Везде
Morality and Grounds for Criminalization
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
Morality and Grounds for Criminalization
Annotation
PII
S1605-65900000622-5-1
DOI
10.12737/jrp.2023.030
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Natalya V. Genrikh 
Occupation: Head of the Department of Criminal Law
Affiliation: North Caucasian Branch, Russian State University of Justice
Address: Krasnodar, Russia
Edition
Volume 27 No. 3
Pages
69-81
Abstract

The correlation of criminal law and morality is a wide area of intellectual discussions that do not lose relevance over time. A special place among them is occupied by the problem of the moral justification of criminalization, the connection of morality with the principles and grounds for establishing a criminal prohibition. Additional attention to these issues is justified both by the need to monitor the current development of criminal law thought, and by the need to give new assessments and rethink some well-known political and legal concepts.

Research objectives: on the basis of modern methods of scientific cognition (modeling, typologization, axiological assessment, constitutional expertise, forecasting) to determine possible prospects for improving theoretical knowledge about the relationship between morality and criminal law in order to optimize criminalization processes.

Based on the results of the analysis, two criminalization models based on the principles of immorality of the act and harm have been established, which correlate with the concepts of malum in se and malum prohibitum. For a long time they were thought of dichotomically as mutually exclusive. Their consistent implementation in the law led to the saturation of the criminal law with acts whose criminalization was extremely dubious (acts that are morally disapproved, but do not pose a danger, as well as acts that are thought of as dangerous by representatives of the elite, but are not considered as morally disapproved by the population). At the same time, each of these concepts individually is not capable of forming a reliable and modern basis for the formation of criminal law. The starting point in overcoming their dichotomy and forming a new concept of criminalization can be the understanding of a crime as an act that, from a moral point of view, deserves criminal punishment regardless of whether the act itself violates or does not violate established moral norms.

Keywords
criminalization, crimes malum in se, malum prohibitum, immorality of crime, moral justification of punishment
Date of publication
15.03.2023
Number of purchasers
12
Views
216
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf
1

References



Additional sources and materials

1. Antonyan Yu. M. Criminology. Selected lectures. Moscow, 2004. 448 p. (In Russ.)

2. Babaev M. M., Pudovochkin Yu. E. Russian criminal policy and criminal law: the experience of critical analysis. Moscow, 2017. 696 p. (In Russ.)

3. Bekkaria Ch. About crimes and punishments. Moscow, 2004. 184 p. (In Russ.)

4. Boyko A. I. Moral and religious foundations of criminal law. Moscow, 2010. 248 p. (In Russ.)

5. Cornford A. Preventive Criminalization. New Criminal Law Review. International and Interdisciplinary Journal, 2015, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1—34.

6. Davis M. S. Crimes Mala in Se: An Equity-Based Definition. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 2006, vol. 17, pp. 270—289.

7. Dimock S. The Malum prohibitum — Malum in se Distinction and the Wrongfulness Constraint on Criminalization. Dialogue, 2016, vol. 55, pp. 1—24.

8. Duff R. A. Answering for Crime: Responsibility and Liability in the Criminal Law. Oxford, 2007. 322 p.

9. Duff R. A. Crime, Prohibition, and Punishment. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 2002, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 97—108.

10. Dyurkgeym E. On the division of social labor. In Dyurkgeym E. On the division of social labor The method of sociology. Translated from A. B. Gofman. Moscow, 1991. 432 p. (In Russ.)

11. Garner B. A. (ed.). Black’s Law Dictionary. 9th ed. Dallas, 2004.

12. Hagan F. E. Introduction to criminology: Theories, methods, and criminal behavior. 4th ed. Chicago, 1998. 576 p.

13. Husak D. Overcriminalization: The Limits of the Criminal Law. New York, 2008. 248 p.

14. Karpets I. I. Criminal law and ethics. Moscow, 1985. 256 p. (In Russ.)

15. Khabrieva T. Y. Contemporary Law-Making and the Role of Juridical Science. Journal of Russian Law, 2015, no. 8, pp. 5—13. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.12737/12222.

16. Korobeev A. I. Criminal Law Policy of Russia: from genesis to crisis. Moscow, 2019. 352 p. (In Russ.)

17. Kozlov A. P. The concept of crime. St. Petersburg, 2004. 819 p. (In Russ.)

18. Kudryavtsev V. N., Eminov V. E. Criminology and problems of criminalization. Journal of Russian Law, 2004, no. 12, pp. 46—50. (In Russ.)

19. Kudryavtsev V. N., Yakovlev A. M. (eds.). Grounds for criminal prohibition: criminalization and decriminalization. Moscow, 1982. 303 p. (In Russ.)

20. Kuznetsova N. F. Crime and criminality. Moscow, 1969. 232 p. In Kuznetsova N. F. Selected works. St. Petersburg, 2003. 834 p. (In Russ.)

21. Kuznetsova N. F. Criminal law and morality. Moscow, 1967. 104 p. (In Russ.)

22. Larkin P. J. Public Choice Theory and Overcriminalization. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 2013, vol. 36, no. 715, pp. 715—793.

23. Lopashenko N. A. Criminal policy. Moscow, 2009. 608 p. (In Russ.)

24. Nudel S. L. Trends in modern russian criminal policy in the context of criminalization. Chelovek: prestuplenie i nakazanie, 2019, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 18—26. (In Russ.)

25. Priel D. Criminalization, Legitimacy, and Welfare. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 2018, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 657—676.

26. Prozumentov L. M. On the necessity of accounting for criminological conditions in criminalization of acts. Ugolovnaya yustitsiya, 2013, no. 2(92), pp. 85—88. (In Russ.)

27. Ragimov I. M. On the morality of punishment. St. Petersburg, 2016. 224 p. (In Russ.)

28. The course of Soviet criminal law. Vol. 2: Piontkovskiy A. A. Crime. Moscow, 1970. 516 p. (In Russ.)

29. Tonkonoff Costantini S. E. Las funciones sociales del crimen y el castigo. Una comparación entre las perspectivas de Durkheim y Foucault. Sociológica, 2012, Año 27, no. 77.

30. Wolfe N. T. Mala in Se: A disappearing doctrine? Criminology, 1981, vol. 19, pp. 131—143.

31. Zelinskiy A. F. Crimonology. Kharkov, 2000. 352 p. (In Ukr.)

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate