Author Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
The article analyzes the texts of CIS country criminal laws for the completeness of objective and subjective reflection of crime preparation signs. They revealed the specifics of methods for objective characteristics description in the articles of the General Part of the Criminal Law. They studied the legislative approaches to the limits and the methods of preparatory action criminalizing. It is stated that with all the diversity of legislative approaches to objective and subjective crime preparation sign formalizing, it is possible to single out some common features for all states.
Incomplete Crime, Preparation for a Crime, Objective Side, Subjective Side, Criminalization Ways, Criminalization Limits.
A clear description of a criminal-legal prohibition follows from the very definition of legality principle. The quality of the criminal law is determined to some extent depending on the accuracy of regulated criminal relation reflection by criminal law. The development of a universal approach to the determination of the actions that constitute the preparation for a crime is one of particular problems for criminal law both in the field of legislation and in the doctrine of criminal law . The studies of an unfinished crime and, in particular, the preparation for a crime is implemented in several directions: as one of the foundations for a crime prevention , as one of the components of sociological research subject , as well as in other directions. There are also the studies touching on the problems of responsibility or punishment for “an accidentally unfinished crime” , the reasons for a crime performance impossibility [10; 2]. With all the diversity of approaches to the study of an unfinished crime, there are practically no developments concerning the preparation for a crime. It should be noted that the preparation for a crime and an offense attempt should be regarded as independent criminal-legal phenomena, although they are the types of an unfinished crime, since they have a different set of objective and subjective attributes and entail different consequences. Proceeding from this, it seems reasonable to study the preparation for a crime first.
The existence of a standard on the preparation for a crime is typical for all criminal codes of CIS countries, however, a set of signs that allow to qualify a person’s actions as preparatory ones, vary in some cases. Most criminal laws attempted to describe the objective signs characteristic / typical of an act that forms the preparation composition in as much detail as possible. Estimating concepts that allow a broad interpretation of the preparation norm are contained in all the criminal codes of CIS countries, which makes it possible to make the norm more universal and effective one. During the determination of the subjective characteristics, you can see that in some cases an intentional form of guilt is defined directly, in other cases the deliberate form of guilt follows from the norm sense. It seems possible to conclude that all laws provide only an intentional form of guilt in preparation composition. The limits of punishability, that is, the criminalization of preparation, are found in all criminal laws. In most cases, this happens through the recognition of preparation for certain categories (classifications) of crimes as a punishable one. The methods of criminalization are characterized by heterogeneity of approaches. In some cases, the preparation for certain categories (classifications) of crimes is recognized as punishable, in other cases it is recognized as punishable by defining the punishability of preparation for a particular crime kind or type.
435 total views, 1 views today