Differentiation of Criminal Liability of Accomplices in a Crime

Relevance. This article discusses topical issues of differentiation of criminal liability of accomplices in a crime, which has a certain specificity, taking into account the characteristics of individual manifestations of criminal activity.
The purpose is to analyze both general and special rules of criminal law regulation of the limits of liability of accomplices in a crime.
The objectives of the study are identifying the problems of criminal law regulation of the limits of liability of accomplices in the crime and suggest ways to solve them.
Methodology. The methodological basis of the study is general scientific and particular scientific methods of cognition of reality, which made it possible to investigate the issues of differentiating the criminal liability of accomplices in a crime.
Results. The legal mechanisms available in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for differentiating the criminal liability of accomplices are analyzed. It has been determined that the accessory nature of complicity underlies the differentiation of the criminal liability of accomplices. It was revealed that the main means of differentiating criminal responsibility are forms of complicity.
Conclusion. The existing means of differentiating criminal responsibility do not ensure the implementation of the principle of justice. The form of complicity cannot always be used as a means of differentiating the criminal liability of accomplices, other means, such as the allocation of special compositions in which the organizer or intermediary is presented as the perpetrators of certain crimes, is private (and not always an effective means of differentiating criminal liability). It is proposed to legally link the amount of punishment. assigned to the performer and other accomplices.

1. Stefanovich A. V. Osobennosti differenciacii ugolovnoj otvetstvennosti za gruppovye prestupleniya [Features of differentiation of criminal responsibility for group crimes]. Nauka i sovremennost' = Science and Modernity, 2010, no. 4-2, pp. 361–365.

2. Petrov S. V. Znachenie yuridicheskoj konstrukcii ugolovno-pravovoj normy pri differenciacii otvetstvennosti na primere otgranicheniya slozhnyh form souchastiya [The significance of the legal construction of the criminal law norm in the differentiation of responsibility by the example of the differentiation of complex forms of complicity]. Yuridicheskaya tekhnika = Legal Technique, 2013, no. 7-2, pp. 579–582.

3. Svyatenyuk N. Differenciaciya otvetstvennosti i individualizaciya nakazaniya za prestuplenie, sovershennoe v souchastii [Differentiation of responsibility and individualization of punishment for a crime committed in complicity]. Ugolovnoe pravo = Criminal law, 2008, no. 3, pp. 44–49.

4. Oskanyan S. M. Perspektivy differenciacii vidov souchastnikov v ugolovnom prave Rossijskoj Federacii [Prospects of differentiation of types of accomplices in the criminal law of the Russian Federation]. Nauchnyj elektronnyj zhurnal Meridian = Scientific electronic journal Meridian, 2019, no. 12(30), pp. 174–176.

5. Minin D. A. Podhody k differenciacii otvetstvennosti za posrednichestvo vo vzyatochnichestve v ugolovnyh kodeksah zarubezhnyh stran: sravnitel'no-pravovoj analiz [Approaches to differentiation of responsibility for mediation in bribery in criminal codes of foreign countries: comparative legal analysis]. Obshchestvo i pravo = Society and Law, 2013, no. 3(45), pp. 148–152.

6. Sarkisyan V. G. Problemy differenciacii nakazaniya za podstrekatel'stvo k soversheniyu prestupleniya [Problems of differentiation of punishment for incitement to commit a crime]. Evrazijskij yuridicheskij zhurnal = Eurasian Law Journal, 2016, no. 4(95), pp. 246–248.

7. Ibragimov S. R. Mezhdunarodno-pravovoe regulirovanie otvetstvennosti za posobnichestvo terroristicheskoj deyatel'nosti [International legal regulation of responsibility for aiding terrorist activities]. Agrarnoe i zemel'noe pravo = Agrarian and Land law, 2017, no. 10(154), pp. 147–152.

8. Shubina V. Yu. O differenciacii ugolovnoj otvetstvennosti za posobnichestvo v prestuplenii [On the differentiation of criminal liability for complicity in a crime]. Obshchestvo i pravo = Society and Law, 2010, no. 5(32), pp. 148–151.

9. Ilidzhev A. A. Pravovoe regulirovanie differenciacii nakazaniya za souchastie v prestuplenii po UK RF [Legal regulation of differentiation of punishment for complicity in a crime under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation]. Vestnik Vladimirskogo yuridicheskogo instituta = Bulletin of the Vladimir Law Institute, 2009, no. 2(11), pp. 96–99.

10. Ilidzhev A. A. Predely nakazaniya otdel'nyh vidov souchastnikov po zarubezhnomu ugolovnomu zakonodatel'stvu [Limits of punishment of certain types of accomplices under foreign criminal legislation]. Vestnik Vladimirskogo yuridicheskogo instituta = Bulletin of the Vladimir Law Institute, 2007, no. 3(4), pp. 214–216.

11. Ilidzhev A. A. Nekotorye osobennosti vydeleniya vidov souchastnikov i souchastiya v prestuplenii [Some features of distinguishing the types of accomplices and complicity in a crime]. Vestnik Vladimirskogo yuridicheskogo instituta = Bulletin of the Vladimir Law Institute, 2007, no. 1(2), pp. 230–234.

12. Aistova L. S., Kraev D. Yu. Ugolovnoe pravo zarubezhnyh stran [Criminal law of foreign countries. St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg yurid. in-t (filial) Universiteta prokuratury Rossijskoj Federacii, 2020. 131 p.

13. Naumov A. V., eds. Ugolovnoe pravo zarubezhnyh gosudarstv. Obshchaya chast' [Criminal law of foreign countries. The general part]; ed. by A. V. Naumov, A. G. Kibal'nik. Moscow, Yurajt Publ., 2018. 285 p.

14. Krylova N. E., Golovanova N. A., Kozochkin I. D. Ugolovnoe pravo zarubezhnyh stran. Vol. 1. Obshchaya chast'. Angliya. SSHA [Criminal law of foreign countries. Vol. 1. General part. England. USA]; ed. by N. E. Krylova. 5th ed. Moscow, Yurajt Publ., 2019. 240 p.

15. Esakov G. A. Mezhdunarodno-ugolovnoe pravo kak podotrasl' rossijskogo ugolovnogo prava: sovremennoe sostoyanie i problemy [International criminal law as a sub-branch of Russian criminal law: current state and problems]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye organizacii = International Law and International Organizations, 2015, no. 3, pp. 331–346. https://doi.org/10.7256/2226-6305.2015.3.15751.

16. Lafitskij V. I. Sravnitel'noe pravovedenie: nacional'nye pravovye sistemy. Tom 3. Pravovye sistemy Azii [Comparative jurisprudence: national legal systems. Vol. 3. Legal systems of Asia]. Moscow, IZiSP Publ., KONTRAKT Publ., 2013. 303 p.

17. Baleev S. A. Differenciaciya otvetstvennosti souchastnikov prestupleniya [Differentiation of responsibility of accomplices of a crime]. Uchenye zapiski Kazanskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Gumanitarnye nauki = Proceedings of Kazan University. Humanities, Series, 2007, vol. 149, no. 6, pp. 200–204.

18. Kaplin M. N., Gribov A. S., Gruzinskaya E. I. Nekotorye aspekty individualizacii i differenciacii otvetstvennosti sub"ektov gruppovyh prestuplenij [Some aspects of individualization and differentiation of responsibility of subjects of group crimes]. Aktual'nye problemy gumanitarnyh i estestvennyh nauk = Actual problems of humanities and natural sciences, 2015, no. 4-2, pp. 36–38.

19. Obrazhiev K., Chashin K. Kriminalizaciya posrednichestva vo vzyatochnichestve: poisk optimal'noj modeli [Criminalization of mediation in bribery: the search for an optimal model]. Ugolovnoe pravo = Criminal Law, 2013, no. 6, pp. 30–35.

20. Ponomarev N. S. Diskussionnye voprosy momenta okonchaniya prodolzhaemogo vzyatochnichestva: kriticheskij analiz raz"yasnenij Plenumov Verhovnyh Sudov SSSR i RF [Debatable issues of the moment of the end of the ongoing bribery: critical analysis of the explanations of the Plenums of the Supreme Courts of the USSR and the Russian Federation]. Mirovoj sud'ya = Justice of the Peace, 2022, no. 2, pp. 29–37.

21. Ugolovnoe pravo. Obshchaya chast' [Criminal law. The general part]; ed. by I. Ya. Kozachenko i Z. A. Neznamova. Moscow, Infra-M Publ., Norma Publ., 1997. 516 p.