Amendment of the Criminal Code of the Russian Empire of 1903: Encroachment on a non-existent or clearly unsuitable object as a circumstance excluding criminal liability

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The relevance of this study is determined by the need for regular adjustments and improvements in the criminal law regulation of circumstances that exclude the criminality of an act. This need is ongoing, as society’s values, needs and ideas about justice continually evolve. Additionally, new challenges and threats emerge, and recent scientific findings, particularly in criminology and criminal law doctrine, must also be taken into account. One of the novelties of the 1903 Criminal Code of the Russian Empire was its provision that a direction toward a non-existent or unsuitable object could exclude the criminality of an act. This article examines the theoretical and practical prerequisites for this innovation. It presents and analyzes the practice of the Governing Senate (the highest court of the Russian Empire) concerning offences involving imaginary or unsuitable objects of crime during the period when the Criminal Punishment and Correctional Statute - the predecessor to the 1903 Criminal Code - was in effect. The analysis concludes that there was an inconsistency in the judicial practices, highlighting a pressing need for law enforcers at that time to have clear and reasonable criteria on this issue. The article also analyzes the ideas and intentions of the developers of the 1903 Criminal Code regarding this circumstance, as well as the relevant provisions. It is noted that there was no application of this innovation by the Governing Senate, which can be attributed to the limited duration of the 1903 Criminal Code. The author concludes that the ideas and judgments expressed during the development and evaluation of this normative provision could be valuable for improving the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Currently, it does not directly regulate liability for attempts involving unsuitable objects nor define the legal consequences of factual and legal errors. The analysis and conclusions presented in this article may also be relevant in preparing a draft resolution for the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

About the authors

Petr A. Skoblikov

Institute of State and Law, the Russian Academy of Sciences

Author for correspondence.
Email: skoblikov@list.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7875-7036
SPIN-code: 8001-2807

Doctor of Legal Sciences, Leading Research Fellow in the Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Criminology Department

10 Znamenka str., Moscow, 119019, Russian Federation

References

  1. Belogrits-Kotlyarevskii, L.S. (1903) Textbook of Russian criminal law. General and special parts. Kiev etc.; South Russian publishing house of F.A. Ioganson. (in Russian).
  2. Epifanov, B.V. (2015) The subject of a crime: the concept and problems of law-making. Bulletin of St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 2(66), 70-74. (in Russian).
  3. Fatkullina, M.B. (2001) Legal and factual errors in criminal law (problems of qualification). Dis. of Candidate of Legal Sciences. Yekaterinburg, Ural Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. (in Russian).
  4. Gaikov, V.T. & Kosarev, A.V. (2005) The concept of circumstances precluding the criminality of an act and their classification. News of higher educational institutions of the North Caucasus region. Social Sciences. (3), 77-79. (in Russian).
  5. Isaev, M.M. (1925) General part of criminal law of R.S.F.S.R. Leningrad, State publishing house. (in Russian).
  6. Khoroshilova, O.S. (2015) Attempt at crime and the factual error. Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 4-2(64), 258-261. EDN VAUGFR.
  7. Kolokolov, G.E. (1904) New criminal code: Interpretation and critical analysis. Moscow: Typolithography of U. Vener successor of O. Falk Publ. (in Russian).
  8. Korshansky, N.I. (1976) The Subject of the Crime. Volgograd: Higher Investigative School. (in Russian).
  9. Kufaev, V. (1923) The Criminal Code Enacted in the Polish State on May 1, 1921. Law and life. (5-6), 130-131. (in Russian).
  10. Kuznetsova, N.F. & Tyazhkova, I.M. (eds.). (2002) Course of Criminal Law. General Part. Vol. 1. The Doctrine of Crime. Moscow, Zertsalo Publ. (in Russian).
  11. Lenin, V.I. (2020) State and revolution. Moscow, AST Publ. (in Russian).
  12. Lutkov, D.V. (1872) Collection of information explaining the practical application of the Penal Code, extracted from collections: a) the highest approved opinions of the State Council, b) decisions of the Governing Senate (ed. 1864, 1865 and 1866), c) decisions of the Criminal Cassation Department (for 1866-1870 and the first half of 1871), decisions of the General Military Court and other periodicals. Compiled by D. Lutkov, member of the Tula District Court. Moscow, Printing house T. Rees. (in Russian).
  13. Mikhailov, V.I. (2016) The institution of lawful harm (circumstances precluding the criminality of the act) in the Criminal Code of 1903. Journal of Russian Law. (5), 65-72. (in Russian).
  14. Obrazhiev, K.V. & Pikurov, N.I. (eds.). (2023) Commentary on the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: in 3 vols. Vol. 1. General part. Moscow, Prospekt Publ.
  15. Pustoroslev, P.P. (1907) Russian criminal law: The general part. Issue 1. Juriev, K. Mattisen printing house. (in Russian).
  16. Sergeevskii, N.D. (1911) Russian criminal law: A study guide. General part. 9th ed. Saint Petersburg, M.M. Stasiulevich Printing House. (in Russian).
  17. Skoblikov, P.A. (2023). Execution of the law as a circumstance precluding the criminality of an act: Criminal code of 1903 and contemporary Russian legislation. Zakon. (11), 147-156. https://doi.org/10.37239/0869-4400-2023-20-11-147-156 (in Russian).
  18. Skoblikov, P.A. (2019) Resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation 2017-2018 on the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of persons affected by crimes. Criminology: yesterday, today, tomorrow. 3(54), 57-67.
  19. Slavin, I. (1931) Sabotage on the frontline of Soviet criminal law. Moscow, Sovetskoe zakonodatel’stvo Publ. (in Russian).
  20. Solovev, O.G. (2016) On the question of the correlation of abstract and casuistic methods in the construction of norms of criminal law. Actual problems of humanities and natural sciences. (2-3), 231-233. (in Russian).
  21. Stuchka, P. (1918) Proletarian Revolution and the Court. Proletarian Revolution and Law. (1), 1-8. (in Russian).
  22. Yevtushenko, E.A. (2016) On the development of the institution of circumstances excluding the criminality of an act in the criminal legislation of Russia. Electronic bulletin of the Rostov Socio-Economic Institute. Issue No. 1 (January-March), 254-262. EDN XHSUKL. (in Russian).

Copyright (c) 2025 Skoblikov P.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies