Inducing or Facilitating Suicide: Issues of Differentiation of Responsibility and Classification
https://doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2020.169.12.145-155
Abstract
The paper analyzes the norm on criminal responsibility for inducing and facilitating suicide (article 110.1), included in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the expansion of "death groups" in social networks. The author pays special attention to the issues of differentiation of responsibility, calling into question the expediency of fixing in part 1-3 of this article the formal elements of crimes that provide for responsibility for "ineffective" inducement to suicide and assistance in its commission. The ratio between the public danger of inducing suicide and facilitating its commission is analyzed in detail. The author provides examples of the classification of these acts in the aggregate, when their commission does not entail the suicide of the victim or his attempt, and emphasizes the artificial nature of such a combination. The author concludes that it is necessary to refrain from splitting interrelated acts, i.e. inducing suicide and facilitating its commission, into two separate elements of the crime in parts 1 and 2 of the article. As a matter of discussion, the author examines the issue of distinguishing the analyzed acts from inducing them to suicide, and proves the validity of the legislative decision to recognize them as more socially dangerous. A separate consideration in the paper is given to the question of the nature of the determinative relationship in the elements of the "effective" inducement to suicide and assistance in its commission. Contrary to traditional views, it is noted that the acts of the inducing or facilitating a person are a necessary (mandatory) condition for committing suicide, that is, they are in a conditional relationship with it, and not in a causal relationship. When considering the issues of classification, the author reveals the content of the concept of "attempted suicide", while critically evaluating proposals to replace it with a "suicide attempt". Non-obvious elements of the analyzed crimes are indicated (targeting and special purpose), which allow distinguishing them from non-criminal acts. Finally, proposals are formulated to change the criminal law norm
About the Author
D. A. MeleshkoRussian Federation
Denis A. Meleshko, Cand. Sci. (Law), Senior Lecturer of the Department of Criminal Law
ul. Sadovaya-Kudrinskaya, d. 9, Moscow, 125993
References
1. Aveshnikova AA. Ob ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti za sklonenie nesovershennoletnikh k samoubiystvu [On criminal liability for inducing minors to suicide]. Rossiyskiy sledovatel [Russian Investigator]. 2019;1:33-37. (In Russ.)
2. Kovalev MI. Souchastie v prestuplenii [Complicity in a crime]. Yekaterinburg; 1999. (In Russ.)
3. Kapinus OS, Merkurev VV, editors. Kommentariy k Ugolovnomu kodeksu Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Comment to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation]. Moscow: Universitet prokuratury Rossiyskoy Federatsii; 2018. (In Russ.)
4. Krukovskiy VE, Mosechkin IN. Ugolovno-pravovye problemy protivodeystviya deyatelnosti, napravlennoy na pobuzhdenie k soversheniyu ubiystv i samoubiystv [Criminal-legal problems of countering activities aimed at encouraging the Commission of murders and suicide]. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki [Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics]. 2018;4:196-215. (In Russ.)
5. Kudryavtsev VN. Obshchaya teoriya kvalifikatsii prestupleniy [General theory of crime classification]. 2nd ed., rev. and suppl. Moscow; 2001. (In Russ.)
6. Obrazhiev KV, Chikin DS. Slozhnye edinichnye prestupleniya [Complex individual crimes]. Moscow; 2016. (In Russ.)
7. Pudovochkin YuE. Uchenie o sostave prestupleniya [The Doctrine of Component Elements of a Crime]. Moscow; 2009. (In Russ.)
8. Padov VV. Prichinnaya svyaz pri bezdeystvii v yatrogennykh prestupleniyakh [Causality in omission of an act in iatrogenic crimes]. Voprosy rossiyskoy yustitsii. 2020;5:515-526. (In Russ.)
9. Ryzhov EV. Obosnovannost ispolzovaniya v ugolovnom prave termina «pokushenie na samoubiystvo» [Validity of the use of the term "attempted suicide" in criminal law]. Rossiyskiy sledovatel [Russian Investigator]. 2018;6:27-29. (In Russ.)
10. Ter-Akopov AA. Prestuplenie i problemy nefizicheskoy prichinnosti [Crime and problems of non-physical causation]. Moscow; 2003. (In Russ.)
11. Ustinova TD. Sklonenie k samoubiystvu ili sodeystvie samoubiystvu: kriticheskiy analiz [Encouragement to Commit Suicide or Assisting with Suicide: Critical Analysis]. Lex russica. 2020;3:33-37. (In Russ.)
12. Filippova SV. Sklonenie k soversheniyu samoubiystva ili sodeystvie soversheniyu samoubiystva: ugolovnopravovaya kharakteristika i problemy kvalifikatsii: dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk [Inducement to commit suicide or assistance to commit suicide: Criminal law characteristics and problems of classification. Cand. Sci. (Law)]. Moscow; 2020. (In Russ.)
13. Shesler AV. Perspektivy sovershenstvovaniya ugolovno-pravovykh norm o souchastii v prestuplenii [Prospects for improving criminal law norms on complicity in crime]. Lex russica. 2015;6:30-38. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Meleshko D.A. Inducing or Facilitating Suicide: Issues of Differentiation of Responsibility and Classification. Lex Russica. 2020;73(12):145-155. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2020.169.12.145-155