of types of punishments, with their separate meaningful definition in the corresponding articles of the section X of the General part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, or by covering normative definition in sanctions of the specified articles of section XI of the Special part of threats of application of such additional types of punishments according to the existing parts of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In this regard the sanctions of Article 286 and 287 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine propose to make appropriate changes. As for the practice of applying special confiscation for committing crimes in the field of traffic safety and vehicle operation, it is recommended that the question of its implementation should be based on the fact that the subject of special confiscation may be defined in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Art. 96-2 of the Criminal Code - items 6, 6-1 part 9 of Art. 100 of the Criminal Procedure Code, paragraph 2, part 1 of Art. 96-2 of the Criminal Code - item 2 part 9 of Art. 100 of the CPC, paragraph 3, part 1 of Art. 96-2 of the Criminal Code - item 5 part 9 of Art. 100 of the CPC, paragraph 4, part 1 of Art. 96-2 of the Criminal Code - item 1 part 9 of Art. 100 of the CPC items of the material world that possess a certain property value, and are usually considered as physical evidence in criminal proceedings initiated on the fact of committing certain crimes in the field of traffic safety and vehicle operation.

Criminal Law and Procedure

Japanese Law ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 450-466
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Oda
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
Basic Concepts ◽  
The Law ◽  
Terrorist Acts

The primary statute of criminal law in Japan is the Criminal Code of 1907. There are various separate laws which provide for specific crimes, generally denoted as ‘special criminal laws’. Some offences were added by way of such special laws in the recent years including the law against terrorist acts of 2019. The The Criminal Code is divided into the General Part and the Special Part. The former lays down the general principles and basic concepts of criminal law such as intention, negligence, attempt, accomplice, etc. The latter lists specific offences. Constitution guarantees the rights of defendants and suspects. Criminal procedure has become much more transparent, and better protection is given to suspects.

scholarly journals Role of the footnotes to articles of the Criminal Code of Ukraine regarding differentiation of criminal responsibility

2020 ◽  
pp. 63-73
Author(s):  
Natalia Antoniuk
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Body ◽  
Paradoxical Situation ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
Key Terms

Footnotes to articles of the Criminal Code of Ukraine have a function of making understanding the essence of the features of the body of crime easier. These features are clarified or detailed in the footnotes. Nevertheless, sometimes the legislator awards the footnote with functions it does not comply with. Such an approach of the legislator led to the discussion if the footnote can prescribe the features of the body of crime as the disposition of the norm does. However, the analysis of the footnotes to articles of the Criminal Code allows us to make the conclusion that the mentioned above approach is not executed in full scope by the legislator while constructing the text of the footnote. In some footnotes the legislator clarifies such an important feature of crime as volume of damages, in the others – defines feature of repeated crime. Moreover, sometimes the footnote substitutes the disposition of the article and leads to differentiation of criminal responsibility. This is a rather paradoxical situation when criminality of the action is not directly prescribed in the disposition but takes ground from the supplemental element of the article. We can illustrate the above said using the example of the footnotes to articles 149 and 303 of the Criminal Code in the part of actions encroaching minor victims or victims under the age of 18 years old. For instance, in certain footnotes to these articles the legislator has prescribed that methods of committing these crimes don’t matter. So, methods as the essential features of bodies of mentioned crimes lose their obligatory role, if crimes are committed versus minors or persons under age. We suggest that the differentiation of criminal responsibility must not be done using footnotes. It is necessary to mention an important differentiating role of the footnote to article 45 of the Criminal Code, which envisages list of corruption offences. We suppose that such a key definitions shall be interpreted in certain articles of the Code but not in the footnotes. Optimally – terminological chapter is to be implemented into the Criminal Code. The footnote to the article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code must only detail or clarify the essence of the features of crime, but cannot broaden their essence or volume. The footnote shall not obtain normative character in the meaning of establishing criminality of the action. If the necessity to define some unified notions in the Criminal Code occurs, then it should be defined within the borders of the terminological chapter of the code. Features of the body of crime must be directly prescribed in the disposition of the Special Part of the Criminal Code. It is necessary to remove footnotes-definitions and footnotes-lists to the terminological chapter. At the same time, it is important to remember that the terminological chapter in the General Part of the Code is cross-cutting. So, if the necessity to clarify or to detail something concerning the body of specific crime occurs, the legislator can easily do this with the use of the footnote. Key terms: footnote, differentiation of criminal responsibility, disposition of the article.

scholarly journals Relations of crimes of different gravity degree in the Criminal code of Ukraine

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-157
Author(s):  
Oleksandra Skok ◽  
Inna Shylo
Keyword(s):  
Economic Activity ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Impact

The article deals with the classification of criminal offenses in the current Criminal Code of Ukraine. All the crimes, the responsibility for which are established in the Special part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, are analyzed and on the basis of this detailed description of crimes of small gravity, crimes of moderate gravity, serious and especially serious crimes is carried out. According to Art. 12 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, depending on the severity of the crimes are divided into crimes of small severity, moderate, serious and especially serious. The legislative classification of crimes was made taking into account the type of punishment (fine and imprisonment), as well as the amount of punishment. This is the norm of the current Criminal Code acquired in accordance with the Law «On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine on the Humanization of Liability for Offenses in the Field of Economic Activity» of November 15, 2011 No. 4025-VI. The percentage of different categories of crimes has been analyzed and the impact of the severity of crimes on some criminal liability issues has been determined. A study of the ratio of minor crimes to other categories of crimes showed that minor crimes constitute a fairly significant category of crimes, compared to others, namely 24.9%. In the Special Part of the Criminal Code, there is a «sharp jump» from the category of minor crimes to the category of especially serious crimes, which is connected with the occurrence of especially grave consequences in the qualified criminal offenses.

scholarly journals “Inconsequent Carelessness” in Modern Conditions of Criminal Legislative Reform: The Problem and Ways to Solve it

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 3-13
Author(s):  
Serhii Bahirov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Mental Attitude ◽  
Legislative Reform ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Future ◽  
General Part ◽  
Normative Models

The article highlights the problem of inconsistency of legislative provisions on careless forms of guilt,which are contained in the General Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, to the constructive peculiarity ofcriminal offenses that are provided by the Special Part of this Code.The author draws attention to the problem which emerged due to the future transfer of a significantnumber of criminal offenses from the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses to the book of criminaloffenses of the new Criminal Code of Ukraine. The vast majority of these offenses are constructed so as tohave a formal composition, to wit the consequences outside it. At the same time, the construction of acareless form of guilt and its varieties, recklessness and negligence, the normative models of which arecontained in the General Part of the draft Criminal Code of Ukraine, provides for a mental attitude to theconsequences.It is substantiated that the developers of the draft of the new Criminal Code of Ukraine will have todecide on one of the two directions of the system: either to completely abandon the criminalization ofinconsequent carelessness, leaving the legislative concept of carelessness covering only criminal offenseswith material composition, or to agree with the idea of presence of the inconsequent carelessness within theinstitute of criminal offense.Future problems with determining the form of guilt of criminal offenses are shown, if among theprovisions of the General Part of the projected Criminal Code of Ukraine there is a provision on the limitedpunishment of a careless behavior.The principle of constructing norms on criminal liability for careless acts is proposed, according towhich resultative careless delicts should be provided in the book of crimes, and careless offenses with aformal composition should be misdemeanors.In order to properly cover the provisions of the General Part of the future Criminal Code of Ukraine onthe carelessness of all constructive types of careless offenses, the author proposes to provide two types ofcareless form of guilt: resultative carelessness and inconsequent carelessness.Theoretical modeling of the relevant criminal law norms has been carried out, which will consolidate theinconsequent carelessness and its varieties.

Influence of the ideas of Ivan Yakovlevich Foynitsky on the formation of criminal responsibility for kidnapping in modern Russia

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (12-3) ◽  
pp. 230-234
Author(s):  
Natalia Martynenko ◽  
Anatoly Maydykov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Modern Concept ◽  
Russian Scientist ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyzes the ideas of the Russian scientist in the field of criminal law Ivan Yakovlevich Foinitsky (1847-1913) on the establishment of criminal liability for kidnapping. The influence of I.Y. Foinitsky's ideas on the modern concept of criminal law protection of a person from abduction is shown. It is concluded that the norm on responsibility for the abduction of a person existing in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, its location in the structure of the norms of the Special Part, in many respects includes the provisions laid down by I.Y Foinitsky.

LEGAL CONTENT OF CATEGORY“PREPARATION FOR PERFORMANCE OF AN INTENTIONAL CRIME”

2020 ◽  
pp. 39-45
Author(s):  
V. F. Lapshin ◽  
E. H. Nadiseva
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Principle Of Legality

The implementation of criminal liability for an unfinished crime, interrupted at the stage of preparation, is not consistent with the basic criminal law requirements, since the act committed at the stage of preparation, clearly does not contain any signs of a crime or its composition. At the same time, the imposition of punishment is carried out in accordance with the sanction of the norms of the Special part of the criminal code, which indicates the existence of an act not actually committed by the convicted person. This allows us to raise questions about the legality and necessity of bringing a person to criminal responsibility for an act recognized as preparation for the Commission of an intentional crime. The analysis of provisions of the current criminal legislation, sources of scientific literature, and also materials of judicial practice on criminal cases about incrimination of preparatory actions, allowed to draw a conclusion according to which attraction of the person to responsibility for Commission of the act characterized as preparation for Commission of crime, contradicts the principle of legality and justice. In this regard, it is proposed to change the current criminal legislation, eliminating the rules on the preparation of the Institute of unfinished crime.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document