Critical analysis of the object of the crime as an element of the corpus delicti

The article provides evidence of the groundlessness of recognizing the object of a crime as an element of the corpus delicti. The substantiation of this conclusion in relation to such types of criminal offenses as preparation for a crime, attempted crime, incitement to a crime, aiding in a crime and the act of the organizer of a criminal offense is carried out by demonstrating that they do not even come into contact with the object of the crime and don’t have a direct impact on it. The proof that the object of the crime is not an integral part of the criminal act, expressed in causing harm, is carried out in two directions - in relation to crimes that harm the internal benefits of a person, for example, his life or health, and in relation to crimes that harm external benefits of people recognized as objects of criminal law protection, in particular, such as public order, public safety, etc. It is shown that the object of a crime in the form of a person’s internal goods cannot be a constituent part of a crime because these benefits are inside of their owner, and he himself is an element of some social group formation (social system), but not an element of a crime committed against him. The argument that external objects of a crime are not an integral part of a crime is based on the results of a detailed analysis of the process of causing harm. The results of such an analysis, carried out using the categories of the part and the whole, demonstrate the fundamental impossibility of isolating any constituent elements (parts) in the process of causing harm. In this process, it is possible to single out only certain of its phases and stages, but not its component parts.