Actions: problems of separation of forms in the aspect of improvement of the terminological apparatus of domestic criminal law
In qualification, identifying the scope of the offence is the first step in this process because, in practice, when a crime is detected, the law enforcement agency faced by the features of its scope. At the same time, a number of dispositions of the norms of the Special part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine envisages acting solely in one of its forms "commissions" and "omissions", which are quite evaluative in their separation.
The content of these terms, although generally simplified, identical in the educational literature, is not interpreted equally by scientists in scientific works, and sometimes is uncertain. A separation of commissions and omissions, both active and passive forms of action is possible if elementary in external manifestation of active or passive action is committed. These include the fact of a specifically conscious and desirable movement of one's body or a conscious and desirable refusal to commit such actions.
The authors emphasize that the problems of separation of commissions and omissions, as an active and passive form of high-handed, conscious, unlawful and socially dangerous behavior of the subject of the crime, were recognized by scientists in the "Soviet times".
On basis of conducted analysis and with reference to the work of leading scientists, the authors propose the expediency of refusal in the domestic criminal law of the terms "commissions" and "omissions", with the simultaneous introduction to the theory of criminal law and the Criminal Code of Ukraine a term devoid of internal contradictions (act, commissions etc.), caused by the application in the dispositions of the Particular part of the law on criminal liability of the specific division of the external manifestation of the behavior of the subject of the crime.
Kuzmin S. A. (2012). Do pytannia neobkhidnosti zminy poniatiinoho aparatu vyznachennia obiektyvnoi storony skladu zlochynu v teorii vitchyznianoho kryminalnoho prava [On the question of the need to change the conceptual apparatus of determining the objective side of the crime in the theory of domestic criminal law]. Borotba z orhanizovanoiu zlochynnistiu i koruptsiieiu (teoriia i praktyka), Combating Organized Crime and Corruption (Theory and Practice). 1 (27). 202–207. [in Ukrainian].
Kuzmin S. A. (2012). Kompiuterna (kibernetychna) informatsiia, yak predmet uchynennia zlochynu (kryminalno-pravovyi aspekt) [Computer (cyber) information as the subject of the crime (criminal aspect)]. Informatsiia i pravo, Information and law. 3 (6). 159–163. [in Ukrainian].
Kuzmin S. A. (2012). Do pytannia pro udoskonalennia definitsii predmeta zlochynu v teorii vitchyznianoho kryminalnoho prava [On the question of improving the definition of the object of crime in the theory of domestic criminal law]. Borotba z orhanizovanoiu zlochynnistiu i koruptsiieiu (teoriia i praktyka), Combating Organized Crime and Corruption (Theory and Practice). 2 (28). 195–200. [in Ukrainian].
Spasovych V. (1863). Uchebnyk uholovnoho prava [Manual of criminal law]. Sanktpererburhъ: typohrafyia Iosyfata Ohryzko. [in Russian].
Korzhanskyi M. Y. (1997). Obiekt i predmet zlochynu: lektsii. [Object and subject of crime: lectures]. Kyiv: Nats. akad. vnutr. Sprav. [in Ukrainian].
Bantyshev O. F. (2001). Kryminalna vidpovidalnist za zlochyny proty osnov natsionalnoi bezpeky Ukrainy (problemy kvalifikatsii): monohrafiia [Criminal liability for crimes against the national security fundamentals of Ukraine (qualification problems): monograph]. Kyiv: Vyd-vo NA SB Ukrainy. [in Ukrainian].
Romaniuk B. V., Bantyshev O. F. (2018). Zlochyny proty myru, bezpeky liudstva ta mizhnarodnoho pravoporiadku: monohrafiia [Crimes against peace, human security and the rule of law: a monograph]. Kyiv: Krok. [in Ukrainian].
Muzyka A. A., Lashchuk Ye. V. (2011). Predmet zlochynu: teoretychni osnovy piznannia: monohrafiia [Subject of crime: theoretical foundations of knowledge: monograph]. Kyiv: PALYVODA A. V. [in Ukrainian].
Kudriavtsev V. N. (1960). Obiektyvnaia storona prestuplenyia: monohrafyia [The objective side of crime: a monograph]. Moskva: Hos. yzd-vo yuryd. lyt. [in Russian].
Baulin Yu. V. (2004). Zvilnennia vid kryminalnoi vidpovidalnosti: monohrafiia [Exemption from criminal responsibility: a monograph]. Kyiv: Atika. [in Ukrainian].
Diakov S. V., Yhnatev A. A., Karpushyn M. P. (1988). Otvetstvennost za hosudarstvennye prestuplenyia [Responsibility for state crimes] / Obshch. red. y vved.: Barkov L. Y. Moskva: Yuryd. lyt. [in Russian].
Kurliandskoho V. Y, Mykhailova M. P. (Ed.) (1963). Osobo opasnye hosudarstvennye prestuplenyia [Particularly dangerous state crimes]. [in Russian].
Smyrnov E. A. (1974). Osobo opasnye hosudarstvennye prestuplenyia. Voprosy kvalyfykatsyy v sviazy s prymenenyem uholovno pravovoi normy: ucheb. posob. [Particularly dangerous state crimes. Qualification issues related to the application of a criminal law norm: a study guide]. Kyiv: Nauchno-yzdatelskyi y redaktsyonno-yzdatelskyi otdel KVSh MVD SSSR. 180. [in Russian]