Art. 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for the responsibility of citizens if they acted as organizers, accomplices or instigators in the commission of a crime. The description of this legislative act is used by the state to establish and distribute the responsibility of those people who were somehow aware of the crime being committed and could even influence the perpetrator in any way available to them. That is, the law classifies such persons as accomplices, even if these people did not physically participate in the crime.
Multi-channel free hotline Legal advice on criminal law. Every day from 9.00 to 21.00
Moscow and region: +7 (495) 662-44-36
St. Petersburg: +7 (812) 449-43-40
Article 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation
Application of Art. 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is due to the fact that a crime sometimes involves not one criminal, but several. In this case, it is important for the court to distinguish and determine what type of crime those participating in belong to, since the punishment of the criminals will depend on this basis.
According to Art. 33 of the Criminal Code distributes 4 types of criminals, namely:
- Executor.
- Organizer.
- Instigator.
- Accomplice.
The perpetrator is a direct participant in the crime, the main person who, through his actions, caused harm to another person or someone else’s property. There may be several such perpetrators in one crime.
Organizers include the person who organized the criminal group, the crime and led the chaos. Essentially, this person has power over all other people related to the offense.
An instigator is a person who, through persuasion, threats, blackmail or other actions that put pressure on the decision of another person, and thus forces him to commit an offense.
An accomplice is a person who helps the perpetrator or organizer of a crime with advice or other information in order to benefit from the offense.
An accomplice is also recognized as someone who promised the criminal in advance to hide the crime. The punishment for all those listed in Article 33 of the Criminal Code is determined based on what they committed, since the types of crimes can be different. Some persons may be subject to mitigating or aggravating circumstances that may exist during the commission of a crime.
Arbitrage practice
Judicial practice in cases where there were several participants playing different roles is quite extensive. Each individual criminal case requires careful analysis and establishment of the share of participation of each person in the overall case.
It must be borne in mind that assisting one person in committing a crime will not be considered the commission of a crime by a group of persons.
Thus, an excellent example of incorrect practice can be the verdict of the Moskovsky District Court (Kaliningrad), where citizen S. was convicted of committing acts of complicity with her husband K. in the illegal sale of a narcotic drug by prior conspiracy by a group of persons. When pronouncing the sentence, the judge did not take into account that the crime itself and the evidence collected during the preliminary investigation did not indicate that S. was assisting a group of people, but only spoke of aiding S. alone.
Under such circumstances, set out in the materials of the criminal case and in the verdict of the court of first instance, the cassation court recognized the erroneous classification of the actions as a group of persons guilty on the basis of a preliminary conspiracy and excluded this criterion from the conviction.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=6m_ou3LX2c0%3Fautohide%3D2%26autoplay%3D0%26controls%3D1%26fs%3D1%26loop%3D0%26modestbranding%3D0%26playlist%3D%26rel%3D1%26showinfo%3D1% 26theme%3Ddark%26wmode%3D
Punishment for the organizer
The organizer of a crime is a person who is active in everything related to preparation for committing an offense.
Such an event participant can have two roles:
- direct participant;
- The role of only the organizer.
With direct participation, the criminal carries out the organization primarily on his own, develops a plan for the proposed act, determines the role of each participant, if there are several of them, and also determines his role in participation. If the organizer only intends to develop a plan, then he does not participate in the process itself, but at the same time manages the process completely, communicating with other participants in ways available to him.
The punishment of this accomplice will be determined in accordance with the obligations assumed, since offenses may vary in severity, but the terms of the name are subject to change.
Also, when assigning a measure of responsibility, the identity of other people who are part of the company that committed the offense is taken into account:
- Minors.
- Incapacitated.
- Mentally ill, but not incapacitated.
In this case, the organizer, even if he did not participate in the crime, is recognized as the direct perpetrator, since he influenced other accomplices thanks to his strength, both physical and intellectual, and also suppressed the weaker ones and essentially forced or incited them to act as he pleased.
Executor
This type of accomplice includes the person who carries out the main harm, that is, the objective side of the offense.
To recognize a person as a performer, he must meet certain points, namely:
- fulfilled the objective side partially or completely;
- used by a person who has non-criminal status;
- possessed special knowledge if required.
If the perpetrator does not fulfill his functions in committing the crime, for example, when beating does not cause physical harm to the victim, then the crime will be considered imperfect.
By definition, such an offender goes into the category of accomplices, which means that aiding in the commission of a crime of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation will be applicable to him and he will be liable under this legislative act.
If a person, in carrying out criminal intentions, uses another person who cannot be the object of a criminal conviction, then he takes full responsibility for the actions of the person not subject to criminal liability and becomes a perpetrator before the law, although in fact he may commit incitement to commit a crime (Article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). finds him guilty.
The commentary to Article 33 states that when committing certain types of crimes, for example, robbery or theft of intellectual property, the perpetrator must have certain knowledge that allows him to carry out criminal intentions. If a person does not have such knowledge, then he is unlikely to be able to commit the objective side of the offense, which means his actions will be classified as other actions and attributed to other participants in the plan aimed at causing public harm.
Examples
The role of the instigator is easier to understand using specific examples.
So, for example, in 2011, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Karelia considered a case with the following plot. A., wanting to commit the murder of R., acted as an organizer.
He transferred money to the convicted B., so that he, acting as an intermediary, would persuade K. to commit murder through bribery. B., carrying out criminal intent, met with K. and, with the help of both bribery and threats, persuaded the latter to participate in the murder of R. The murder took place, B. received money from A.
Later, based on the results of the investigation of the case, he was convicted as an accomplice of A. and instigator of K.
As an example when a person’s actions were erroneously classified as incitement, we can mention the Byashimov case, considered in 1967 (unlike other branches, the fundamental principles of criminal law have changed little since the times of the USSR). This citizen was convicted by the court of first instance as an instigator of murder.
His actions were expressed in the fact that he wrote to his brother, who was serving in the army at that moment, about the immoral actions of his wife. Returning home, his brother committed murder and was convicted for it, and Byashimov was brought in as an instigator.
However, the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the USSR Supreme Court acquitted the convict, pointing out that Byashimy’s actions did not specifically induce the killer to commit a crime. The information he conveyed to his brother led to the commission of a crime, but the convict had no intent to kill the victim.
Definition of instigator
In order for a participant to be found guilty of incitement to commit a crime, the article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation stipulates that he must commit certain actions in order to be charged with such a crime.
Typically, such actions mean:
- Bribery is a material reward for the perpetrator for committing an offense.
- Persuasion is a systematic suggestion to a person about the need for some action.
- Threat - intimidation of a person by any means to carry out evil intentions with his hands.
- Other actions aimed at ensuring that another person becomes the performer.
To expose the instigator, it is necessary that other persons who are accomplices give evidence indicating that this person incited them in any way to commit illegal actions. For example, when committing fraud, the instigator convinces the person who will carry out this activity to give false information.
It is worth noting that the incitement article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation always applies if such a fact of commission of a crime has been established in relation to a capable and criminally responsible person.
If a person belongs to the category of persons who, for one reason or another, are recognized as limited in bearing responsibility, then the instigator changes his status to the perpetrator, which implies a more severe punishment.
Aiding
If the accused is charged with aiding and abetting the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, this means that the person in every possible way helped other participants in the crime in committing it or in hiding traces that could incriminate the suspects.
The Code understands the commission of complicity if the accomplice commits the following actions:
- acquires or destroys a crime weapon;
- gives advice on concealing the offense;
- promises in advance to help in carrying out the crime;
Also, the concept of complicity can have two forms: actions, when complicity is expressed in the form of assistance in any way, or inaction, when the accomplice does not report illegal information known to him.
Proven complicity is a rather complex action in practice, since most criminal acts are qualified under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and are independent violations of the law.
In the Russian Federation, complicity can be proven only with very compelling reasons. In this case, the actions of the accomplice must have a specific form, that is, complicity. For example, if a person wants to commit suicide, then an accomplice should facilitate this. However, such a person may be charged with incitement to suicide if this type of crime is proven.
In America, it is much easier to accuse a person of complicity; for example, in terrorism cases, any action aimed at helping a militant, including legal assistance, is punishable under the article of complicity.
Gaps in legislation
Some lawyers point out that guidance, advice and information may be considered to remove obstacles. In this regard, according to experts, the wording given in the norm is not entirely successful. The removal of obstacles, aimed at strengthening the resolve of other participants, can only be expressed through active actions. Moreover, it can be written, oral, including using gestures. The promise to hide the attacker, means, instruments of assault, traces, objects that were obtained illegally, to acquire or sell them, in accordance with the law, are considered as independent methods of intellectual assistance only when given in advance. Some lawyers point out the failure of this formulation. Experts explain their position by saying that the reference to a “promise given in advance” stipulates that the relevant information is provided before the implementation of the objective side of the act begins. But such assurances can take place after it, but before the actual completion of the encroachment. In this case, they also, according to lawyers, should be classified as removing obstacles, since they are also aimed at strengthening the determination to carry out illegal actions. Accordingly, they also have a causal relationship with
