THE CONCEPT, NATURE AND STRUCTURE OF SOCIALLY DANGEROUS CONSEQUENCES OF A CRIME: THEORY, LEGISLATION AND PRACTICE
Keywords:
corpus delicti, objective side of the crime, essential feature, optional feature, material corpus delicti, socially dangerous consequence, criminal-legal significanceAbstract
Logical, systematic, logical-legal, comparative-legal methods of research are widely used in this article. In particular, first of all, the concept of socially dangerous consequences and the stages of its formation are described in detail. Also, the socially dangerous consequence is generally an optional sign of the objective side of the crime, it is recognized as a necessary sign in material crimes, and the opinions and views expressed by scientists in the theory of criminal law about it are highlighted, and then the criminal law in the norm, the expression of the socially dangerous consequences and their specific characteristics are described in sequence by the legislator. At the same time, in the development of the concept of socially dangerous consequence, which is a sign of the objective side of the existing criminal law, the specific importance of the signs of the objective side of the crime is described. In this article, based on the deduction method of research, the nature, structure and forms of the socially dangerous consequence, which is a sign of the objective side of the crime structure, have been studied, and the theoretical and scientific views on it in the criminal law have been reflected. Also, in this article, the main focus is on the concept, nature, forms and structure of the socially dangerous consequence, which is a sign of the objective side of the criminal structure, as well as the specific criminal-legal significance of the criminal consequence and related theoretical and practical problems. At the same time, the doctrine of criminal law and existing scientific research were analyzed, and reasonable theoretical proposals and recommendations were developed in this regard.
References
2. Kovalev M.I. Obshchestvenno opasnyye posledstviya prestupleniya i dispozitsiya ugolovnogo zakona [Socially dangerous consequences of a crime and the disposition of the criminal law]. Sovetskoye gosudarstvo i pravo – Soviet state and law, 1990, no. 10, p. 38.
3. Rustamboyev M.X. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi jinoyat huquqi kursi [Course of the criminal law of the Republic of Uzbekistan]. Vol. 1. The doctrine of crime. 2nd ed., supplem. and revised. Tashkent, Military-technical institute of the National Guard of the Republic of Uzbekistan, 2018, p. 165.
4. Usmonaliyev M., Bakunov P. Jinoyat huquqi [Criminal law]. General part. Tashkent, Nasaf Publ., 2010, p. 181.
5. Akhmedova G. Posledstviya obshchestvenno opasnogo deyaniya i konstruktsiya sostava prestupleniya po obyektivnoy storone [Consequences of a socially dangerous act and the structure of a crime on the objective side]. Review of Law Sciences, Tashkent, 2020, no. 1, spec. iss., pp. 191–196.
6. Magomedgaziev M.U., Zaidova M.U. Obshchestvenno opasnyye posledstviya kak obyazatel’nyy priznak ob’’ektivnoy storony prestupleniya [Socially dangerous consequences as an obligatory sign of the objective side of the crime]. Actual problems of jurisprudence in the modern world, 2017, p. 167–171.
7. Balashov S.K. Logiko-pravovoy analiz soderzhaniya obyektivnoy storony obshchestvenno opasnogo deyaniya i prestupleniya [Logical and legal analysis of the content of the objective side of a socially dangerous act and crime]. Filosofiya prava – Philosophy of Law, 2015, no. 4 (71), pp. 87–92.
8. Kuznetsova N.I., Shkele M.V. Ekologicheskiy vred i obshchestvenno opasnyye posledstviya ekologicheskikh prestupleniy [Ecological harm and socially dangerous consequences of environmental crimes]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta MVD Rossii – Bulletin of the St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 2019, no. 2 (82), pp. 161–169.
9. Kameneva A.N. Obshchestvenno opasnyye posledstviya v normakh o prestupleniyakh v sfere ekonomicheskoy deyatel’nosti: problemy otrazheniya v zakone [Socially dangerous consequences in the norms on crimes in the sphere of economic activity: problems of reflection in the law]. Lex Russica, 2020, no. 5 (162), pp. 53–63.
10. Vinokurov V. N. Ob’’yekt prestupleniya: doktrinal’no-prikladnoye issledovaniye [Object of crime: doctrinal and applied research]. Moscow, Prospekt Publ., 2019, pp. 170–171.
11. Fomin P.P. Predmet i priznaki ob’’yektivnoy storony sostava prestupleniya: problemy vzaimosvyazi i razgranicheniya [The subject and signs of the objective side of the corpus delicti: problems of interconnection and differentiation]. Vestnik Luganskoy akademii vnutrennix del imeni E.A. Didorenko – Bulletin of the Luhansk Academy of Internal Affairs named after EA Didorenko, 2018, no. 1, pp. 146–156.
12. Novoselov G. Bez prestupnykh posledstviy net prestupleniya [Without criminal consequences there is no crime]. Rossiyskaya yustitsiya – Russian Justice, 2001, no. 3, p. 56.
13. List F. Uchebnik ugolovnogo prava [Textbook of criminal law]. A common part. Moscow, 1903, p. 126.
14. Durmanov N.D. Ponyatiye prestupleniya [The concept of crime]. Rep. ed. M.D. Shargorodsky. Moscow, Publ. House of the Academy of Sciences, 1948, p. 57.
15. Traynin A.N. Sostav prestupleniya po sovetskomu ugolovnomu pravu [Composition of a crime according to Soviet criminal law]. Moscow, 1951.
16. Austin J. Lectures on Jurisprudence. 523. 4th ed. 1873.
17. Moore M.S. Act And Crime: The philosophy of action and its implications for criminal Law. 1993, p. 18.
18. Husak D.N. The Orthodox model of the criminal offense. Crim. Just. Ethics, 1991, vol. 10, pp. 20–21.
19. Fletcher G. On the moral irrelevance of bodily movements. U. Pa. L. Rev., 1994, no. 142, p. 1443.
20. Morris H. Punishment for thoughts, guilt and innocence. Essays in legal philosophy and moral psychology, 1989, p. 197.
21. Gorr M. The Actus Reus requirement: A qualified defense. Crim. Just. Ethics, 1991, no. 10, p. 11.
22. Enker A.N. Impossibility in criminal attempts-legality and the legalprocess. Minn. L. Rev., 1969, no. 53, pp. 665, 687.
23. Blackstone W. Commentaries on the Laws of England. Book IV, 10th ed. 1787, p. 21.
24. Glanville W. Criminal Law. The General Part. 2th. ed. 1961, p. 22.
25. Kuznetsova N.F Znacheniye prestupnykh posledstviy dlya ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti [Significance of criminal consequences for criminal liability]. Moscow, Gosjurizdat Publ., 1958, pp. 14–15.
26. Sharapov R. Klassifikatsiya sostavov prestupleniy na formalnyye i materialnyye: mif ili realnost’ [Classification of elements of crimes into formal and material myth or reality]. Criminal Law, 2000, no. 3, p. 53.
27. Zemlyukov S.V. Ob odnom aspekte sovershenstvovaniya ugolovno-pravovoy terminologii [On one aspect of improving criminal law terminology]. Soviet State and Law, 1988, no. 9, p. 80.
28. Kudryavtsev V.N. Ob’’yektivnaya storona prestupleniya [The objective side of the crime]. Moscow, Gosjurizdat Publ., 1960, p. 197.
29. Mikhlin A.S. Posledstviya prestupleniya [Consequences of the crime]. Moscow, Jurid. lit. Publ., 1969, p. 16.
30. Koryanskiy N.N. Ob’’yekt i predmet ugolovno-pravovoy okhrani [Object and subject of criminal law protection]. Moscow, Publ. House of the Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, 1980, p. 162.
31. Frolov Ye.A. Ob’’yekt i prestupnyye posledstviya pri posyagatel’stvakh na sotsialisticheskuyu sobstvennost’ [Object and criminal consequences in case of encroachments on the socialist property]. Scientific Notes of Sverdlovsk University, 1968, iss. 8, p. 111.
32. Mamedov A. Sootnosheniye i vzaimosvyaz ob’’yekta i ob’’yektivnoy storony prestupleniya [Correlation and the relationship between the object and the objective side of the crime]. Criminal law, 1999, no. 2, p. 56.
33. Boyko A.I. Prestupnoye bezdeystviye [Criminal inaction]. St. Petersburg, Legal Center Press Publ., 2003, p. 42.
34. Timeyko G.V. Obshchee ucheniye ob ob’’yektivnoy storone prestupleniya [The general doctrine of the objective side of the crime]. Rostov, Rost Publ. House, 1977, p. 83.
35. Kabulov R., Otajonov A.A. et al. Jinoyat huquqi [Criminal law]. General part. Completed and revised 2nd ed. Tashkent, MIA Academy of the Republic of Uzbekistan, 2012, pp. 117–118.
36. Jinoyat huquqi [Criminal law]. General part. Res. ed. H. Ochilov. Tashkent, Adolat Publ., 2020, pp. 71–72.
37. Zemlyukov S.V. Ugolovno-pravovyye problemy prestupnogo vreda [Criminal-legal problems of criminal harm]. Novosibirsk, Novosib Publ. House, 1991, pp. 19–21.
38. Ugolovnoye pravo Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Criminal law of the Russian Federation]. General part. Ed. B.V. Zdravomyslova. P. 142.
39. Legislation of CIS countries. Available at: https://base.spinform.ru/spisdoc.fwx/.
40. Model Criminal Code. Recommended legislative act. Adopted by the Resolution of the Interparliamentary Assembly of the Member Nations of the Commonwealth of Independent States on February 17, 1996. Available at: https://www.cisatc.org/1289/135/154/241/.
41. Kuznetsova N.F. Izbrannyye trudy [Selected Works]. St. Petersburg, Juridicheskiy Center Press, 2003, p. 41.
42. Tkachenko V. Ugroza kak ugolovno-pravovaya kategoriya [Threat as a criminal law category]. Investigator, 2000, no. 6, p. 7.
43. Braynin Ya.M. Ugolovnaya otvetstvennost’ i yee osnovaniye [Criminal liability and its basis]. Moscow, Gosjurizdat Publ., 1963, p. 181.
44. Kuznetsova N.F, Kostrova M.B. Obshchestvenno opasnyye posledstviya: lingvisticheskiy aspekt [Socially Dangerous Consequences: Linguistic Aspect]. Moscow University Bulletin, Series 11 – Law, 2001, no. 6, pp. 27–28.
45. Kurs sovetskogo ugolovnogo prava [The course of Soviet criminal law]. Eds. N.A. Belyaev, M.D. Shargorodsky. Vol. 1. General part. Leningrad, Leningrad Publ. House, 1968, p. 329.
46. Legislation of CIS countries. Available at: https://continent-online.com/.
