scholarly journals Forms of Participation of Several Persons in the Commission of Crimes

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evgenii Leonidovich Libenzon

The article reveals the legal nature of complicity in a crime, the objective and subjective signs of complicity, gives a description of complicity, examines the main problems that practitioners face in resolving the problems of criminal law regulation of joint participation in a crime, including the presence in the norms of the Special Part of the Criminal Code RF, provides a legal assessment of the legality of establishing responsibility for certain types of actions of accomplices, whose criminal liability is presented as independent offenses

2020 ◽  
pp. 98-104
Author(s):  
Evgenii Leonidovich Libenzon

The article reveals the legal nature of complicity in a crime, reveals the objective and subjective signs of complicity, gives a description of complicity, examines the main problems that practitioners face in resolving the problems of criminal law regulation of joint participation in a crime, including the presence in the norms of the Special Part of the Criminal Code RF, provides a legal assessment of the legality of establishing responsibility for certain types of actions of accomplices, whose criminal liability is presented as independent offenses.


Author(s):  
Vаleria A. Terentieva ◽  

The systematic nature of criminal law forms the main features of the industry, namely: normativity, universalism, that is, the absence of casuistry and obligation. The strict consistency of both the entire industry and its individual institutions allows avoiding the redundancy of criminal law regulation, clearly determining the legal status of a person in conflict with the law. However, the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation do not always meet these requirements due to defects in legal technology, and, sometimes, gaps in regulation. In practice, the courts, in an effort to minimize the above defects, sometimes resort to excessive criminal law regulation; as an example, the article gives the ratio of the application of suspended sentence and placement in a special educational institution of a closed type. The article analyzes sentences to minors in which Art. 73 and Part 2 of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation were simultaneously applied in one sentence for the same act. For a comprehensive study, the article analyzed sentences to minors held in special educational institutions of a closed type for the period from 2014 to 2020, criminal statistics posted on the website of the Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, as well as various points of view of leading legal scholars. The research methods of static observation, analysis and synthesis, the system-structural method, as well as a number of factographic methods, were used. The study develops from the general to the specific, i.e., first, systematicity is analyzed as a property of the branch of criminal law and then as a property of a legal institution, namely, the release of minors from criminal liability. Consistency as a property of the institution of exemption from criminal punishment presupposes the impossibility of intersecting elements within one institution. Special attention is paid to the legal nature of suspended sentence as the most common punishment measure for minors, and its effectiveness. Then the cases of the simultaneous application of Art. 73 and Part 2 of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are analyzed. In the course of the study, the author examines the features of suspended sentence and placement in a special educational and educational institution of a closed type, compares these two forms of criminal liability, and highlights the differences. The conclusion is that the simultaneous placement in a special educational institution of a closed type and suspended sentence are a redundancy of criminal law regulation. The article raises the question of the need to improve the Criminal Code in terms of the development of placement in a special educational and educational institution of a closed type as a type of exemption from criminal punishment: the court is to be provided with the opportunity to control the juvenile offender’s correctional process.


Author(s):  
V.V. Rovneyko

The article deals with the issues of criminal law and legal assessment of patent trolling, which, on the one hand, is a kind of abuse of law and violation of the principle of good faith of participants in civil legal relations, and, on the other hand, has a sufficient degree of public danger and prevalence to be the basis of criminal liability. The author's conclusions are based on the study of media materials and judicial practice. Most of the “victims” of patent trolling pay money, not being mistaken about the legality of the claims, but being guided by the desire to avoid legal costs and other problems associated with litigation. Establishing the criminal legal nature of patent trolling is somewhat problematic, since it is a combination of fraud and extortion in the broad sense of these concepts. Signs of existing crimes, such as fraud (article 159 of the criminal code) and extortion (article 163 of the criminal code), contain definitions of these concepts in a narrow sense. This does not allow such actions to be classified as specified crimes.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 3-13
Author(s):  
Serhii Bahirov

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.


Author(s):  
Dongmei Pan

The article discusses the latest changes in the Criminal Code of the People’s Republic of China that were introduced at the end of 2020. The amendments were adopted after numerous revisions and discussions, and were officially published on December 26, 2020. As a result, fifteen new offences were added to the Criminal Code, and 47 articles were modified or amended. These amendments refer to financial security, intellectual property, security of public healthcare, production of food and medications, and the regulation of criminal liability for crimes connected with minors. Thus, they reflect the reaction of criminal legislation to public life through the criminalization and penalization of some publically dangerous actions. At the same time, they indicate the direction of Chinese criminal policy that combines «leniency» and «strictness». For example, most of the newly added offences are minor. On the whole, changes and amendments to the current Criminal Code of China are connected with different institutes of criminal law: reduction of the age of criminal liability for some offences; addition of new offences; introduction of changes and amendments to the dispositions and sanctions of some of the existing offences; provision of an opportunity to impose penalties that are under the lower limit determined by the corresponding Article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of China if the property obtained in the crime is recovered, or the economic damage to the victim is compensated.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (12-3) ◽  
pp. 230-234
Author(s):  
Natalia Martynenko ◽  
Anatoly Maydykov

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.


Author(s):  
R. V. Zakomoldin ◽  

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.


Author(s):  
Андрей Владимирович Кулаков ◽  
Александра Юрьевна Болотина

Статья посвящена исследованию природы соучастия в преступлении как самостоятельного института уголовного права. Признавая институт соучастия одним из дискуссионных в уголовно-правовой доктрине, авторы отмечают, что в настоящее время спорным является вопрос о юридической природе соучастия, решение которого имеет не только теоретическое, но и практическое значение, заключающееся в обосновании ответственности соучастников преступления при вынесении судебного приговора. Правовая природа соучастия в преступлении проявляется в том, что данный институт определяется нормами уголовного права и тем самым представляет собой особое уголовно-правовое явление, характеризующееся рядом существенных признаков. Основная функция института соучастия как уголовно-правового института заключается в обосновании уголовной ответственности лиц, оказывающих содействие в совершении преступлении. В настоящее время в доктрине выработано две теории, обосновывающие правовую природу соучастия в преступлении: акцессорная теория и теория самостоятельной, независимой от других соучастников ответственности. Проведенный в статье анализ научных концепций и мнений позволяет утверждать, что в настоящее время соучастие в преступлении представляет собой самостоятельный институт уголовного права, закрепленный в нормах Общей и Особенной частей УК РФ, имеющий многоаспектный характер, выражающийся в зависимости от обстоятельств совершения деяния и преступного результата в одних случаях в акцессорной природе ответственности соучастников преступления, в других - в самостоятельной ответственности соучастников преступления. Именно при сочетании акцессорности и индивидуализации ответственности лиц, совершивших преступление, возможна всесторонняя и полная оценка правонарушающего поведения субъектов, а также назначение справедливого наказания. The article is devoted to the study of the nature of complicity in a crime as an independent institution of criminal law. Recognizing the institution of complicity as one of the controversial ones in the criminal law doctrine, the authors note that at present the issue of the legal nature of complicity is controversial, the solution of which has not only theoretical but also practical significance, consisting in justifying the responsibility of accomplices in a crime when passing a court sentence. The legal nature of complicity in a crime is manifested in the fact that this institution is determined by the norms of criminal law and thus represents a special criminal law phenomenon characterized by a number of essential features. The main function of the institute of complicity as a criminal law institution is to substantiate the criminal liability of persons assisting in the commission of a crime. Currently, two theories have been developed in the doctrine that substantiate the legal nature of complicity in a crime: the accessory theory and the theory of independent responsibility, independent of other accomplices. The analysis of scientific concepts and opinions carried out in the article allows us to assert that at present complicity in a crime is an independent institution of criminal law, enshrined in the norms of the General and Special parts of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, having a multidimensional character, expressed depending on the circumstances of the act and the criminal result in some cases in the accessory nature of the responsibility of the accomplices of the crime, in others - in the independent responsibility of the accomplices of the crime. It is with the combination of accessory and individualization of responsibility of persons who have committed a crime that a comprehensive and complete assessment of the offending behavior of subjects is possible, as well as the appointment of a fair punishment.


2020 ◽  
pp. 39-45
Author(s):  
V. F. Lapshin ◽  
E. H. Nadiseva

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.


Author(s):  
Олег Вячеславович Дорошенко

В статье рассматриваются проблемные аспекты судебного штрафа. Делается вывод, что, поскольку судебный штраф по своей правовой природе является иной мерой уголовно-правового характера, поэтому он должен быть справедливым (ст. 6 УК РФ), не может иметь своей целью причинение физических страданий и унижение человеческого достоинства (ст. 7 УК РФ). Судебный штраф схож с уголовным наказанием, поскольку лицо, совершившее преступление и освобожденное от уголовной ответственности с назначением судебного штрафа, испытывает страдания, схожие со страданиями лица, к которому применено уголовное наказание, однако в меньших размерах. Проводится сравнительный анализ штрафа как уголовного наказания и судебного штрафа. Делается вывод, что в некоторых случаях судебный штраф является более строгой мерой, нежели штраф как уголовное наказание. Анализируется статистика назначения судебного штрафа. Автор приходит к выводу, что при назначении судебного штрафа должно учитываться мнение потерпевшего (при его наличии). The article discusses the problematic aspects of the court fine. It is concluded that a judicial fine by its legal nature is a different measure of a criminal-law nature, since it is established for committing crimes (Art. 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), it must be fair (Art. 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), and it cannot aim at causing physical suffering and humiliation of human dignity (Art. 7 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The court fine is similar to criminal punishment, since the person who committed the crime and who is exempted from criminal liability with the imposition of a judicial fine suffers similar suffering to the person to whom the criminal penalty was applied, but to a lesser extent. A comparative analysis of the fine as a criminal punishment and the judicial fine is carried out. It is concluded that in some cases, a judicial fine is a more severe measure than a fine as a criminal punishment. The statistics of the appointment of a fine are provided. The author concludes that when imposing a fine, the opinion of the victim (if any) should be taken into account.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document