Minority of a deed provided for by the criminal law: praxis legis, guae debet esse

   Objective: to develop scientifically substantiated provisions on the insignificance of a deed provided for by the criminal law and to propose measures to improve legislation and law enforcement in this area.

   Methods: dialectical approach to cognition of social phenomena, allowing to analyze them in development and functioning, which contributed to the use of the following research methods: a) general scientific (logical, systemic, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction), b) special (documentary, practical, comparative-legal, formal-legal).

   Results: the work substantiates the conclusion that the recognition by an inquirer, investigator, prosecutor, judge of the insignificance of a deed provided for by the criminal law should be based on the following information: about the occurrence of all elements and signs of corpus delicti in the deed; about the infliction of small (minor) harm to law-protected interests in conjunction with the intent of the perpetrator aimed at causing such, including the lack of desire to cause harm, which excludes the existence of a reasonable amount of criminal-law harm. It is proposed to supplement Part 1 of Article 24 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code with a new ground for refusal to initiate criminal proceedings (termination of criminal proceedings), namely, the insignificance of the deed, and to consider it as a circumstance excluding criminal prosecution of a suspect (accused).

   Scientific novelty: the following means to distinguish a minor act from a crime were substantiated: a) the introduction of the “reasonable amount of criminal-legal harm” category in the investigative and judicial practice, b) the need for law enforcement to establish objective and subjective conditions of minor significance of the deed, c) the proposal on modernizing the criminal-procedural legislation.

   Practical significance: the main provisions and conclusions stated in the article can be used in scientific, pedagogical, law-making, investigative and judicial activity when considering the issues of application and improvement of the norm on the insignificance of a deed provided for by the criminal law, on the delimitation of such deed from a crime.

1. Batyukova, V. E., & Dineka, V. I. (2023). Insignificance of the act (concept and relation) Gosudarstvo i pravo, 12, 219–224. (In Russ.). doi: 10.31857/s102694520029300-1

2. Garbatovich, D. A. (2021). The practice-forming decision of the Supreme Court on the criteria for recognizing an act as insignificant. Ugolovnoe pravo, 7, 9–17. (In Russ.).

3. Gizatullin, I. A. (2023). Insignificance of a criminal law action: the procedural aspect. Rossiiskaya yustitsiya, 8, 21–27. (In Russ.).

4. Ivanchin, A. V. (2015). Theoretical model of the prescriptions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the grounds for criminal responsibility and violations of low significance. Lex russica, 6, 16–28. (In Russ.).

5. Kazantsev, S. Ya., & Safin, N. M. (2022). The insignificance of an act in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. Bulletin of the Moscow University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 4, 105–108. (In Russ.).

6. Khilyuta, V. V. (2021). The selection of grounds for termination of a criminal case on account of a misdemeanor. Zakonnost, 4, 53–55. (In Russ.).

7. Komyagin, R. A. (2021). The insignificance of an act in criminal law: theoretical modeling of the concept and algorithm of establishment. Union of Criminalists and Criminologists, 4, 50–56. (In Russ.).

8. Liutynskii, A. M. (2021). Indeterminacy of the insignificance of an act in Russian criminal law: some aspects. State Legal Research, 4, 158–160. (In Russ.).

9. Lopashenko, N. A. (2019). On certain problems in interpreting a minor deed according to the Russia Criminal Code. Ugolovnoe pravo, 5, 65–78. (In Russ.).

10. Naumov, A.V. (Ed.) (1999). Comment to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (2^nd ed., revised and complemented). Moscow: Jurist. (In Russ.).

11. Nikonov, M. A. (2021). How regional courts apply the norm on the minority of a deed. Ugolovnyi protsess, 1, 68–75. (In Russ.).

12. Obrazhiev, K. V. (2020). Minority of giving and taking a bribe: issues of criminal-legal assessment. Ugolovnoe pravo, 3, 39–52. (In Russ.).

13. Obrazhiev, K. V. (2021). Minor thefts of property for over 2,500 rubles. Ugolovnoe pravo, 6, 39–48. (In Russ.).

14. Plotnikov, R. V. (2019). Problematic issues related to the characteristic of minority of the deed. Criminalist, 3, 76–80. (In Russ.).

15. Pudovochkin, Yu. E. (2019). Assessment of the degree of public danger in establishing the insignificance of an act (based on court practice). Russian Justice, 8, 59–75. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17238/issn2072-909x.2019.8.59-75

16. Sharapov, R. D. (2020). Minor thefts of property. Ugolovnoe pravo, 6, 83–96. (In Russ.).

17. Stelmakh, V. Yu. (2021). Insignificance of the act as a special case of lack of corpus delicti. Bulletin of the Moscow University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 1, 153–159. (In Russ.).

18. Tyunin, V. I. (2020). On the insignificance of an act in criminal law and criminal law. Ugolovnoe pravo, 4, 69–76. (In Russ.).

19. Veliev, I. V. (1992). Criminal-legal techniques of establishing and legal assessment of infringement when qualifying crimes : abstract of a Cand. Sci. (Law) thesis. Baku. (In Russ.).

20. Vinokurov, V. N. (2019a). Correlation between the absence of elements of the crime and minority of the deed. Ugolovnoe pravo, 4, 23–27. (In Russ.).

21. Vinokurov, V. N. (2019b). On the limits of minority of the deed. Ugolovnoe pravo, 6, 18–23. (In Russ.).

22. Zagorodnikov, N. I., Nikiforov, B. S., Sakharov, A. B., Utevsky, B. S., Lunts, D. R., Bloom, M. I., Vyshinskaya, Z. A., Kopylovskaya, M. A., Kuznetsov, A. V., Sergeeva, T. L., Smirnov, E. A., Vlasov, I. S., Ivanov, V. N., & Shlykov, S. A. (1964). Scientific-practical comment to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (2^nd ed.). Moscow: Yuridicheskaya literatura. (In Russ.).

23. Zhilkin, M. G. (2022). Judicial practice of qualifying fraud as a minor deed. Ugolovnoe pravo, 6, 32–38. (In Russ.).

24. Zhilkin, M. G., & Chukanova, E. S. (2022). Judicial practice of qualifying robbery as a minor deed. Ugolovnoe pravo, 10, 10–20. (In Russ.).

25. Zhilkin, M. G., & Nikonorova, Yu. V. (2022). Judicial practice of qualifying misappropriation and embezzlement in connection with duties of office as a minor deed. Ugolovnoe pravo, 7, 14–23. (In Russ.).

26. Zvecharovsky, I. E. (2013). Demarcating between criminal and non-criminal in criminal law: tangible implications and procedural form. Ugolovnoe pravo, 3, 97–101. (In Russ.).