Multiplicity of crimes: the question of improving differentiation of criminal responsibility

Keywords: differentiation of criminal responsibility, multiplicity of crimes, cumulation of crimes, repetition of crimes.

Abstract

The number of committed crimes gradually increases social dangerousness of guilty person actions. Though, the amount of damages inflicted to the object, forming of criminal profession, creating illusion of impunity and other factors testify in favor of importance of multiplicity as means of differentiation of criminal responsibility. However, multiplicity in the Criminal Code of Ukraine usually doesn’t have influence on variative regulation of legal influence. Vice verse, most of situations of cumulating of crimes (except deliberate grave and especially grave crimes), in practice, have no impact on the amount of means of criminal responsibility. As well, repeated crime influences strictness of criminal responsibility if the body of the committed crime includes repetitiveness as qualified element. If the body of crime lacks this element, the court can only consider this feature as aggravating punishment. In any case, the court can’t impose punishment more strict, than the one, prescribed in the article of Special Part of the Code.

The purpose of the article is to identify the shortcomings of the differentiation of criminal liability in the case of aggregate, recurrence or recurrence of crimes. It is planned, as well, to suggest ways of improving of differentiating approach to criminal responsibility. It is also necessary to solve the problem of taking into account simultaneous influence of several qualified elements on the committed crime, besides multiplicity.

The scientific novelty of the article. In our research we suggested improvement of differentiation of criminal responsibility for multiplicity of crimes. The problem of simultaneous influence of features of multiplicity and organized group on responsibility is solved.

The conclusions. 1) The borders of differentiating impact of multiplicity of crimes on criminal responsibility must be set by legislator only. This role can’t be delegated to court, without rules of imposing final punishment established by Code; 2) qualified features of repetitiveness and previous conviction may be excluded from the articles of the Special Part of the Code. They should be envisaged in the General part of the Code; 3) Imposing punishment for multiplicity of crimes, the court must have an opportunity to exceed the borders envisaged in the article of the Special Part of the Code. Anyways, the punishment can’t exceed the maximum, prescribed in the article 12 of the Code; 4) If all the crimes are committed in the form of organized group (as the qualified element), the multiplicity will not increase the strictness of criminal responsibility.

References

Навроцький В. О. Основи кримінально-правової кваліфікації : навч. посібник. Київ : Юрінком Інтер, 2006. 704 с.

Бажанов М. І. Множественность преступлений по уголовному праву Украины. Избранные труды. Харків : Право, 2012. 1244 c.

Кругликов Л. Л., Васильевский А. В. Дифференциация ответственности в уголовном праве. СПб. : Издательство «Юридический центр Пресс», 2002. 300 с.

Зінченко І. О., Тютюгін В. І. Множинність злочинів: поняття, види, призначення покарання : монографія. Х. : ФІНН, 2008. 336 с.

Lovegrove A. Sentencing the multiple offender: judicial practice and legal principle. Research and public policy series. No. 59. Canberra : Australian Institute of Criminology, 2004. 190 р.

Ryberg J., Roberts J. V. and De Keijser J. Sentencing Multiple Crimes. New York : Oxford University Press, 2018. 277 c.

Мармура О. З. Про ознаки, що кваліфікують злочин, які можуть регламентуватися в загальній частині законодавства про кримінальну відповідальність. Науковий вісник Львівського державного університету внутрішніх справ. 2018. № 2. С. 253–264.

References:

Navrotskyi, V. O. (2006). Osnovy kryminalno-pravovoi kvalifikatsii. Kyiv : Yurinkom Inter [іn Ukrainian].

Bazhanov, M. I. (2012). Mnozhestvennost’ prestuplenyi po uholovnomu pravu Ukrainy. Izbrannyie trudy, s. 333–334. Kharkiv: Pravo [in Russian].

Kruhlykov, L. L., Vasylevskyi, A. V. (2002). Dyfferentsyatsyia otvetstvennosty v uholovnom prave. SPb. : Yzdatelstvo «Iurydycheskyi tsentr Press» [in Russian].

Zinchenko, I. O., Tiutiuhin, V. I. (2008). Mnozhynnist zlochyniv: poniattia, vydy, pryznachennia pokarannia. Kh. : FINN [in Ukrainian].

Lovegrove, A. (2004). Sentencing the multiple offender: judicial practice and legal principle. Research and public policy series, 59. Canberra : Australian Institute of Criminology.

Ryberg, J., Roberts, J. V. and De Keijser, J. (2018). Sentencing Multiple Crimes. New York : Oxford University Press.

Marmura, O. Z. (2018). Pro oznaky, shcho kvalifikuiut zlochyn, yaki mozhut rehlamentuvatysia v zahalnii chastyni zakonodavstva pro kryminalnu vidpovidalnist. Naukovyi visnyk Lvivskoho derzhavnoho universytetu vnutrishnikh sprav, 2, 253–264 [in Ukrainian].


Abstract views: 38
PDF Downloads: 21
Published
2020-05-29
How to Cite
Antoniuk, N. O. (2020). Multiplicity of crimes: the question of improving differentiation of criminal responsibility. Scientific Papers of the Legislation Institute of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, (3), 6-13. https://doi.org/10.32886/instzak.2020.03.01