Kuznetsova’s category of «guilt» and qualification of crimes

Abstract

In the article, based on the understanding of N.F.Kuznetsova’s category “guilty of a person” as “committing a crime by a person”, “criminality of an act committed by a person” is solved, among other things, the applied problem of choosing between competing norms of the Special Part of the Criminal Law, when the objective side of the act is fully described in different norms of the Special Part, the ratio of which as a general and it is impossible to install a special one. The use of a purely procedural presumption in dubio pro reo in the substantive aspect, that is, in resolving qualifying problems, is substantiated: since the recognition of a person committing a crime is not only proof of the actual circumstances of the act, but also its qualification, that is, “establishing compliance in the deed with the signs of a socially dangerous act on the grounds of the corpus delicti provided for in the norms of the General and Special Parts of the Criminal Code, with a conclusion on the application of one or another article of the Code”, the above constitutional provision (Article 49 of the Constitution) should be interpreted not only in the procedural, but also in the substantive aspect. With this in mind and proceeding from N.F.Kuznetsova’s category of guilt a) the conclusion about the fundamental possibility of using the rule “irremovable doubts about the guilt of the accused are interpreted in favor of the accused” as a tool for criminal legal qualification, and b) recognizing the presence of defects in legislative technique, due to which various criminal law norms infringing on one and the same direct object, similarly describe the corpus delicti to be imputed to the guilty person, it was proposed when deciding on which article to qualify the phrases expressed publicly or posted on leaflets posted in public places, aimed at convincing other persons of what is needed, in particular, kill representatives of a certain racial, social, etc. groups precisely because the latter belong to such a group, choose a norm with a milder sanction, which is Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, if the act was committed without signs qualifying the relevant act.

References

1. Gadzhiev, T.B. (2009). Special issues of qualification of kidnapping and its delimitation from related offenses (comparative legal analysis of the legislation of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Azerbaijan). International criminal law and international justice, 2, pp. 24–30 (in Russ.).

2. Gaukhman, L.D. (2003). Qualification of crimes: law, theory, practice. Moscow (in Russ.).

3. Golovko, L.V. (2016). The principle in dubio pro duriore and the theory of irremovable doubts, or on the benefits of studying the Swiss criminal procedure doctrine. Law, 8, pp. 72–84 (in Russ.).

4. Klenova, T.V. (2022). Principles of qualification of crimes against its meaninglessness. Russian investigator, 5, pp. 55–58 (in Russ.).

5. Kolokolov, N.A. (2020). Is a formal approach to assessing reality an evil in Russian criminal justice and a necessary standard? Analysis of criminal law reality on the example of the practice of justices of the peace. Justice of the peace, 4, pp. 17–28 (in Russ.).

6. Kudryavtsev, V.N. (2006). It is time to modernize the science of criminal law. Criminal Law, 5, pp. 130–131 (in Russ.).

7. Kudryavtsev, V.N. (2004). General theory of qualification of crimes. Moscow (in Russ.).

8. Kudryavtsev, V. and Trusov, A. (2002). Answer N. F. Kuznetsova. Criminal Law, 1, pp. 66–67 (in Russ.).

9. Kuznetsova, N. (2002). Discussion questions on the book of V. I. Kudryavtsev and A. I. Trusova “Political Justice in the USSR”. Criminal Law, 1, pp. 63–25(in Russ.).

10. Kuznetsova, N.F. (2007). Is it necessary to modernize the criminal law? Criminal law, 2, pp. 132–135 (in Russ.).

11. Kuznetsova, N.F. (2007). Problems of qualification of crimes: Lectures on the special course “Fundamentals of qualification of crimes”. Moscow (in Russ.).

12. Lyublinsky, P.I. (1917). Technique, interpretation and casuistry of the criminal code. Petrograd (in Russ.).

13. Marchuk, V.V. (2014). Special principles for qualifying crimes. Journal of Russian Law, 2, pp. 79–90 (in Russ.).

14. Muradov, E.S. and Yani, P.S. (2007). Guilt, guilt, social danger. Bulletin of the Academy of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation, 1, pp. 13–18 (in Russ.).

15. Naumov, A.V. (2006). Open letter to AcademicianV. N. Kudryavtsev. Criminal law, 4, pp. 135–138 (in Russ.).

16. Prozumentov, L.M. and Arkhipov, A.V. (2018). Problems of application of Art. 238 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Russian Justice, 4, pp. 17–19 (in Russ.).

17. Trefilov, A.A. (2016). The ratio of the principles in dubio pro reo and in dubio pro duriore in the criminal process of Switzerland and Russia. Law, 3, pp. 117–123 (in Russ.).

18. Yani, P.S. (2011). Qualification of extremist crimes. Russian Justice, 10, pp.11–16 (in Russ.).

19. Yani, P.S. (2006). Professor N. F. Kuznetsova. On the personality of a scientist. In: V.S., Komisarov (Ed.). The whole world lives as long as a person’s memory lives. Collection of articles. Moscow (in Russ.).