On the issue of juvenile delinquency: the current state and features in modern conditions

Serenko Roman Sergeevich ORCID: 0000-0002-7667-6918 Lecturer; Department of Criminal Law; Southwestern State University 305040, Russia, Kursk region, Kursk, ul. 50 let Oktyabrya, 94, room 710 romanserenko@bk.ru

Yakovleva Elena Olegovna ORCID: 0000-0003-1733-3904 PhD in Law Associate Professor; Department of Criminal Law; Southwestern State University 94, 50 let Oktyabrya str., office 710, Kursk region, 305040, Russia Pragmatik-alenka@yandex.ru

Introduction. Juvenile delinquency is one of the types of crime, the basis for which is the age of the subject of the crime, which is within the limits established by law. Issues related to juvenile delinquency have always been of particular concern to society, and researchers have paid close attention to their consideration in scientific papers. Thus, such authors as M.V. Barynkin, A.R. Gravshenkova, F.R. Chernovolenko, Yu.V. Sokol, M.I. Khatuntsev and others were engaged in studying the issues analyzed within the framework of this work. In their works, the peculiarities of juvenile delinquency and their condition within a given period of time are worked out with a sufficient degree of detail. However, the state of juvenile delinquency and some of its features to a certain extent undergo constant changes under the influence of both external and internal factors. In this regard, the topic of this study becomes relevant again after even a short period of time.

The topic analyzed in the framework of this study, related to the current state and peculiarities of juvenile delinquency in modern conditions, is quite relevant due to the obvious need to study certain aspects of juvenile delinquency and, on this basis, to find options for improving legislation and law enforcement practice to effectively bring minors who have committed a criminally punishable act to justice. At the same time, the authors' attempt to study in detail certain aspects of bringing minors to criminal responsibility can in the future contribute to improving the mechanism of such activities of law enforcement agencies, which can have a positive impact on the state of juvenile delinquency.

While working on this article, a number of general scientific methods, such as analysis, synthesis and generalization, were used to study the norms of current legislation regulating the issues of criminal prosecution of minors and their conditional conviction. In order to systematize the available scientific research on the topic of the work, clarify the results obtained, as well as formulate conclusions, a systematic analytical method was used. To analyze the age criteria for criminal prosecution in foreign legislation and compare them with the experience of regulating this issue in domestic legislation, a comparative legal method was used. In addition, in some aspects, such methods of scientific cognition as deduction, induction, analogy, abstraction and systematization were used.

The purpose of this study is to clarify the features of juvenile delinquency, their specifics and current status. As a result of the research work, we see the formulation of the features of juvenile delinquency that take place in modern conditions, the identification of negative aspects in the current procedure for regulating the issues of bringing minors to criminal responsibility, as well as the formulation of proposals aimed at overcoming problematic aspects.

Discussion. Before proceeding to the analysis of juvenile delinquency, it is necessary to understand the characteristics of this subject of crime. Thus, in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, in particular Article 87 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, a person who has reached the age of 14 at the time of the commission of a crime, but has not yet turned 18, is recognized as a minor. In turn, persons who are not yet 14 years old are also generally recognized as minors, but they are not considered as subjects of crime by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, even despite numerous proposals to reduce the age of criminal responsibility. These persons are classified by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation as "minors". It should be noted that the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation contains a separate section on the specifics of bringing minors to criminal responsibility – Section V. Criminal liability of minors. At the same time, this section contains only one chapter consisting of ten articles – Chapter 14. Features of criminal liability and punishment of minors. This state of affairs in itself testifies to the special attitude of the legislator towards such a category of criminals as minors. Indeed, the decision on bringing a minor to criminal responsibility acts as a rather serious problem, the wrong solution of which may, on the one hand, entail bringing to justice a person with not yet fully formed ideas about the world in which he lives and its rules and placing him in conditions whose influence on such a person is highly likely it will entail its criminalization ^{[1, p. 153; 2, p. 217]}. On the other hand, there may be a situation where a really guilty minor, who is aware of the negativity of his actions, will avoid criminal liability. Both options, in our opinion, are unacceptable due to the fact that minors are persons who are at such a period of development when the foundation of a future personality has already been laid in them, but it has not been fully formed. So, in the first of the above cases, we place an incompletely formed personality among individuals, most of whom already have a clearly negative attitude towards the laws and norms of life in society, and in the second we demonstrate to the minor the absence of clearly tangible consequences of his actions ^{[3, p. 56]}.

In connection with the above, it should be pointed out that juvenile delinquency has been and remains one of the most pressing problems facing both the State and society. Thus, juvenile delinquency in the framework of criminal law is the totality of all crimes committed by persons aged 14 to 18 years. However, acts containing all the signs of a crime, but committed by a person under the age of 14, cannot be considered a crime, since one of the mandatory signs of the subjective side of the crime is missing, and accordingly the subject of this crime is missing ^{[4, p. 55; 5, p. 17]}.

We further propose to pay attention to the issue of the number of criminal manifestations of minors. So, if we take official statistics for the last decade, the following situation is generally observed: in 2014, the number of identified minors who committed a crime amounted to 54,369, in 2015 – 55,993, in 2016 – 48,889, in 2017 – 42,504, in 2018 – 40,860, in 2019 – 37963, for 2020 – 33575, for 2021 - 29126, for 2022 – 26305, for 2023 - 27325 ^[6]. However, in order to have the clearest understanding of the state of affairs in this matter, it is not enough to know the number of crimes, it is important to pay attention to their specific gravity. To do this, it is necessary to know the total number of crimes committed on the territory of the Russian Federation. In particular, 2190578 crimes were registered in 2014, 2388476 in 2015, 2160063 in 2016, 2058476 in 2017, 1991532 in 2018, 2024337 in 2019, 2044221 in 2020, 2004404 in 2021, 1966795 in 2022, 1947200 in 2023 ^[6]. Thus, in 2014, the share of crimes committed by minors accounted for 2.48%, in 2015 – 2.34%, in 2016 – 2.25%, in 2017 – 2.06%, in 2018 – 2.05%, in 2019 – 1.87%, in 2020 – 1.64%, in 2021 in 2022 - 1.34%, in 2023 - 1.40%. It is important to understand that the data presented, especially starting in 2020, cannot be considered fully accurate, since at the moment the official statistics do not yet include the number of crimes committed in the territories annexed to the Russian Federation, namely, the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics, Zaporizhia and Kherson regions. Based on the analysis of the above statistics, it should be pointed out that, unlike the total number of crimes committed in the country, the number of crimes committed by minors has a clear tendency to decrease their number.

It follows from the above data that, along with the annual decrease in the number of crimes committed by minors, there is also a decrease in the share of this category of crimes in the total number of crimes committed on the territory of the Russian Federation, which acts as clear evidence of the high effectiveness of law enforcement agencies in the prevention of crime among the analyzed category of persons.

It is a decrease in the proportion that can indicate a really right direction towards combating juvenile delinquency, since a decrease in the number of such crimes against the background of an increase in their proportion indicates only a decrease in the average age of criminals in the country, which is also unacceptable due to the fact that the earlier a crime is committed, the more likely it seems that a person becomes a criminal a path that can become vital for him.

It is important to point out that the above statistics include the totality of crimes committed by persons between the ages of 14 and 18, however, a number of features should be taken into account. Thus, in accordance with Part 1 of Article 20 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the age at which a person is subject to criminal liability is 16 years, which is taken as the general age of criminal responsibility. In addition to the general age, there is also a reduced age of criminal responsibility, which is 14 years old. The lowered age of criminal responsibility is established for crimes characterized by a high degree of public danger. In particular, crimes for which criminal liability will occur from the age of 14 are fully presented in Part 2 of Article 20 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

In general, the age at which a person becomes able to realize the social essence and the actual nature of his actions was determined differently in each state at certain historical stages. In domestic law, the current provisions regarding the minimum age of criminal responsibility are determined based on an assessment of data on a person's ability to "transfer moral and psychological aspects related to criminal responsibility, that is, in determining the possibility of prosecution, taking into account the individual characteristics of a minor or her perception and understanding" ^[7].

In addition, in a number of works by domestic researchers, one can find an indication that only a person who, at the time of its commission, had a level of intellectual development and social maturity at the time of its commission, allowing for an adequate assessment of the significance of the act he commits for society and, based on this, determine an acceptable behavior option for him ^[8].

In the legal literature, it is often possible to find studies devoted to the comparative analysis of crime in general and juvenile delinquency ^{[9, p. 163]}. However, this is not entirely correct, since in this case we are not talking about independent phenomena. Thus, juvenile delinquency acts only as one of the components of crime as a whole, and conducting a comparative study of a part and a whole is unacceptable. Such close attention to the study of the issues of criminal prosecution of persons who had not reached the age of majority at the time of the commission of the crime, and the consideration of this category of crimes as an independent object of research, is due to the specifics of such criminal manifestations and the attention paid by the legislator to this topic ^[10].

When investigating issues related to the criminal prosecution of minors, attention should be paid to foreign experience in regulating this issue. Thus, in the works of foreign researchers, one of the most relevant topics is the analysis of the causes of crimes committed by minors. In our opinion, the most interesting works are those concerning the study of the influence exerted by the conditions of upbringing in a single-parent family on the subsequent ability of a minor to commit a crime. Most often, the conclusion of such works is the statement that a child living with his mother and raised only by her is less likely to commit socially dangerous acts in the future than a child raised only by his father ^[11]. In Russia, a number of studies have also been conducted on the influence of the properties of the family in which a child is raised on juvenile delinquency, the analysis of which allows us to establish the existence of a natural connection between the conditions of child rearing, and especially what happens in an incomplete family, and juvenile delinquency ^{[12, p. 307; 13, p. 122]}.

As for the age of criminal responsibility itself, then, as previously indicated, the issue of determining it is decided in each State at different historical stages in its own way. In this regard, today in foreign countries, slightly different approaches are being established to establish a specific age, upon reaching which a person becomes, in accordance with the ideas of the legislator, able to bear criminal responsibility for a socially dangerous act committed by him and to realize the essence of the punishment imposed on him. So, for example, in Germany, criminal liability begins at the age of 14, in the UK – at 10, in France – at the age of 13. An interesting situation occurs in the United States of America, where, in the presence of a unified legal system, different legislative acts have different approaches to determining the age of criminal responsibility, as a result of which it differs depending on the state. However, there is still a certain general rule, according to which criminal liability will occur from the age of 11 for committing crimes at the federal level ^[14].

The age of criminal responsibility established today in the Russian Federation also acts as a rather controversial issue. Moreover, there are proposals in the scientific community to reduce the age of criminal responsibility in the Russian Federation. There are both arguments for and against this issue. Thus, the proponents of this proposal justify the need to reduce the age of criminal responsibility by saying that in this way society will be able to protect itself from a significant number of criminals. A person who has reached the age of 12 is already able to realize the actual nature of his actions and the essence of a number of crimes. In addition, there are cases of serious, cynical crimes committed by persons aged 12-13 years ^{[15, p. 52]}. Opponents of lowering the age of criminal responsibility point to the fact that the current penal enforcement system is not ready to provide corrective action to criminals aged 12-13 years. In addition, in their opinion, all possible measures of influence on such persons, in addition to criminal liability, have not been exhausted to date. Among other things, it is possible that, if omissions are made in the study of the identity of a particular offense, persons who, indeed, due to their young age, are not aware and unable to realize the essence of their actions will be brought to criminal responsibility ^{[16, p. 165]}. In our opinion, reducing the age of criminal responsibility, despite the risks involved, is quite justified due to the presence of signs in persons aged 12-13 years indicating their ability to realize the negative nature of individual crimes, the importance and value of human life, as well as a number of other objects of criminal law protection. In particular, an analysis of the behavior of persons aged 12-13 years at the time of the criminal assault, as well as actions committed immediately afterwards and aimed at hiding traces of what they had done, allows us to establish that at this age adolescents already have an awareness of crime and the punishability of their actions ^{[17, p. 182]}. In this regard, it seems advisable to reduce the age of criminal responsibility for certain types of crimes, for example, encroaching on human life, as well as sexual integrity.

Returning to the study of issues related to juvenile delinquency in the Russian Federation, it should be noted that in addition to the registered crimes taken into account in the statistical data, there is a fairly significant number of crimes that remain unknown to law enforcement agencies or unregistered by them. Indeed, juvenile delinquency has a high degree of latency ^{[18, p. 40]}. Thus, in a number of studies, it can be found that juvenile offenders at the time of bringing them to criminal responsibility already had experience of committing crimes, but they remained unknown to law enforcement agencies, as a result of which a sense of impunity was formed, which led to further facts of illegal activity, even if in the first case a careless crime took place ^[19].

To date, the causes of juvenile delinquency are most often divided into five main groups, among which: reasons related to the absence or improper upbringing; reasons caused by the age and psychological characteristics of the personality of minors; reasons due to the position of the family in which the minor is raised; the influence of adults, under the influence of which minors are involved in group crimes; the imperfection of the current criminal legislation in terms of bringing minors to criminal responsibility ^{[20, p. 346]}.

In general, it is precisely the fact that minors, due to their characteristics, are not yet fully formed personalities. Any external influences can have a significant impact on them. So, next, we propose to focus on the issue of the formation of a sense of impunity among minors, which is quite important in the context of considering issues of criminal responsibility. In particular, a minor who has escaped punishment once, especially at the age of 14-15 years, without proper influence, an idea of the normality of actions for which there are no negative consequences is quickly formed. In this context, the most interesting issues are probation of minors, which, in accordance with the works of domestic researchers in the field of criminal law, has a number of problematic aspects and, when implemented in its current form, can negatively affect the future behavior of a person ^{[21, p. 19; 22, p. 32; 23, p. 330]}.

Conditional sentencing of minors, which has exclusively positive aspects for the purpose of its existence and practical application, can lead to the re-commission of crimes and the formation of a minor on a criminal path. In the doctrine of criminal law, there is an opinion that the conditional conviction of minors as a whole acts as a special legal structure of a criminal nature, which allows: firstly, to apply measures of influence to a minor offender, while avoiding factors that can negatively affect his personality, namely isolation from society; secondlySecondly, to release a person who has not reached the age of majority from actually serving a sentence of imprisonment, since this may irreversibly affect the values and foundations of such a category of offenders ^[24]. It is in relation to minors in modern conditions that probation is most often used ^{[25, p. 99]}. However, among the negative aspects that may occur if the issue of the possibility of probation in relation to minors is incorrectly resolved, the following are most often highlighted:

1. The fact that among all repeated crimes committed by persons under the age of majority, it is the crimes of probationers that have the greatest proportion. In particular, it should be noted that there is a natural connection between the frequent re-commission of crimes by conditionally convicted minors and the widespread, sometimes unjustified, use of this institution. Thus, cases of insufficient study of the offender's personality and hasty conclusions about the possibility of correcting a minor without isolating him from society by applying a suspended sentence can lead to a situation in which a really dangerous criminal, even if he has not reached the age of majority, will remain at large.

2. Frequent cases of the formation of a sense of impunity among juvenile offenders to whom a suspended sentence has been applied. It should be noted here that in case of repeated commission of a crime during the probation period to a minor convicted person who has been given a suspended sentence, the court may decide to re-assign a suspended sentence based on the degree of public danger of the committed act and the identity of the offender. At the same time, as practice shows, courts do not always pay due attention to the study of the criminal's personality, the degree of his deviant behavior, as well as the determinants contributing to the commission of repeated crimes by probationers. The consequence of the above is situations in which a minor who has committed a crime and has been subjected to a suspended sentence, feeling to a certain extent his impunity, commits a new crime, the result of which is a suspended sentence again, leading to the rooting of this feeling ^{[26, p. 95]}.

3. The absence of a sense of guilt and public danger of their actions in the category of offenders under consideration. As for this problem, it is related to the previously mentioned sense of impunity and to a certain extent reinforces it. Thus, a number of legal restrictions are imposed on a conditionally convicted minor, the specific amount of which is established by the court when passing a sentence based on the list provided for in Part 5 of Article 73 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, a person under the age of 18, in our opinion, is not yet able to understand the true nature of such legal restrictions, which they consider in most cases as optional recommendations, rather than duties ^[27].

Among other things, an analysis of the current version of the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which enshrine the procedure for applying a suspended sentence to minors, makes it possible to establish that there is a possibility of re-applying a suspended sentence to a minor in case he commits a new crime during the probation period. Thus, Part 6.2 of Article 88 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides that in the case of a new crime committed by a minor convicted under probation, which is not particularly serious, the court, taking into account the circumstances of the case and the identity of the perpetrator, may decide to re-apply a suspended sentence with the establishment of a new probation period and the assignment of duties provided for in Part 4 of Article 73 of the Criminal Code. This state of affairs is ambiguously assessed by researchers. Thus, some believe that it is the frequent application of probation to minors, especially repeated ones, that has a negative impact on the growth rate of serious juvenile delinquency ^{[28, 29]}. According to others, the current procedure for assigning conditional sentences to minors allows us to take into account the specifics of this category of offenders and avoid placing them in an environment that can have a negative impact on them, that is, in an educational colony ^[30].

Conclusion. Juvenile delinquency in the Russian Federation, despite a number of positive aspects related to the well-established tendency to decrease their number, as well as their share in the total mass of crimes committed in the country, still continues to be a topic that causes a huge amount of controversy in the doctrine of criminal law, and especially in the issue of the causes of criminal behavior on the part of minors. In order to minimize the cases of crimes committed by minors, more careful attention should be paid to the personality characteristics of this category of criminals.

An analysis of the causes of juvenile delinquency will allow us to establish that one of the most obvious problems, the ways to effectively solve which the legislator has not yet proposed, is a significant number of cases of unjustified application of probation to juvenile offenders. This is especially important in light of the possibility of re-applying a suspended sentence to a minor. This state of affairs in practice leads to situations in which a person who has committed a criminal act twice is never subjected to real punishment, since the essence of the measures imposed in such a case cannot always be correctly understood by a person at that age. Because of this, the most obvious and at the same time effective solution to the problem is the exclusion of Part 6.2 from the content of Article 88 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which allows the re-application of a suspended sentence against a minor. And in order to maintain a more careful attitude towards minors with a not yet fully formed personality in the matter of bringing to criminal responsibility, it is necessary to avoid as much as possible the imposition of punishment that can negatively affect such a person, namely, imprisonment.

All of the above suggests that in the form currently available, the institution of conditional sentencing of minors under certain circumstances may, due to the specifics of the personality of minors and their rapid perception of external influences, cause the formation of a sense of impunity and, as a result, the commission of new, possibly even more serious crimes. In this regard, the law enforcement officer, in the case of a minor committing a crime, at the stages preceding the decision on bringing him to criminal responsibility, should pay the most careful attention to the analysis of the personality of each specific offender. It is quite difficult to achieve this in practice due to the rather high degree of workload of law enforcement officers. In this regard, as a possible direction for improving this activity, the implementation of deeper and more comprehensive cooperation between employees of different departments, both among themselves and with public associations and civil society institutions, can be considered. Such actions will allow, on the one hand, to carry out work more effectively in the case of an already accomplished fact of committing a crime by a minor, and on the other hand, they will increase the effectiveness of work on the prevention of this category of crimes.