In criminal law, the delimitation of crimes and other offenses is carried out according to various criteria. The grounds for differentiation are closely related to the characteristic features of the acts themselves. Next, we consider the main criteria for distinguishing between crimes and other offenses .
General information
In the broad sense, an offense should be understood as any act condemned by society and causing harm to it. In legal theory, he refers to a violation of generally binding rules sanctioned or established by the state, causing damage to relations regulated by legal norms, and the onset of adverse consequences for the guilty.
When describing the delimitation of a crime from other offenses , as a rule, criminal offenses and administrative, disciplinary offenses and civil-law tort are contrasted.
Separation Specifics
The signs by which the distinction between crimes and other offenses is carried out , briefly , show the special place of criminally punishable acts in the system, although there are much more misconducts, as statistics show.
Differentiation of illegal actions allows you to choose the appropriate measures of influence on the subjects.
Normative base
Sometimes in practice you have to use a kind of cheat sheet to distinguish between crimes and other offenses . This is due primarily to a certain mixture of norms in the legislation. Currently, the system of normative acts for criminal acts provides for the Criminal Code, administrative offenses of the Administrative Code, and civil law tort - CC. At the same time, many questions arise in practice. For example, why in different codes can one meet a characteristic, if not the same, then, in any case, of very similar illegal actions?
So, in the Code of Administrative Offenses and Criminal Code there are descriptions:
- violations of the order of protection of fish stocks;
- illegal use of identification tools (in particular, trademark);
- illegal obtaining a loan;
- intentional or fictitious bankruptcy;
- violations of fire safety rules, etc.
Some other acts may be called differently, but be related or similar in content. Examples include:
- Petty hooliganism and hooliganism. Sanctions for the first are fixed in the Code of Administrative Offenses, for the second - in the Criminal Code.
- Petty theft and theft, misappropriation / embezzlement, fraud.
There are many such examples. Despite the well- defined distinctions between crimes and other offenses in the codes, their differentiation only on the basis of reference to a particular regulatory act seems clearly insufficient.
Public danger
The distinction between crimes and other offenses on this basis seems more justified and effective. The key criterion should be the degree of public danger.
It is worth saying that at present there is no consensus on whether all offenses are dangerous to society. Some scholars believe that it is characteristic only of criminal acts. Others believe that when delimiting crimes and other offenses, one cannot talk about the absence or presence of public danger, since they all pose a certain threat. Differentiation must be carried out precisely by its degree and nature.
The arguments of lawyers
Many prominent experts are asking themselves - if disciplinary violations do not pose a danger to society, which explains the establishment of rather strict sanctions for their admission, the existence of disciplinary charters for individual departments, provisions on the responsibility of judges, the possibility of supervisory authorities to take measures when committing such misconduct?
Most authors are of the opinion that the distinction between crimes and other offenses , which are related socially harmful actions, must be done precisely according to the degree of threat they pose. This approach is indirectly confirmed by the fact that the compositions of many criminal acts have no analogues in the Code of Administrative Offenses, and administrative offenses, respectively, in the Criminal Code.
In particular, the administrative legislation does not provide for the majority of attacks against the person, which are punishable exclusively by criminal norms. In the Criminal Code, in turn, there are no compositions of violations similar to those provided for in Ch. 5 Administrative Code (encroachment on the rights and interests of the individual). At the same time, the Criminal Code provides for a special chapter 19 for crimes against constitutional freedoms and rights, including articles 136-149.
Conclusion
The differentiation of crimes and other offenses by the nature and degree of danger to society seems quite natural. According to these criteria, some violations can be recognized solely as criminal acts, others as administrative offenses.
The difference in the degree of their danger is not only quantitative, but also qualitative, since according to one of the dialectical laws, quantity in this case passes into quality.
Effects
Their presence or absence should be taken into account when distinguishing between criminal and other unlawful acts. Equally important is the severity of the consequences. When assessing the degree of danger of action for society as a criterion for recognizing it as a crime or other offense, one must proceed from the nature of the social threat of the entire act as a whole, and take into account both subjective and objective factors.
Civil tort, as well as criminal attacks on property, are associated with damage to the property of the individual and the state. Crimes and other offenses also cause harm to the normal functioning of society in the current legal system. Accordingly, the first and second represent a certain social danger. Meanwhile, the level of negative impact of crimes and other offenses varies.
Amount of damage
Determining the amount of harm allows you to distinguish criminal offenses from other violations. For example, if an employee's use of his official position contrary to the interests of the civil service entails a substantial infringement of the rights of the state, society, or person, his actions are qualified under Article 285 of the Criminal Code. In the absence of the specified harm, the behavior of the subject is equated to a disciplinary offense.
Subjective factors
The circumstances that determine the level of danger to society and can affect the differentiation of crimes and other violations include the purpose, motive and form of guilt.
For example, if minor damage to health was intentionally caused to a subject, then the act is qualified under Article 115 of the Criminal Code. If there is negligence in the actions of the perpetrator, the harm can be compensated according to the rules of Art. 1085 Civil Code.
Nature of wrongfulness
This is another sign by which the delimitation of criminal acts and other offenses is carried out. Crimes always violate criminal law. Other offenses are contrary to the norms of other legal sectors. Moreover, they can be contained not only in laws, but also in by-laws.
Punishment
Another sign of differentiation is sanctions applied to the perpetrator. The consequence of a criminal act is a punishment under the Criminal Code, involving a criminal record. Other offenses entail less severe measures of influence. Some administrative sanctions, for example, arrest, correctional labor, a fine, have contents similar to criminal penalties. The difference between the two is that the first convictions do not entail.
Finally
When differentiating crimes and other offenses, many circumstances must be taken into account. Some criminal acts encroach on such groups of public relations, on which administrative and other offenses cannot encroach. An example is human life, state security. By the nature of public danger, an act without special labor can be attributed to crimes or other unlawful acts.
Difficulties in practice arise when committing offenses related to different legal sectors, but encroaching on the same object. For example, liability for traffic violations is established by both the Criminal Code and the Code of Administrative Offenses. The main criterion in such cases is the degree of danger of the act to society.
Crimes similar in composition to administrative misconduct violate mainly the relations that are taking shape in the areas of governance, public safety and order, and environmental protection.