CC BY
11UDC 343.21
DOI: 10.37399/2686-9241.2021.1.51-68
The Social Significance
of the Regulation of Non-Criminal
Acts in the Criminal Law
Denis A. Garbatovich
Ural Branch, Russian State University of Justice, Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation
For correspondence: garbatovich@mail.ru
Abstract
Introduction. In science, it is already proved that the effectiveness of criminal legislation in relation to crime prevention is very limited. The criminal law is objectively unable to eliminate the causes of crime due to their social nature. Nevertheless, the regulation of non-criminal acts is a socially significant area of criminal law policy that helps to resolve or reduce the painful difficulties that arise in the process of law-making and law enforcement activities in relation to the criminal law. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The theoretical basis of the research is based on Russian doctrinal sources devoted to modern concepts of criminal policy, forms and means of its implementation, and the social consequences of mitigating or toughening criminal repression. Results. The social importance of the regulation of non-criminal legal acts is determined by the ability to resolve three central problems. Firstly law-making activities when determining the boundaries of criminalisation. Secondly, maintaining human resources to implement repressive penal policy. Thirdly conservation of the economic resource, as the impact of penal policy and define ensuring the principle of inevitability of criminal responsibility and alternative ways to resolve a criminal law conflict. This includes the possibility of self-defense of individual rights by means of criminal law.
Discussion and Conclusion. Regulation of non-criminal acts is a kind of "safety mechanism" of criminal law policy. It is a means of protection against excessive criminalisation, a means of ensuring compliance of legislative formulas with the realities of life, and a means of ensuring a balance between lawmaking and law enforcement.
Keywords: criminal policy, non-criminal legal acts, criminal repression, law-making, criminal responsibility, compliance, criminalisation, penal policy, criminal law conflict
For citation: Garbatovich, D. A., 2021. The social significance of the regulation of noncriminal acts in the criminal law. Pravosudie/Justice, 3(1), pp. 51-68. DOI: 10.37399/26869241.2021.1.51-68.
© rapóaTOBUH fl. A., 2021
Социальная значимость регламентации непреступных уголовно-правовых деяний
Д. А. Гарбатович
Уральский филиал Российского государственного университета правосудия, г. Челябинск, Российская Федерация garbatovich@mail.ru
Аннотация
Введение. В науке доказано, что эффективность средств уголовного законодательства относительно предупреждения преступности является весьма ограниченной. Уголовный закон объективно не способен ликвидировать причины преступности в силу их социальной природы. Тем не менее регламентация непреступных уголовно-правовых деяний является социально значимым направлением уголовно-правовой политики, способствующим разрешению или снижению болезненности проблем, возникающих в процессе правотворческой и правоприменительной деятельности относительно уголовного закона. Теоретические основы. Методы. Теоретической основой исследования стали отечественные доктринальные источники, посвященные современным концепциям уголовной политики, формам и средствам ее реализации, социальным последствиям смягчения или ужесточения уголовной репрессии.
Результаты исследования. Социальная значимость регламентации непреступных уголовно-правовых деяний определяется способностью разрешить проблемы: 1) правотворческой деятельности при установлении границ криминализации; 2) сохранения человеческого ресурса при реализации репрессивной уголовно-правовой политики; 3) сохранения экономического ресурса как последствия уголовно-правовой политики; 4) обеспечения принципа неотвратимости уголовной ответственности и определить возможности разрешения уголовно-правового конфликта альтернативным способом и самозащиты прав личности средствами уголовного закона.
Обсуждение и заключение. Регламентация непреступных уголовно-правовых деяний представляет собой некий «страховочный механизм» уголовно-правовой политики, средство защиты от избыточной криминализации, средство обеспечения соответствия законодательных формул жизненным реалиям, средство обеспечения баланса между законотворчеством и правоприменением.
Ключевые слова: уголовная политика, непреступные уголовно-правовые деяния, уголовная репрессия, уголовная ответственность
Для цитирования: Гарбатович Д. А. Социальная значимость регламентации непреступных уголовно-правовых деяний // Правосудие/Justice. 2021. Т. 3, № 1. С. 51-68. DOI: 10.37399/2686-9241.2021.1.51-68.
Introduction
I n the process of fulfilling its social purpose of satisfying the relevant needs of society, the ability of the criminal law to achieve its goals through the criminal law means at its disposal is relatively effective. In the theory of criminal law, criminological research, as well as in the practice of applying the criminal law when imposing punishment, it has long been established that its restorative, general and private preventive, corrective functions are extremely small [Karpets, I. I., 1973; Gilinsky, Ya. I., 2015, p. 39; Babaev, M. M. and Pudovochkin, Yu. E., 2015], the reasons giving rise to crime as a social phenomenon have a social nature and cannot be eliminated by the criminal law
due to its objective limitation of the "natural" framework [Babaev, M. M. and Pudovochkin, Yu. E., 2016, p. 421]. Nevertheless, the criminal law is necessary, in the hands of the state, to act as the most repressive tool used in dealing with socially dangerous conflicts in cases where the use of means of other branches of law is considered inappropriate, ineffective, and/or inadequate. Criminal legislation is a means of criminal law policy, the priorities of which, according to A. I. Raroga, "must have sufficient social and legal grounds, and the criminal law means of ensuring these priorities must be, firstly, adequate to the protected social values, and secondly, practically realizable, that is, meet the needs of practice and serve as a convenient tool for influencing socially unacceptable criminal law phenomena" [Rarog, A. I., 2015, p. 13].
We believe that the regulation of non-criminal criminal offenses is a socially significant area of criminal law policy that helps to resolve or reduce the painful difficulties of problems that arise in the process of lawmaking and law enforcement.
Theoretical Basis. Methods
The object of the research is the criminal law policy and the reform of criminal law in terms of the regulation of non-criminal criminal acts. The theoretical basis of the work was domestic doctrinal sources involving three topics. Firstly, modern concepts of criminal policy. Secondly, social consequences of mitigation or toughening of criminal repression. Thirdly, forms and means of implementation of criminal law policy.
In carrying out a systemic, logical and legal analysis of the Russian criminal legislation, the following six grounds were considered. Firstly, the problems of law-making activities in establishing the boundaries of criminali-sation. Secondly, the problem of preserving human resources during the implementation of a repressive criminal law policy. Thirdly, the problem of preserving the economic resource because of criminal law policy. Fourthly, problems of ensuring the principle of inevitability of criminal liability. Fifthly, the possibility of resolving a criminal offense conflict in an alternative way, and finally and sixthly, the possibility of self-defense of individual rights by means of criminal law.
Results
As a result of the study, it was concluded that the social significance of the regulation of non-criminal criminal acts is determined by the ability to solve the problems arising in the process of implementing criminal law policy.
The problem oflawmaking lies in the establishment of the boundaries of crim-inalisation. In modern Russia, the facts of excessive, unjustified criminalisa-tion, miscalculations on the part of the legislator in recognising acts as socially dangerous (and accordingly criminal), are already recorded [Korobeyev, A. I., 2012, pp. 112-113; Burlakov, V. N., 2015, p. 35; Gilinsky, Ya. I., 2015, p. 40; Babaev, M. M. and Pudovochkin, Yu. E., 2016, pp. 425-426; Ivanov, N. G.,
2017, p. 78; Gladkikh, V. I., 2018]. In this case, the use of repression in the form of criminal punishment to unjustifiably criminalise acts can generate new legal and social conflicts [Tolpykin, V. E., 2009]. N. I. Pikurov explains: "Strengthening criminal law repression in itself is not only incapable of resolving the conflict, but can also cause greater tension, which often leads to negative consequences for the existing legal order... The criminal law remains only an auxiliary, and not the most successful, tool for resolving social -economic conflicts... The excessive use of criminal repression to prevent social conflicts in the absence of measures aimed at eliminating the socio-economic and political causes of such conflicts, can only provoke their further aggravation" [Pikurov, N. I., 2012]. M. M. Babaev and Yu. E. Pudovochkin also explain that "the absence or inability to find effective solutions to social problems, together with an attempt to solve them by means of criminal law not adapted for this, contributes to the growth of social discontent and tension, its accumulation" [Babaev, M. M. and Pudovochkin, Yu. E., 2020, p. 93].
In such a situation, the intensity of the conflict can be reduced at the level of law enforcement by the following means. Firstly, through the use of the normative construction of the act, formally containing signs of a certain corpus delicti, but due to its insignificance, it does not pose a public danger. The social conflict resulting from the erroneous establishment of the boundaries of criminalisation is resolved at the law enforcement level, when the law enforcement officer, having established in the assessed actions (i. e. inaction) of a person, signs of a certain corpus delicti, nevertheless comes to the conclusion that the act is insignificant and terminates the criminal case. Secondly, through the implementation of the constructions of positive post-criminal acts regulated in the criminal law, affecting the release of a person from criminal liability, punishment, and mitigation.
According to the opinion of A. M. Balafendiev, exemption from criminal liability is intended to eliminate internal contradictions inherent in criminal law [Balafendiev, A. M., 2010, p. 9]. The institution of exemption from criminal liability gives the method of criminalising socially dangerous acts the necessary flexibility. This translates the state's reaction in the presence of the conditions provided for in the law into a positive channel and thereby eliminates the negative social costs of punitive influence on persons who have committed minor crimes, persons who have shown active remorse and abstained from committing new crimes [Sverchkov, V. V., 2008; Korobeyev, A. I., 2019, pp. 40-41].
The inability of the state to adequately assess the real social danger of a criminalised act is the condition for the inevitable emergence of a social conflict. The regulation in the criminal law of an insignificant act or positive anti-criminal behavior helps to reduce the escalation of the negative consequences of the designated conflict through two main forms. Firstly, narrowing the boundaries of the criminal (for example, at the law enforcement level - when an illegal criminal act is recognised as insignificant). Secondly, a decrease in the fear of criminal law (for example, through the widespread
practice of exempting a person from criminal liability in the presence of appropriate positive post-criminal behavior).
The regulation of non-criminal acts in this case is a kind of "safety mechanism" of criminal law policy, a means of protection against excessive criminali-sation. That is, it is a way to ensure compliance of legislative formulas with the realities of life and strike a balance between lawmaking and law enforcement.
The problem of preserving human resources. Repressive criminal policy deprives society of a social resource on a larger scale than it happens when the repressive beginning of criminal policy is expressed minimally [Babaev, M. M. and Pudovochkin, Yu. E., 2020, p. 72]. The most important value in a democratic rule-of-law state - human resources - suffers from the most pronounced repressive criminal policy.
A. G. Khlebushkin explains that when a criminal prohibition is introduced, there are always at least three types of social costs. Firstly, limiting the rights and freedoms of citizens by expanding the range of prohibited acts. Secondly, an increase in the number of the convicted population. Thirdly, the growth of economic costs associated with the implementation of criminal proceedings and the execution of punishment according to the introduced norms of the criminal law [Khlebushkin, A. G., 2014, p. 49].
A. I. Korobeyev refers to five side effects of the criminal law prohibition. Firstly, "stigmatisation" of a certain part of the population, the receipt by citizens of the stigma "criminal". Secondly, the weakening of socially useful ties of convicts up to their complete loss. Thirdly, a decrease in the professional qualifications of convicts obtained before the commission of a crime. Fourthly, exclusion of a certain number of citizens from various spheres of socially useful activity. Fifthly, additional costs for the resocialisation and reintegration of convicts in the post-penitentiary period [Korobeyev, A. I., 2019, pp. 81-82].
In our opinion, factors contributing to minimising these consequences and preserving human resources include the regulation of positive post-criminal behavior affecting the release of a person from criminal liability (Articles 7576.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). They also include the release of a person from criminal punishment (for example, voluntarily undergoing treatment for drug addiction, medical and social rehabilitation (Article 82.1 of the Criminal Code RF), and the appointment of a conditional sentence, as well as the use of parole from serving a sentence.
In the event that a person who has committed a crime will not be assigned long terms of imprisonment, the state will focus on punishments not related to imprisonment. It will apply other measures of a criminal-legal nature, other forms of implementation of criminal liability, which means the vector of criminal-law policy will focus on the preservation of human and human capital. Such a policy is capable of minimising the negative social consequences of serving long prison terms. These are namely:
Firstly, the likelihood of maintaining family, kinship, friendship, and relations will increase, which is not typical when serving long prison terms.
Secondly, the problem of employment would be partially solved. If, during conviction, when applying other forms of implementation of criminal liability, the workplace is retained for the person, then the likelihood of compensation for the damage caused by the crime will be more real. In Russia, where there is a high level of unemployment, it is much more difficult for persons who have served a sentence of imprisonment with a criminal record to compete with those who are not characterised by this "social stigma". The regulation of other measures of a criminal-legal nature, for example the practice of applying the grounds for exemption from criminal liability can reduce the level of convictions not only among persons who have committed criminal acts, but also reduce the proportion of persons who have committed crimes in relation to the entire society.
Thirdly, one of the reasons for the existence of crime is its self-reproduction. Unfortunately, prison colonies sometimes do not correct the convicted person, nor do they educate one into a law-abiding citizen, but rather in fact act as a kind of "criminal school". This contributes to maintaining a high level of "criminal infection" of the population [Babaev, M. M. and Pudovochkin, Yu. E., 2020, p. 73]. The use of punishments not related to imprisonment, the use of other forms of implementation of criminal liability can protect a person who has committed a criminal act from turning him into a recidivist or a professional criminal.
Fourthly, the indicated policy will help to reduce the overcrowding of places of detention. This is one of the conditions that is also a factor in the regulation of positive penitentiary behavior, which affects the widespread use of the institution of parole.
Raising the question of the negative social consequences of the use of long terms of imprisonment, the author does not call on the legislator and law enforcement officer to completely abandon them, which is impossible, given the level of grave and especially grave crimes against the person, property, public safety, and public morality. In this case, we are talking about the fact that the punishment and other measures of a criminal-legal nature, imposed on the person who committed the crime, should first of all comply with the principle of justice. The state, when resolving the criminal conflict that has arisen, does not focus on the most repressive instruments of the criminal law.
The solution to this problem is to ensure the principle of differentiation and individualisation of criminal responsibility and punishment, which is possible only with a proper assessment of the post-criminal positive. Examples include positive steps, such as active repentance, reconciliation with the victim, compliance with the sentence serving regime) and negative measures - for example, evading the investigation or trial, violation of pre-trial agreements on cooperation, evasion of the convict from serving the sentence) the behavior of the individual.
The problem of preserving the economic resource is essential. Repressive criminal law policies require huge economic investments. When assessing its economic efficiency, calculated through the ratio of the results achieved and the corresponding financial costs, it will never be considered effective. Howe-
ver, this fully applies to liberal criminal law policy. The main line concept of crime prevention in a legal and democratic social state should never depend on the solution of the issue, whether it is economically beneficial or not. However, the implementation of any preventive measure, the introduction of a new criminal prohibition, or the type of punishment will always depend on the availability of appropriate financial resources.
The regulation of the circumstances affecting the release of a person from criminal liability or punishment, (such as precluding the criminality of an act, an act of insignificance, or positive post-criminal acts) indicates that there are instruments in the criminal law policy implemented by the state which can be assessed as liberal and humane, intended to reduce criminal repression.
An inevitable consequence of the implementation of a designated criminal law policy should be a reduction in the number of people convicted to the actual terms of serving a sentence in the form of imprisonment. There should be a decrease in the number of employees working in places of detention, and, accordingly, a decrease in the economic costs of the penal system for the maintenance of convicts in places of deprivation of liberty.
Nevertheless, science has proven that a liberal criminal policy, in comparison with a repressive one, is not less costly, more economically profitable, and perhaps, on the contrary, requires more funding for its effectiveness (for example, for preventive and social-rehabilitation aspects) [Babaev, M. M. and Pudovochkin, Yu. E., 2020, pp. 122-123].
At the same time, the state, through the regulation of positive post-criminal acts affecting the release of persons from criminal liability, is trying to use the appropriate instruments of the criminal law not only to preserve, but also to replenish its economic resource. For example, exemption from criminal liability in connection with the imposition of a court fine is gaining widespread practice. During the period of validity of Articles 762, 1044, and 1055 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the application of a judicial fine has confirmed its relevance in law enforcement practice. In accordance with the statistical data of the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, a court fine in 2017 was assigned to 20 639 persons, in 2018 - 33 329 persons, and in 2019 - 52 461 persons1.
Researchers of criminal policy have already established the fact that one of the goals of the ongoing reform of domestic criminal law is to replenish state revenues in order to financially support its activities [Tarasov, A. A., et al., 2017, pp. 59-90]. One of the means of this criminal law policy is the
1 Review of judicial practice of exemption from criminal liability with the appointment of a court fine (Article 762 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) (Approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on July 10, 2019). URL: https://www.vsrf.ru/documents/thematics/28088/; Judicial statistics of the Judicial Department under the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. URL: http://cdep.ru/index.php?id=79&item=5259
regulation of positive post-criminal acts in the form of payment of a sum of money to the state (for example, compensation for damage, forfeit, transfer to the federal budget of monetary compensation in the amount of double the amount of damage caused or double the amount of income obtained as a result of the commission of a crime, etc.).
The problem of ensuring the principle of inevitability of criminal liability is crucial. It would be wrong to admit that the principle of inevitability of criminal liability is realised only when each person who committed a crime has experienced the most repressive means of criminal law, namely punishment. The implementation of the principle of the inevitability of criminal liability also occurs in those cases when in relation to each person who violated the criminal prohibition, there is a response and based on the law of the state reaction in the form of the use of variable criminal law mechanisms, characterised by varying degrees of criminal repression [Aryamov, A. A. and Kolyvant-seva, M. A., 2017, pp. 39-43]. So, A. I. Korobeyev explains that "this principle includes the need to: identify all, without exception, crimes committed in reality; bringing to criminal responsibility all persons guilty of committing crimes; the application to each of them of measures of criminal punishment, or measures replacing it, or, finally, release from criminal liability and (or) from punishment in cases and on the grounds provided for by the criminal law; compensation for the harm caused by the crime there, of course, where possible" [Korobeyev, A. I., 2019, pp. 38-39].
The necessary conditions for the response of the state to the fact of committing a crime should be, at a minimum, its identification, registration, disclosure, bringing a person to criminal responsibility. Considering the statistics of annually registered crimes, their detection rate, the number of persons brought to criminal responsibility, we see:
Table 1 / Таблица 1
Year Number of registered crimes (thousand) / Количество зарегистрированных преступлений (тыс.) Number of identified persons who have committed crimes (thousand) / Количество выявленных лиц, совершивших преступления (тыс.) Number of unsolved crimes (thousand) / Количество не раскрытых преступлений (тыс.)
2007 3582,5 1317,6 1863,9
2008 3209,9 1256,2 1479,5
2009 2994,8 1219,8 1309,1
2010 2628,8 1111,1 1193,3
2011 2404,8 1041,3 1980,1
2012 2302,2 1010,9 1014,7
2013 2206,2 1012,6 950,3
2014 2166,4 1000,1 948,6
2015 2351,2 1063,03 1026,2
Year Number of registered crimes (thousand) / Количество зарегистрированных преступлений (тыс.) Number of identified persons who have committed crimes (thousand) / Количество выявленных лиц, совершивших преступления (тыс.) Number of unsolved crimes (thousand) / Количество не раскрытых преступлений (тыс.)
2016 2160,0 1015,8 983,3
2017 2058,5 967,1 886,7
2018 1991,5 931,1 860,4
2019 2024,3 884,7 915,22
From the data presented, it is easy to conclude that every year there is a significant number of unsolved crimes, and we are talking only about acts that have been registered. Without reasoning about the problems of objectivity of Russian statistics, about the real reflection of existing crime in it, we will only note that according to various criminological studies, the level of latent crime is quite high, and the number of crimes actually committed annually can be expressed in a figure from 12 to 30 million [Luneev, V. V., 2015, p. 87].
In this situation, it is necessary to remember that the existing system of justice in the state with the means and staff at its disposal is incapable of "digesting" not only the entire volume of crime, but even its officially recorded (registered) part [Gilinsky, Ya. I. , 2009, p. 55].
In such an environment, the regulation of positive post-criminal acts aimed at facilitating and solving crimes (for example, active repentance, pre-trial cooperation agreement, etc.) will undoubtedly contribute, at least to a small extent, to the implementation of the principle of inevitability of criminal liability. Striving to ensure the principle of the inevitability of criminal liability is a prerequisite for public respect for the current criminal legislation.
The regulation of positive post-criminal acts is a tool for solving a criminal-legal conflict in an alternative way. The question of using alternative methods of resolving a criminal-legal conflict is relevant for Russian criminal law. A condition for resolving a criminal-legal conflict in an alternative way is a dialogue between a criminal and a victim, a search for a compromise between them, aimed at exhausting the arisen socio-legal conflict.
By regulating mediation methods of resolving criminal-legal conflicts such vectors of criminal law policy as the economy of criminal law repression, its reduction, restorative justice (restorative justice), humanisation, and liberalisation are implemented [Aryamov, A. A. and Kolyvantseva, M. A., 2017, p. 41; Matveeva, Ya. M., 2017, p. 140; Lapshin, V. F., 2012, p. 133]. The most notable examples are
- active repentance (Article 75 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation),
2 Official website of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation // https://mvd.rf/reports/1/
- reconciliation with the victim (Article 76 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation),
- compensation for damage (Article 76.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation),
- payment of a court fine (Article 76.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation),
- voluntary release of a kidnapped person (Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation),
- release of a hostage (Article 206 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation),
- voluntary surrender of weapons, explosive devices, explosives (Articles 222-223.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), and
- voluntary surrender of drugs (Article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
Legislative consolidation of non-criminal criminal acts can dilute the one-sidedness of the criminal law in resolving the social and legal conflict resulting from criminal behavior. The doctrine of criminal law justifiably raises the problem of the impotence of the criminal law, when there is its inadequacy to the specific conditions of the place and time of its application, or inadequate use of the force of repression and (or) insufficient flexibility in the approach to the practice of applying measures of more humane content [Babaev, M. M. and Pudovochkin, Yu. E., 2016, p. 421].
The indicated flexibility in the practice of applying measures of a more humane content is precisely capable of providing other already regulated measures of a criminal-legal nature, other forms of implementation of criminal liability. The basis of this is the corresponding non-criminal criminal-legal acts (for example, exemption from criminal liability in connection with an active repentance, reconciliation with the victim; non-prosecution in case of voluntary release of the abducted person; release from criminal liability in case of voluntary surrender of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, weapons; parole from serving a sentence in the presence of appropriate positive penitentiary behavior, etc.).
The problem of protecting individual rights by means of criminal law is worth considering. One of the tasks of the criminal law is to protect human and civil rights and freedoms from criminal encroachments (part 1 of article 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). In our opinion, it is more accurate and more correct to talk about protection from socially dangerous encroachments, both criminal and non-criminal [Lobanova, L. V., 2012, p. 146]. A. V. Denisova explains that "ensuring the safe existence of people in society is a continuously realised goal of criminal law as an industry performing the main burden of countering socially dangerous acts" [Denisova, A. V., 2018, p. 67]. Nevertheless, the presence of the principle of humanism in the criminal law did not become a guarantee of ensuring human security. Public order, public safety, the safety of a particular person, are often provided by measures that are far from being
based on the norms of criminal law. For example, preventive measures used by law enforcement agencies, something the legislator himself is well aware of.
Therefore, by regulating the circumstances precluding the criminality of an act, a person is given the opportunity:
1) in conditions of necessary defense to protect himself or other persons from socially dangerous encroachments;
2) to detain a person who has committed a crime for delivery to the authorities or in order to prevent him from committing other criminal acts;
3) cause harm to social relations protected by criminal law in conditions of extreme necessity, physical or mental coercion;
4) take risks to achieve a socially useful goal, and;
5) be an undisciplined subordinate when executing an order or instruction in cases of realizing their illegal nature. V. I. Mikhailov [2012, pp. 179-180] explains that situations, the resolution of which is associated with the infliction of legitimate harm, arise when solving socially significant problems in various areas of positive social activity.
The regulation of the circumstances precluding the crime of acts, which gives the individual the opportunity to be socially active, expands the boundaries of his rights and freedoms, promotes moral and physical development while self-protecting his rights by means of criminal law.
In the science of criminal law, the question is consistently raised that the positive development of society can be ensured by legislative consolidation of other circumstances that exclude the criminality of an act. Notable examples include euthanasia, causing harm while playing sports, organ transplantation, consent of a person, compliance with legislation, conducting operational-search measures, exercise of their rights, and performance of professional duties [Kozlov, A. P., 2012, p. 104; Nikulenko, A. V., 2012, pp. 187-189; Oreshkina, T. Yu., 2012, pp. 202-203].
Discussion and Conclusion
The regulation of non-criminal criminal offenses is a kind of "safety mechanism" of criminal law policy, a means of protection against excessive criminal-isation, a way to ensure compliance of legislative formulas with life realities and a balance between lawmaking and law enforcement.
The consolidation of positive post-criminal behavior in the criminal law that affects the release of a person from criminal liability, the release of a person from criminal punishment, the appointment of a suspended sentence, the use of parole from serving a sentence, contribute to the preservation of human resources.
The establishment of positive post-criminal acts in the form of payment of a sum of money to the state is one of the means of replenishing the state's income in order to financially support its activities.
Regulated other measures of a criminal-legal nature, other forms of implementation of criminal liability, the basis for the application of which
were the relevant non-criminal criminal-legal acts, provide the flexibility of law enforcement practice when resolving a criminal conflict in an alternative way.
Legislative consolidation of circumstances precluding criminality of acts, which gives the individual the opportunity to be socially active, expands the boundaries of his rights and freedoms, contributes to his moral, physical development with self-defense of his rights by means of criminal law.
References
Aryamov, A. A. and Kolyvantseva, M. A., 2017. Alternativnyye formy resheniya ugolovno-pravovogo konflikta = [Alternative forms of solving the criminal-legal conflict]. Monograph. Moscow: Jurlitinform. (In Russ.) Babaev, M. M. and Pudovochkin, Yu. E., 2015. [Criminal punishment in a conflictological context]. Vestnikyuridicheskogo fakulteta Yuzhnogo federalnogo universiteta = Bulletin of the Faculty of Law of the Southern Federal University, 1(3), pp. 15-26. (In Russ.)
Babaev, M. M. and Pudovochkin, Yu. E., 2016. [Repressive solution of social problems: causes and consequences]. Vserossiyskiy kriminologicheskiy zhurnal = All-Russian Criminological Journal, 10(3), pp. 419-430. (In Russ.)
Babaev, M. M. and Pudovochkin, Yu. E., 2020. Rossiyskaya ugolovnaya politika XXI veka = [Russian criminal policy of the XXI century]. Monograph. Moscow: Jurlitinform. (In Russ.)
Balafendiev, A. M., 2010. Osvobozhdenie ot ugolovnoj otvetstvennosti v svyazi s pozitivnym postkriminal'nym povedeniem: social'no-pravovye predposylki, sushchnost' i sistematizaciya vidov = [Exemption from criminal liability in connection with positive post-criminal behavior: social and legal prerequisites, essence and systematization of types]. Abstract of Cand. Sci. (Law) Dissertation. Kazan. (In Russ.) Burlakov, V. N., 2015. [Modernization of the criminal law and its results]. Ugolovnoye pravo: strategiya razvitiya v XXI veke = [Criminal law: development strategy in the XXI century]. Materials of the XII International scientific and practical conference. Moscow, Russian Federation, 29-30 January 2015. Moscow: RG-Press. Pp. 34-37. (In Russ.)
Denisova, A. V., 2018. [Ensuring the safe coexistence of people in society as the main goal of Russian criminal law]. Obespecheniye natsionalnoy bezopasnosti - prioritetnoye napravleniye ugolovno-pravovoy. kriminologicheskoy i ugolovno-ispolnitelnoy politiki = [Ensuring national security-a priority direction of criminal law, criminology and
criminal enforcement policy]. Materials of the XI Russian Congress of criminal law dedicated to the memory of doctor of law, Professor Vladimir Sergeevich Komissarov. Moscow, Russian Federation, 31 May - 1 June 2018. Moscow: Yurlitinform. Pp. 65-68. (In Russ.)
Gilinsky, Ya. I., 2009. Kriminologiya: teoriya, istoriya, empiricheskaya baza, sotsialnyy kontrol = [Criminology: theory, history, empirical base, social control]. St. Petersburg: Publishing house of R. Aslanov "Yuridicheskij centr Press". (In Russ.)
Gilinsky, Ya. I., 2015. Criminal legislation in modern Russia: critical notes. Ugolovnoye pravo: strategiya razvitiya v XXI veke = [Criminal law: development strategy in the XXI century]. Materials of the XII International scientific and practical conference. Moscow, Russian Federation, 29-30 January 2015. Moscow: RG-Press. Pp. 38-41. (In Russ.)
Gladkikh, V. I., 2018. [System problems of the Russian criminal policy]. Obespecheniye natsionalnoy bezopasnosti - prioritetnoye napravleniye ugolovno-pravovoy, kriminologicheskoy i ugolovno-ispolnitelnoy politiki = [Ensuring national security-a priority direction of criminal law, criminology and criminal enforcement policy]. Materials of the XI Russian Congress of criminal law dedicated to the memory of doctor of law, Professor Vladimir Sergeevich Komissarov. Moscow, Russian Federation, 31 May - 1 June 2018. Moscow: Yurlitinform. Pp. 58-61. (In Russ.)
Ivanov, N. G., 2017. [Quality of the criminal law and social significant value that needs criminalization]. Ugolovnoye pravo: strategiya razvitiya v XXI veke = [Criminal law: development strategy in the XXI century: proceedings of the XIV]. International scientific and practical conference. Moscow, Russian Federation, 26-27 January 2017. Moscow: Original-Maket. Pp. 77-80. (In Russ.)
Karpets, I. I., 1973. Nakazaniye: Sotsialnyye, pravovyye i kriminolo-gicheskiye problemy = [Punishment: Social, legal and criminological problems]. Moscow: Legal Literature. (In Russ.)
Khlebushkin, A. G., 2014. [The Social contract and the legitimacy of criminal and legal impact]. Ugolovnoye pravo: strategiya razvitiya v XXI veke = [Criminal law: development strategy in the XXI century]. Materials of the XI International scientific and practical conference. Moscow, Russian Federation, 30-31 January 2014. Moscow: Prospect. Pp. 47-51. (In Russ.)
Korobeev, A. I., 2012. [Criminal law policy of Russia: from dawn to stagnation]. Sovremennaya ugolovnayapolitika:poiskoptimalnoy modeli = [Modern criminal policy: search for the optimal model]. Materials of the VII Russian Congress of criminal law. Moscow, Russian Federation, 31 May - 1 June 2012. Moscow: Prospekt. Pp. 112-115. (In Russ.)
Korobeev, A. I., 2019. Ugolovno-pravovayapolitika Rossii: ot genezisa do krizisa = [Criminal law policy of Russia: from the genesis of the crisis]. Monograph. Moscow: Jurlitinform. (In Russ.)
Kozlov, A. P., 2012. [Criminal policy: its some criminal miscalculations in relation to the current Criminal Code]. Sovremennaya ugolovnaya politika: poisk optimalnoy modeli = [Modern criminal policy: search for the optimal model]. Materials of the VII Russian Congress of criminal law. Moscow, Russian Federation, 31 May - 1 June 2012. Moscow: Prospekt. Pp. 99-108. (In Russ.)
Lapshin, V. F., 2012. [Legal analysis of exemption from criminal liability in cases of crimes in the sphere of economic activity]. Sovremennaya ugolovnaya politika: poisk optimalnoy modeli = [Modern criminal policy: search for the optimal model]. Materials of the VII Russian Congress of criminal law. Moscow, Russian Federation, 31 May - 1 June 2012. Moscow: Prospekt. Pp. 133-136. (In Russ.)
Lobanova, L. V., 2012. [On some novelties of criminal legislation and the balance of forms and methods of criminal law policy]. Sovremennaya ugolovnaya politika: poisk optimalnoy modeli = [Modern criminal policy: search for the optimal model]. Materials of the VII Russian Congress of criminal law. Moscow, Russian Federation, 31 May - 1 June 2012. Moscow: Prospekt. Pp. 145-150. (In Russ.)
Luneev, V. V., 2015. Epokha globalizatsii i prestupnost = [The era of globalization and crime]. Moscow: Infra-M. (In Russ.)
Matveeva, Ya. M., 2017. [Alternative ways of solving the criminal law conflict in the criminal law of Russia: modernity and prospects]. Ugolovnoye pravo: strategiya razvitiya v XXI veke = [Criminal law: development strategy in the XXI century: proceedings of the XIV]. Materials of the XIV International scientific and practical conference. Moscow, Russian Federation, 26-27 January 2017. Moscow: Original-Maket. Pp. 139-142. (In Russ.)
Mikhailov, V. I., 2012. Purpose of the criminal law and the theory of lawful harm. Sovremennaya ugolovnaya politika: poisk optimalnoy modeli = [Modern criminal policy: search for the optimal model]. Materials of the VII Russian Congress of criminal law. Moscow, Russian Federation, 31 May - 1 June 2012. Moscow: Prospekt. Pp. 177-185. (In Russ.) Nikulenko, A. V., 2012. [Prospects of criminal policy in the sphere of legislative consolidation of new circumstances regulating lawful infliction of harm]. Sovremennaya ugolovnaya politika: poisk optimalnoy modeli = [Modern criminal policy: search for the optimal model]. Materials of the VII Russian Congress of criminal law. Moscow, Russian Federation, 31 May - 1 June 2012. Moscow: Prospekt. Pp. 186-191. (In Russ.) Oreshkina, T. Yu., 2012. The system of notes to articles of the Special part of the criminal code of the Russian Federation needs to be
improved. Sovremennaya ugolovnaya politika: poisk optimalnoy modeli = [Modern criminal policy: search for the optimal model]. Materials of the VII Russian Congress of criminal law. Moscow, Russian Federation, 31 May - 1 June 2012. Moscow: Prospekt. Pp. 200-207. (In Russ.)
Pikurov, N. I., 2012. Limited opportunities of the criminal law in preventing social conflicts in the context of reforming socio-economic relations. Sovremennaya ugolovnaya politika: poisk optimalnoy modeli = [Modern criminal policy: search for the optimal model]. Materials of the VII Russian Congress of criminal law. Moscow, Russian Federation, 31 May - 1 June 2012. Moscow: Prospekt. Pp. 220-221. (In Russ.) Rarog, A. I., 2015. Priorities of the Russian criminal law policy. Ugolov-noye pravo: strategiya razvitiya v XXI veke = [Criminal law: development strategy in the XXI century]. Materials of the XII International scientific and practical conference. Moscow, Russian Federation, 29-30 January 2015. Moscow: RG-Press. Pp. 13-17. (In Russ.)
Sverchkov, V. V., 2008. Konceptual'nye osnovy resheniya problem osvobozhdeniya ot ugolovnoj otvetstvennosti = [Conceptual foundations for solving the problems of exemption from criminal liability]. Abstract of Dr. Sci. (Law) Dissertation. Nizhny Novgorod. (In Russ.) Tarasov, A. A., Sharipov, A. R., Kostrova, M. B., et al., 2017. Realizatsiya ugolovnoy politiki: sovremennyye problemy ugolovnogo i ugolovno-protsessualnogo pravotvorchestva, primeneniya i kadrovogo obes-pecheniya = [Implementation of criminal policy: modern problems of criminal and criminal-procedural law-making, application and personnel support]. Ed. A. A. Tarasov. Moscow: Justice. (In Russ.) Tolpykin, V. Ye., 2009. [Nasiliye i nenasiliye kak formy proyavleniya i razresheniya sotsial'nykh protivorechiy i konfliktov]. Filosofiya prava = [Philosophy of Law], 6, рр. 7-11. (In Russ.)
Список использованной литературы
Арямов А. А., Колыванцева М. А. Альтернативные формы решения уголовно-правового конфликта : моногр. М. : Юрлитинформ, 2017. 192 с.
Бабаев М. М., Пудовочкин Ю. Е. Репрессивное решение социальных проблем: причины и последствия // Всероссийский криминологический журнал. 2016. Т. 10, № 3. С. 419-430.
Бабаев М. М., Пудовочкин, Ю. Е. Российская уголовная политика XXI века : моногр. М. : Юрлитинформ, 2020. 208 с. Бабаев М. М., Пудовочкин Ю. Е. Уголовное наказание в конфликтологическом контексте // Вестник юридического факультета Южного федерального университета. 2015. № 1 (3). С. 15-26.
Балафендиев А. М. Освобождение от уголовной ответственности в связи с позитивным посткриминальным поведением: социально-правовые предпосылки, сущность и систематизация видов : авто-реф. дис. ... канд. юрид. наук. Казань, 2010. 27 с.
Бурлаков В. Н. Модернизация уголовного закона и ее результаты // Уголовное право: стратегия развития в XXI веке : материалы XII Междунар. науч.-практ. конф. (29-30 янв. 2015 г.). М. : РГ-Пресс, 2015. С. 34-37.
Гилинский Я. И. Криминология: теория, история, эмпирическая база, социальный контроль. СПб. : Изд-во Р. Асланова «Юридический центр Пресс», 2009. 504 с.
Гилинский Я. И. Уголовное законодательство в современной России: критические заметки // Уголовное право: стратегия развития в XXI веке : материалы XII Междунар. науч.-практ. конф. (29-30 янв. 2015 г.). М. : РГ-Пресс, 2015. С. 38-41.
Гладких В. И. Системные проблемы российской уголовной политики // Обеспечение национальной безопасности - приоритетное направление уголовно-правовой, криминологической и уголовно-исполнительной политики : материалы XI Рос. конгр. угол. права, посвящ. памяти д-ра юрид. наук, проф. Владимира Сергеевича Комиссарова, состоявшегося 31 мая - 1 июня 2018 г. М. : Юрлитин-форм, 2018. С. 58-61.
Денисова А. В. Обеспечение безопасного сосуществования людей в обществе как главная цель российского уголовного права // Обеспечение национальной безопасности - приоритетное направление уголовно-правовой, криминологической и уголовно-исполнительной политики : материалы XI Рос. конгр. угол. права, посвящ. памяти д-ра юрид. наук, проф. Владимира Сергеевича Комиссарова, состоявшегося 31 мая - 1 июня 2018 г. М. : Юрлитинформ, 2018. С. 6568.
Иванов Н. Г. Качество уголовного закона и социальная значимая ценность, нуждающаяся в криминализации // Уголовное право: стратегия развития в XXI веке : материалы XIV Междунар. науч.-практ. конф. (26-27 янв. 2017 г.). М. : Оригинал-Макет, 2017. С. 77-80. Карпец И. И. Наказание: Социальные, правовые и криминологические проблемы. М. : Юрид. лит., 1973. 287 с.
Козлов А. П. Уголовная политика: ее некоторые уголовные просчеты применительно к действующему УК // Современная уголовная политика: поиск оптимальной модели : материалы VII Рос. конгр. угол. права (31 мая - 1 июня 2012 г.). М. : Проспект, 2012. С. 99-108. Коробеев А. И. Уголовно-правовая политика России: от рассвета до застоя // Современная уголовная политика: поиск оптималь-
ной модели : материалы VII Рос. конгр. угол. права (31 мая - 1 июня 2012 г.). М. : Проспект, 2012. С. 112-115.
Коробеев А. И. Уголовно-правовая политика России: от генезиса от кризиса : моногр. М. : Юрлитинформ, 2019. 352 с. Лапшин В. Ф. Правовой анализ освобождения от уголовной ответственности по делам о преступлениях в сфере экономической деятельности // Современная уголовная политика: поиск оптимальной модели : материалы VII Российского конгр. угол. права (31 мая -1 июня 2012 г.). М. : Проспект, 2012. С. 133-136.
Лобанова Л. В. О некоторых новеллах уголовного законодательства и балансе форм и методов уголовно-правовой политики // Современная уголовная политика: поиск оптимальной модели : материалы VII Рос. конгр. угол. права (31 мая - 1 июня 2012 г.). М. : Проспект, 2012. С. 145-150.
Лунеев В. В. Эпоха глобализации и преступность. М. : Инфра-М, 2015. 272 с.
Матвеева Я. М. Альтернативные способы решения уголовно-правового конфликта в уголовном праве России: современность и перспективы // Уголовное право: стратегия развития в XXI веке : материалы XIV Междунар. науч.-практ. конф. (26-27 янв. 2017 г.). М. : Оригинал-Макет, 2017. С. 139-142.
Михайлов В. И. Предназначение уголовного закона и теория правомерного вреда // Современная уголовная политика: поиск оптимальной модели : материалы VII Рос. конгр. угол. права (31 мая -1 июня 2012 г.). М. : Проспект, 2012. С. 177-185.
Никуленко А. В. Перспективы уголовной политики в сфере законодательного закрепления новых обстоятельств, регламентирующих правомерное причинение вреда // Современная уголовная политика: поиск оптимальной модели : материалы VII Рос. конгр. угол. права (31 мая - 1 июня 2012 г.). М. : Проспект, 2012. С. 186-191. Орешкина Т. Ю. Система примечаний к статьям Особенной части УК РФ нуждается в совершенствовании // Современная уголовная политика: поиск оптимальной модели : материалы VII Рос. конгр. угол. права (31 мая - 1 июня 2012 г.). М. : Проспект, 2012. С. 200207.
Пикуров Н. И. Ограниченность возможностей уголовного закона в предупреждении социальных конфликтов в условиях реформирования социально-экономических отношений // Современная уголовная политика: поиск оптимальной модели : материалы VII Рос. конгр. угол. права (31 мая - 1 июня 2012 г.). М. : Проспект, 2012. С. 220-221.
Рарог А. И. Приоритеты российской уголовно-правовой политики // Уголовное право: стратегия развития в XXI веке : материалы XII Междунар. науч.-практ. конф. (29-30 янв. 2015 г.). М. : РГ-Пресс, 2015. С. 13-17.
Реализация уголовной политики: современные проблемы уголовного и уголовно-процессуального правотворчества, применения и кадрового обеспечения / А. А. Тарасов, А. Р. Шарипов, М. Б. Кострова и др. ; под общ. ред. А. А. Тарасова. М., 2017. 246 с. Сверчков В. В. Концептуальные основы решения проблем освобождения от уголовной ответственности : автореф. дис. ... д-ра юрид. наук. Н. Новгород, 2008. 60 с.
Толпыкин В. Е. Насилие и ненасилие как формы проявления и разрешения социальных противоречий и конфликтов // Философия права. 2009. № 6. С. 7-11.
Хлебушкин А. Г. Социальный контракт и легитимность уголовно-правового воздействия // Уголовное право: стратегия развития в XXI веке : материалы XI Междунар. науч.-практ. конф. (30-31 янв. 2014 г.). М. : Проспект, 2014. С. 47-51.
Information about the author / Информация об авторе
Denis A. Gаrbatovich, Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, Deputy Director for Research, Ural Branch, Russian State University of Justice (160 Pobedy Av., Chelyabinsk, 454135, Russian Federation)
Гарбатович Денис Александрович, кандидат юридических наук, доцент, заместитель директора по научной работе Уральского филиала Российского государственного университета правосудия (Российская Федерация, 454135, г. Челябинск, пр. Победы, д. 160). E-mail: garbatovich@mail.ru
Submitted 28.09.2020; reviewed 30.10.2020; revised 02.02.2021. Дата поступления рукописи в редакцию издания: 28.09.2020; дата одобрения после рецензирования: 30.10.2020; дата принятия статьи к опубликованию: 02.02.2021.
