Corpus Delicti and the Subject of Proof: to the Discussion of the Relationship Between the Concepts

IF 0.1 Q4 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
S. Kornakova, Ekaterina Zavgorodnevа
{"title":"Corpus Delicti and the Subject of Proof: to the Discussion of the Relationship Between the Concepts","authors":"S. Kornakova, Ekaterina Zavgorodnevа","doi":"10.17150/2500-4255.2021.15(4).495-501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The authors analyze the opinions of scholars about the correlations between the categories «corpus delicti» and «subject of proof». The main object of their criticism is the idea, supported by some scholars, that the elements of corpus delicti equal the circumstances to be proven that are included in the key fact. The authors use the logical criterion to demonstrate that this claim is unsubstantiated. The circumstances stated in Clauses 1 and 2, Part 1, Art. 73 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation characterize the key features of corpus delicti only conditionally. In this connection, the key fact is the aggregate of factual circumstances that constitutes the basis of corpus delicti. \nIn the logical aspect, the qualification of a crime is a syllogistic inference, according to which, if the essential features of the action under investigation coincide with the features of the concept of a specific crime as described in criminal law, then this crime becomes the concept of this action. According to the authors, from this standpoint it is possible to discuss not the equivalence of circumstances to be proven and corpus delicti, but only the equivalence of their essential features as determined by criminal law. They point out the specific character of criminal law and process terminology that also does not make it possible to equate the categories «corpus delicti» and «subject of proof». \nThe significance of the existence of a formulated subject of proof in criminal procedure law and its interconnection with corpus delicti is demonstrated. It is concluded that proof in a criminal case is based on certain knowledge, which performs a methodological function. In this connection, the subject of proof, in the gnoseological sense, is a program of criminal procedure activities determined by the lawmaker. The norms of criminal law determined the parameters of criminal procedure proving, so the subject of proof is based on the criminal law characteristic of the action but does not equal it. The circumstances of the case, determined in the process of proving, are correlated with the norms of criminal law with the purpose of possible criminal law qualification of the action. Corpus delicti, determined in the criminal law, and the subject of proof, formulated in the criminal procedure law, ensure strict certainly and specification of the process of proving carried out by the preliminary investigation bodies and the court.","PeriodicalId":43975,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Russian Journal of Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17150/2500-4255.2021.15(4).495-501","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The authors analyze the opinions of scholars about the correlations between the categories «corpus delicti» and «subject of proof». The main object of their criticism is the idea, supported by some scholars, that the elements of corpus delicti equal the circumstances to be proven that are included in the key fact. The authors use the logical criterion to demonstrate that this claim is unsubstantiated. The circumstances stated in Clauses 1 and 2, Part 1, Art. 73 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation characterize the key features of corpus delicti only conditionally. In this connection, the key fact is the aggregate of factual circumstances that constitutes the basis of corpus delicti. In the logical aspect, the qualification of a crime is a syllogistic inference, according to which, if the essential features of the action under investigation coincide with the features of the concept of a specific crime as described in criminal law, then this crime becomes the concept of this action. According to the authors, from this standpoint it is possible to discuss not the equivalence of circumstances to be proven and corpus delicti, but only the equivalence of their essential features as determined by criminal law. They point out the specific character of criminal law and process terminology that also does not make it possible to equate the categories «corpus delicti» and «subject of proof». The significance of the existence of a formulated subject of proof in criminal procedure law and its interconnection with corpus delicti is demonstrated. It is concluded that proof in a criminal case is based on certain knowledge, which performs a methodological function. In this connection, the subject of proof, in the gnoseological sense, is a program of criminal procedure activities determined by the lawmaker. The norms of criminal law determined the parameters of criminal procedure proving, so the subject of proof is based on the criminal law characteristic of the action but does not equal it. The circumstances of the case, determined in the process of proving, are correlated with the norms of criminal law with the purpose of possible criminal law qualification of the action. Corpus delicti, determined in the criminal law, and the subject of proof, formulated in the criminal procedure law, ensure strict certainly and specification of the process of proving carried out by the preliminary investigation bodies and the court.
行为主体与证明主体:论二者概念的关系
作者分析了学者们对“行为主体”和“证明主体”这两个范畴之间关系的看法。他们批评的主要对象是一些学者支持的一种观点,即既成事实的要素等于关键事实中所包含的待证明情况。作者使用逻辑标准来证明这种说法是没有根据的。《俄罗斯联邦刑事诉讼法》第73条第1部分第1和第2款所述的情况只是有条件地说明了职权主体的主要特征。在这方面,关键的事实是构成行为主体基础的事实情况的总和。在逻辑方面,犯罪的资格是一种三段论推理,根据三段论推理,如果被调查行为的本质特征与刑法中所描述的特定犯罪概念的特征相吻合,那么该犯罪就成为该行为的概念。作者认为,从这一观点出发,可以讨论的不是待证情节和职权的等同,而只是刑法所确定的它们的基本特征的等同。他们指出,刑法和程序术语的特殊性也使得不可能将“职权主体”和“证明主体”这两个范畴划等号。论述了在刑事诉讼法中确立举证主体的意义及其与既得权的联系。本文认为,刑事案件中的证据是建立在一定的知识基础上的,具有方法论的功能。在这个意义上,举证的主体,在灵知学意义上,是由立法者确定的刑事诉讼活动的程序。刑法规范决定了刑事诉讼证明的参数,因此证明的主体是以行为的刑法特征为依据而不等于行为的刑法特征。在举证过程中确定的案件情节与刑法规范相关联,目的是为行为提供可能的刑法资格。刑法规定的职权主体和刑事诉讼法规定的举证主体,保证了初审机关和法院举证过程的严格、明确和规范。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Russian Journal of Criminology
Russian Journal of Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Current stage of law development is defined by novelty in all life spheres of Russian society. The anticipated renovation of legal system is determined by international life globalization. The globalization provides both positive and negative trends. Negative trends include increase in crime internationally, transnationally and nationally. Actualization of international, transnational and national crime counteraction issue defines the role and importance of «Russian Journal of Criminology» publication. Society, scientists, law-enforcement system officers, public servants and those concerned about international rule declared individual legal rights and interests’ enforcement take a tender interest in crime counteraction issue. The abovementioned trends in the Russian Federation legal system development initiate a mission of finding a real mechanism of crime counteraction and legal protection of human rights. Scientists and practicians’ interaction will certainly contribute to objective achievement. Therefore, «Russian Journal of Criminology» publication is aimed at criminology science knowledge application to complete analysis and practical, organizational, legal and informational strategies development. The activity of «Russian Journal of Criminology» that involves exchange of scientific theoretical and practical recommendations on crime counteraction between Russian and foreign legal sciences representatives will help concentrating the efforts and coordinating the actions domestically and internationally. Due to the high social importance of «Russian Journal of Criminology» role in solving theoretical and practical problems of crime counteraction, the Editorial Board is comprised of Russian and foreign leading scientists whose works are the basis for criminological science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信