A person’s mental attitude to a socially dangerous act committed by him is called guilt. It manifests itself in the form of action or inaction and socially dangerous consequences resulting from a crime in the form of negligence or intent. A negative attitude of a person to the customs, rules, norms, requirements adopted in society is manifested in his commission of a crime, which determines the social significance of guilt.
Guilt is one of the mandatory signs of a crime, which is part of it as a fact of objective reality. Criminal liability in Russia occurs solely in the presence of this factor. In its absence, liability does not occur.
Guilt in criminal law takes two forms. Consider them. Moreover, crimes with two forms of guilt can simultaneously be part of one illegal act.
What are you talking about?
A person is recognized as guilty if he committed an unlawful act intentionally or through negligence. Criminal law distinguishes two forms of guilt - intent and negligence. What it is? The intent is direct or indirect. Careless guilt includes negligence and frivolity.
Intentional fault
Direct intent is expressed in the awareness of the dangers for people around them of their actions, their understanding of the inevitability or the possibility that certain consequences will occur.
Indirect intent is characterized by the awareness of the person who committed the criminal act, social danger, as well as the prediction of the possibility of the onset of consequences, the lack of desire for their occurrence. But at the same time, the person reacted to them with indifference. Or it is a conscious assumption of negative consequences.
Careless wine
Carelessness is expressed in the fact that the perpetrator is not indifferent to the consequences of the crime. Therefore, this factor is considered a less dangerous species.
Negligence is expressed in two forms of guilt: frivolity and negligence. A crime committed through negligence is expressed in the absence of foreseeing by the person who committed it, the arrival of serious consequences. But with the necessary forethought and attentiveness, a person could and should have foreseen the onset of certain consequences.
A crime committed by frivolity is considered the act of a person who foresaw the possibility of the dangerous consequences of his actions for the people around him, but who counted (without sufficient reason) to prevent them.
Two forms of guilt
Most crimes are committed with one of the considered forms of guilt. At the same time, some qualified compositions of intentional illegal acts provide for the presence of both of these components simultaneously. Like this? For example, on the part of the subject of the crime, intent is observed in relation to the committed act and negligence in relation to its consequences.
Two forms of guilt in criminal law can arise when a deliberately committed act causes certain consequences. However, they did not cover the plans of the defendant. This means that the person did not want and did not allow the onset of dangerous consequences.
For example, two forms of guilt in one crime are expressed in causing grievous bodily harm. And this entailed the death of the victim by negligence. At the same time, the perpetrator was aware of the danger of his action, foresaw the onset of consequences, but in the form of causing serious harm to health. He desired and allowed their advance. But it did not cover intentionally causing the death of the victim.
Administrative law
As part of the subjective part of the offense in administrative law, guilt is the internal attitude of the person who committed the act to this crime and the harmful consequences that have arisen. Only in the presence of a guilty illegal act does a certain legal liability for individuals and legal entities ensue.
In administrative law, the division into two forms of guilt often does not make sense in relation to legal entities.
Everything is determined from the subjective side of the offense. There is an analysis of the mental attitude of the collective subject to a perfect offense. The form of guilt is determined. The circumstances of taking possible measures to comply with the law and whether it was possible were assessed.
Forms of guilt
There are two forms of guilt in the Code of Administrative Offenses - negligence and intent. Let's consider them in more detail. The form of guilt in the form of the intent of a committed offense is expressed in the person’s awareness of the wrongfulness of his act, the anticipation of the onset of harmful consequences, the desire and assumption of their onset, or indifference to them.
Offenses committed through negligence are characterized by the person’s prediction of the onset of the grave consequences of his actions, but without reason, arrogantly counting on their prevention or the ability to anticipate.
The deliberate form of guilt is expressed in indirect or direct intent. He, in turn, consists in the recognition by a person of the wrongfulness of his act, anticipation of the onset of harmful consequences, conscious assumption or indifference to them. With direct intent, the offender wants the consequences. If the intent is indirect, then the person does not want to do harm, but treats his actions with indifference or consciously admits its infliction.
A careless act can be expressed in two forms of guilt: negligence and frivolity.
Frivolity consists in the person foreseeing the onset of a possible illegal result. But the man was arrogantly counting on his prevention.
Negligence is characterized by a lack of foresight in the person that unlawful consequences will occur. Although a person should have been able to predict their onset.
An administrative offense committed intentionally is more dangerous than an offense committed through negligence.
Most articles of the administrative code do not indicate a form of guilt, as this is not necessary. Administrative liability arises regardless of the careless or willful form of guilt. For example, if the driver violated the rules of the road. The violation could have occurred intentionally, that is, when the driver, for example, saw the sign, but consciously committed a violation or when the driver did not notice the sign, that is, he neglected the rules of the road through negligence. In both the first and second cases, equal measures of administrative responsibility will be applied to the driver .
In administrative law there are no offenses with two forms of guilt compared to criminal law, where the corpus delicti with two forms of guilt takes place.
Guilt in administrative and criminal law
In administrative, as in criminal law, there are two forms of guilt - intent and negligence. Without evidence of guilt, it is not possible to apply criminal liability measures to a person. Depending on how the crime was committed, intentionally or through negligence, the severity of the punishment depends. For example, in the case of destruction or damage to property, where the form of guilt (intentional destruction or negligence) depends on what punishment the criminal will incur - imprisonment, fine, correctional labor, imprisonment. In criminal law (as opposed to administrative) there can be crimes with two forms of guilt. We have already mentioned this. There can be no more than two forms of guilt in crimes.
In administrative law, the factor under consideration does not affect the amount of sanctions. That is, it does not matter whether the intent was or the offense was committed through negligence. For example, violation of the rules of maneuvering. The form of guilt is not important for applying the sanction, but the fact itself matters. The driver may have intentionally violated the rules of the movement or not notice the sign. The administrative penalty from this remains unchanged.
The difference between an offense and a crime
Administrative offense and crime are socially dangerous acts. In criminal law, the level of public danger is much higher than in administrative regulations. Public danger is expressed in specific signs and indicators characterizing certain elements of the crime and enshrined in the rule of law. It is the establishment of the legal structure that affects the possibility of distinguishing between an offense and a crime. Usually this happens on the basis of the objective side of the composition, that is, it is determined by the absence or presence of serious consequences. Also, the level of public danger can be determined on the basis of property damage. For example, the theft of another's property in the amount of more than five minimum wages is considered a crime. And if the indicator is less than or equal, then this is an offense.