Direct and inderect perpetrator of crime: new scientific view on their legislative regulation
Abstract
The article illustrates the narrow approach of legislative regulation in art. 16 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus of the perpetrator of crime, which is one of the types of accomplices in a crime. It is argued that, in part 3 of art. 16 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus, fixing the direct perpetrator of crime, the legislator did not fully reflect who is understood as a co-perpetrator, and who the person who committed the crime, along with other types of accomplices who are not perpetrators, understood. It is substantiated that the use by the perpetrator of persons who are subject to criminal responsibility and those not subject to such for the commission of a crime have a different legal nature and it is not acceptable to generalize them into an independent institution of complicity in a crime. For a more precise differentiation of criminal responsibility, the author’s vision of the formulation of norms in the Criminal Code, regulating the direct and inderect perpetrator of a crime, is proposed.
References
- Babiy NA. Mnozhestvennost’ lits v prestuplenii i problemy ucheniya o souchastii [The multiplicity of persons in crime and the problems of the doctrine of complicity]. Moscow: Yurlitinform; 2013. 720 p. Russian.
- Gruntov IO. [Special questions of the doctrine of complicity in judicial practice and the science of criminal law]. In: Khomich VM, editor. Sudebnaya praktika v kontekste printsipov zakonnosti i prava: sbornik nauchnykh trudov [Judicial practice in the context of the principles of legality and law: collection of scientific works]. Minsk: Theseus; 2006. p. 73–82. Russian.
- Marchuk VV. [Qualification of crimes committed by a group of persons]. In: Khomich VM, editor. Sudebnaya praktika v kontekste printsipov zakonnosti i prava: sbornik nauchnykh trudov [Judicial practice in the context of the principles of legality and law: collection of scientific works]. Minsk: Theseus; 2006. p. 62–73. Russian.
- Arutyunov AA. Souchastie v prestuplenii [Complicity in the crime]. Moscow: Statut; 2013. 408 p. Russian.
- Primachenok AA. [Mediocre execution of crimes as an independent institution of criminal law]. In: Yaskevich AV, editor. Problemy bor’by s prestupnost’yu i podgotovki kadrov dlya pravookhranitel’nykh organov [Problems of combating crime and training personnel for law enforcement agencies]. Minsk: Academy of Internal Ministry of the Republic of Belarus; 2019. p. 188–189. Russian.
- Sarkisova EA. Ugolovnoe pravo. Obshchaya chast’ [Criminal law. The general part]. Minsk: Academy of Internal Ministry of the Republic of Belarus; 2017. 559 p. Russian.
- Barankov NV. [Mediocre execution of the crime] [dissertation abstract]. Saint Petersburg: Sankt-Peterburgskii universitet MVD; 2001. 24 p. Russian.
- Komissarov VS. Souchastie v prestuplenii [Complicity in the crime]. In: Kuznetsova NF, Tyazhkova IM, editors. Kurs ugolovnogo prava. Obshchaya chast’ [Criminal law course. A common part]. Moscow: Zertsalo; 1999. p. 380–442. Russian.
