CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR CRIMES IN THE FIELD OF STATE DEFENSE ORDER AND SYSTEMIC RELATIONS OF CRIMINAL LAW

Liability for public torts is established by the norms of criminal and administrative legislation. The main difference between crimes and administrative offenses is the degree of public danger. When deciding on the criminalization of a particular behavior, the legislator traditionally proceeds from an assessment of the public danger of the act itself. At the same time, when using administrative prejudice to construct criminal law norms, an increased public danger is attached to the identity of the perpetrator. It is the presence of an “intersectoral” recidivism that makes it possible to consider repeated violation of an administrative and legal prohibition as criminally punishable. The change in the degree of public danger of both the act itself and the person who committed it should be gradual, which is manifested, in particular, in the possibility for the court to reduce the category of the committed crime by no more than one step. The article notes that crimes with administrative prejudice have a “borderline” public danger, which is why, taking into account the systemic links between criminal and administrative-tort law, they should relate to crimes of minor or moderate severity. The classification by Federal Law № 365-FZ of 09.24.2022 of crimes with administrative prejudice in the field of state defense orders as serious violates these systemic links. In this regard, it is concluded that the legislator should either change the category of such crimes in the direction of its reduction, or abandon the use of administrative prejudice.