Evaluative features in the composition of crimes against public (general) security: a modern concept of their use

Musienko Natalia Sergeevna Graduate student; Department of Criminal Law and Criminology; Kuban State University 350000, Russia, Krasnodar region, Krasnodar, Stavropol str., 149 pilila@rambler.ru Other publications by this author

The effectiveness of the implementation of a criminal law directly depends on the content of the legal norms that form it and the uniformity of the practice of their application. The wording and content of individual elements of crimes are not unambiguous and clearly defined, which complicates the process of law enforcement officers operating on them. A significant group of such circumstances is formed by the so-called evaluative features or categories ^{[1, p. 16]}. It should be noted that the works of R.U. Akhmedov, D.R. Kasimov, E.V. Kobzeva, E.N. Maslova, B.P. Morozov, S.N. Naumov and a number of other authors are devoted to the study of the evaluative features of the crime in a complex or separately in modern realities (that is, taking into account the legislation of the Russian Federation) ^{[1, p. 15]}. Crimes against public safety are no exception, and along with many other encroachments, they contain designated features in the structures of their compounds.

These crimes are a group of socially dangerous acts that encroach on the totality of public relations in the field of public safety ^{[2, p. 427]}. Currently, this group of crimes is listed in Chapter 24 of Section IX of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which includes 45 articles.

The issue of the system of crimes against public safety in the theory of criminal law is debatable ^{[2, p. 430]}. A more common classification of these is to combine them into four groups: 1) crimes against public (general) security; 2) crimes that infringe on public order; 3) crimes related to violations of special safety rules; 4) crimes related to violations of the rules of trafficking in generally dangerous items ^{[3, p. 401]}.

P.V. Agapov, in turn, divides these criminal attacks into the following types:: a) crimes that infringe on the general conditions for the safe functioning of society; b) socially dangerous acts related to violations of special safety rules in the industrial sector or other types of activities; c) socially dangerous encroachments related to illegal treatment, theft and other actions against objects of increased danger ^{[4, p. 473]}.

A.V. Bokov suggests classifying the analyzed crimes into the following groups: a) crimes against the foundations of public safety (Articles 205-207, 211, 215.2, 227 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation); b) crimes expressed in the creation of special types of criminal groups and communities (Articles 208-210 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation); c) crimes against public order (Articles 212-214 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation); d) criminal violations of special safety rules (Articles 215, 215.1, 216-219 of the Criminal Code); e) illegal trafficking in nuclear materials and radioactive substances (Articles 220-221 of the Criminal Code); f) illegal trafficking in weapons, ammunition, explosives and explosive devices (Articles 222-226 of the Criminal Code) ^{[5, p. 471]}.

Note that there are other classifications that contain from four to six groups of crimes. Considering the indicated classifications, it seems that it is more correct to distinguish them taking into account the main direct object of the criminal act.

It is worth noting that most of the authors are of the same opinion that there is currently an independent group of criminal attacks, which belongs to the category of general.

Distinguishing crimes against public (general) security into a separate group, scientists argue for its independence by the fact that the main direct object of such attacks are public relations in the field of ensuring this level (nature) of security ^{[2, p. 430; 6, p. 155; 7, p. 331, etc.]}.

According to R.V. Zakomoldin, such crimes are "common" because they can be committed in any sphere of public life and affect the most important interests in ensuring normal and safe living conditions for the whole society ^{[8, p. 57]}.

A number of experts in the field of criminal law classify crimes against "general" public safety as socially dangerous acts, the responsibility for which is established by art. 205-205.6, 207, 209-210.1, 211, 212 and 227 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation [9 p. 55].

Additionally, it should be noted that in Chapter 24 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, Federal Laws No. 100-FZ dated 04/01/2020 and No. 32-FZ dated 03/04/2022 added new articles – 207.1, 207.2, 207.3. In criminal encroachment, responsibility for which is established by 207.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the main direct object is public relations ensuring the safety of the population and territories, public order ^{[10, p. 97]}. For the crime provided for in Article 207.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the main direct object of a socially dangerous encroachment is formed by public relations in the field of ensuring public safety, developing regarding the dissemination of reliable information about the use of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and about the activities of state authorities of the Russian Federation outside its territory ^{[11, p. 33]}. Thus, newer criminalized acts are not included in the group of crimes against public (general) security.

The crime, the responsibility for which is regulated by art. 208 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, is similar in name to a group of crimes related to the organization and (or) participation in criminal activities. At the same time, this crime is also distinguished by its direct object, which is represented as a set of public relations in the field of ensuring the normal functioning of state power, as stipulated in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the procedure for the formation of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation ^{[12, p. 168; 13, p. 61]}, which excludes the attribution of this act to a separate group of crimes.

Crimes against public (general) security also have their own classification. For example, a number of scientists suggest that such crimes can be divided into three groups:

- crimes of a terrorist nature (Articles 205-205.6, 207 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation);

- crimes related to the organization and (or) participation in criminal activities (Articles 209-210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation);

- other crimes against public (general) security (Articles 211, 212, 227 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) ^{[14, p. 77]}.

The author of this work, agreeing with the classification presented above, takes it as a basis for the analysis of evaluative features in crimes against public (general) security.

For the convenience of considering the indicated signs, tables are presented below, which contain those in the named crimes, taking into account the presented classification and model of a socially dangerous act.

Table No. 1. Evaluative signs in terrorist crimes (Articles 205-205.6, 207 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

Table No. 2. Evaluative signs in crimes related to organization and (or) participation in criminal activity (Articles 209-210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

Table No. 3. Evaluative signs in other crimes against public (general) security (Articles 211, 212 and 227 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

In addition to the above, it should be noted that in a number of notes to the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, namely to art. 205, 205.1, 205.5, 206, 210, special types of exemption from criminal liability are regulated, the description of which also contains assessment categories. For the convenience of their consideration, the table below is provided.

Table No. 4. Evaluation criteria in the regulation of special types of exemption from criminal liability for crimes against public (general) security

In addition, it should be noted that in some cases the legislator reveals the content of the assessment categories for crimes against public (general) security. This is illustrated in the notes to the articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation providing for responsibility for these crimes, in particular, such as financing terrorism (note 1 to art. 205.1), public justification of terrorism (note 1.1 to art. 205.2), support of terrorism (note 2 to art. 205.4). It should be emphasized that within the framework of the authentic interpretation of the concept of support for terrorism, the legislator, in turn, also allows the use of an evaluation category. This includes other assistance that contributes to the implementation of terrorist activities. Thus, even taking into account the interpretation of the designated action in art. 205.4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, its content seems to be insufficiently defined for understanding.

When considering the modern concept of using evaluative features in criminal law and their implementation in crimes against public (general) security in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it should be noted that such categories in the structure of the criminal encroachment model can be found within the framework of the subject, socially dangerous act and consequences, method, object used as an instrument, special subject and the purpose of the criminal act. The prevailing number of evaluative features is found when describing a socially dangerous act and its consequences. In turn, the latter are expressed in the law in a more unified way, in terms of their legal structure and presentation. This uniformity is evident in such categories as "significant property damage" and "other grave consequences."

Specifying the features of the evaluative features peculiar to the analyzed group of criminal offenses, we note the features of a number of optional elements of the crime that act as constituent elements. In particular, the subject of the crime is indicated only in 205.3 and Part 4 of art. 212 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is presented in the form of other substances and objects that pose a danger to others. The same feature has a "mirror image" in Part 1 of Article 212 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, where it acts as an object used as an instrument of a criminal act. The purpose of the encroachment is designated only for banditry, being represented as an attack on citizens or organizations. Another attack, namely one that is carried out against a sea or river vessel during piracy, is a sign of a socially dangerous encroachment. The elements of a crime indicating the method and objects used as weapons are only found in other crimes against public (general) security (Articles 211, 212 and 227 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

The peculiarities of the evaluative features in the compositions of the analyzed ones can also be traced in the fact that a number of them have been clarified within the framework of judicial interpretation. In particular, in resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 17.01.1997 No. 1 "On the practice of Applying legislation on liability for banditry by Courts" (hereinafter referred to as PPVS RF dated 17.01.1997 No. 1); dated 10.06.2010 No. 12 "On judicial practice of considering criminal cases on the organization of a criminal community (criminal organization) or participation in it (her)" (hereinafter referred to as RF Law of the Russian Federation No. 12 dated 06/10/2010) and No. 1 dated 02/09/2012 "On Certain Issues of Judicial Practice in Criminal Cases of Terrorist Crimes" (hereinafter referred to as RF Law of the Russian Federation No. 12 dated 06/10/2010). Below is a table of the features that have been clarified in these law enforcement acts.

Table No. 5. Evaluative features in the composition of crimes against public (general) security, clarified in the acts of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation

Summing up the analysis of the use of evaluative features in crimes against public (general) security, the following conclusions can be drawn.

1. Crimes against public (general) security are a separate group of crimes united by the main direct object, which is represented as public relations in the field of ensuring the security of any spheres of public life, the most important interests of society, and ensuring normal and safe conditions for its existence as a whole. The designated group of crimes can be conditionally classified into three types: crimes of a terrorist nature (Articles 205-205.6, 207 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation); socially dangerous encroachments related to the organization and (or) participation in criminal activity (Articles 209-210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation); other socially dangerous acts against public (general) security (art. 211, 212, 227 OF THE Criminal Code OF THE Russian Federation).

2. When constructing offences against public (general) security, evaluative features are used to describe the subject, the socially dangerous act and its consequences, the method, the object used as an instrument, a special subject and purpose.

3. The most widespread and diverse use of evaluative features in the crimes of interest is observed in determining such a mandatory feature of the objective side as a socially dangerous act. This is expressed in the form of active actions in all these crimes.

4. When specifying evaluation categories in the construction of crimes against public (general) security, the legislator designates them using an open list.

5. A number of evaluative features in the compositions of these attacks have received an authentic and judicial interpretation. The first is presented in the notes to the articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the second – in the resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

6. Evaluation categories in crimes against public (general) security are used not only in constructing a model of crimes, but also in regulating special types of exemption from criminal liability.