Moral Categories in Russian Criminal Law

The paper studies the forms of interaction between criminal law and moral ethical prescriptions as two systems that regulate the behavior of subjects of public relations. The study made it possible to establish that at present there are five main forms of implementation of moral and ethical categories in the criminal law of the Russian Federation. First, the norms of morality are embodied through the institution of the principles of criminal law. Analyzing the principle of justice, the author describes in detail the relationship under study. Secondly, certain moral prescriptions have been transformed into criminal law prohibitions and are currently legitimized in the dispositions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Particular attention is given to the historical transformation of the moral and ethical norm into the norm of the criminal law. Thirdly, the criminal law directly protects public relations regarding public morality and morality, which is enshrined in Ch. 25 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Fourth, the assessment of the morality (immorality) of the behavior of victims of individual crimes affects the classification of crimes and the imposition of punishment. The materials of investigative and judicial practice are considered, in which law enforcement agencies assessed the immoral behavior of crime victims. Fifthly, the relationship between moral and ethical standards and the system of criminal law is found in the fact that almost all existing criminal law prohibitions were socially and historically determined by the requirements of morality and ethics. At the same time, it was established that there are both purely moral criminal law prohibitions, such as prohibitions on appropriation of someone else’s property or deprivation of life, and criminal law prohibitions based on morality, but significantly modified in the course of social development (crimes in the field of economic activity, computer crimes and others).

1. Alekseev S. S. Voskhozhdenie k pravu. Poiski i resheniya. — 2‑e izd., pererab. i dop. — M.: Norma, 2002. — 608 s.

2. Anoshchenkova S. V. Mekhanizm legitimatsii norm morali (ugolovno-pravovoy aspekt) // Lex russica (Russkiy zakon). — 2016. — № 8. — S. 33–47.

3. Boyko A. I. Nravstvenno-religioznye osnovy ugolovnogo prava: monografiya. — 2‑e izd. — M.: Yurlitinform, 2010. — 248 s.

4. Galaktionov S. A. Printsip spravedlivosti v ugolovnom prave Rossii: monografiya. — Samara: Izd-vo MGPU, 2006. — 152 s.

5. Gerasimov A. M. Nravstvennost v ugolovnom prave Rossii: avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. — Saratov, 2006. — 24 s.

6. Karpets I. I. Ugolovnoe pravo i etika. — M.: Yuridicheskaya literatura, 1985. — 256 s.

7. Kelina S. G., Kudryavtsev V. N. Printsipy sovetskogo ugolovnogo prava. — M.: Nauka, 1988. — 176 s.

8. Kozachenko I. Ya., Sergeev D. N. Dolzhno li ugolovnoe pravo obespechivat prinuditelnost moralnykh zapretov? // Yuridicheskiy vestnik Kubanskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. — 2022. — № 1. — S. 40–49.

9. Kuznetsova N. F. Ugolovnoe pravo i moral. — M.: Izd-vo Moskovskogo universiteta, 1967. — 104 s.

10. Lopashenko N. A. Razmyshleniya ob ugolovnom prave. Printsipy ugolovnogo zakonodatelstva. Ugolovnyy zakon. Prestuplenie, prostupok i sostav prestupleniya. Avtorskiy kurs: monografiya. — M.: Yurlitinform, 2020. — 440 s.

11. Sabitov R. A. Kvalifikatsiya povedeniya litsa, postradavshego ot prestupleniya // Viktimologiya. — 2019. — № 4. — S. 11–19.

12. Starkov E. A. Ugolovnaya otvetstvennost za prestupleniya protiv obshchestvennoy nravstvennosti: avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. — M., 2011. — 23 s.

13. Shalagin A. E. Obshchestvennaya nravstvennost kak obekt ugolovno-pravovoy okhrany // Vestnik ekonomiki, prava i sotsiologii. — 2011. — № 2. — S. 177–180.

14. Fuller R. C. Morals and the Criminal Law // Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. — 1942. — Vol. 32. — Iss. 6. — P. 624–630.