z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
The Perpetrator of the Crime in Complicity and without Complicity: A Universal Role in the Diversity of Legal Constructions
Author(s) -
Д. М. Молчанов
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
lex russica/lex russica (russkij zakon)
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2686-7869
pISSN - 1729-5920
DOI - 10.17803/1729-5920.2021.172.3.107-122
Subject(s) - complicity , element (criminal law) , supreme court , law , political science , sociology , criminology
A comprehensive study of the perpetrator’s role leads to the following conclusions: “perpetrator of the crime” is a universal term used to describe an act that constitutes an objective element of the crime committed both in complicity and without complicity. Four alternatives to the actions of the perpetrator exist: executor who performed the objective element alone, an accomplice who performed the objective element with other accomplices, an indirect perpetrator, an indirect accomplice. Other ways to qualify person’s act as a perpetrator are based not on the law, but on the recommendations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation that de facto acquired the status of the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (joint participation in the organized group, joint participation in a crime with “technical distribution of roles”). The main element of the act of the perpetrator includes the fulfillment of the objective element described in the disposition of the article of the Special Part. The content of the objective element of a particular crime does not depend on the existence of complicity, hence the term “perpetrator” is applicable to any crime and has a universal value. It is impractical to describe in the law the same acts in different terms. “Technical distribution of roles” is a doctrinal term. Its content is disclosed in some resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the RF. Extensive interpretation of the term “perpetrator” in crimes with “technical distribution of roles” is a forced measure on the part of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, since the term “the group of persons in conspiracy” is interpreted restrictively. This interpretation complicates the application of the criminal law and does not allow us to adequately assess the greater risk of crimes committed in complicity. The term “technical distribution of roles” does not have a universal (acknowledged) interpretation in jurisprudence, which also makes it difficult to apply the law. Joint participation in a legal sense in crimes committed by an organized group is a construct that is not based on law applied to crimes with a special subject, which contradicts part 4, Art. 34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here