SPECIAL RULES FOR THE QUALIFICATION OF PROVOCATION OF OFFENSES AGAINST COMPLICITY: SEPARATION OF PROVOCATION FROM RELATED CRIMINAL CONCEPTS

Abstract

In this article is considering the problematic of such phenomenon as “crime provocation” through the prism of differentiation from the related concepts of criminal law. Author points up that Ukrainian legal system has legal deficiencies that deal with the issues of crime provocation which serves as complicity in a crime and which is needed to be additionally scientifically researched. There are two opposing one another scientific viewpoints on the crime provocation term. Traditional position says that crime provocation is an incitement, special kind of crime provocation. Alternative position says that crime provocation is grow out of incitement conception as form of the crime complicity. Due to this view crime provocation is kind of criminalization other person. And the aim of this action is negative consequences for such person.

Author supports alternative position and prove that crime provocation and crime incitement as form of the crime complicity aren’t the same notions. Legal nature of crime provocation isn’t defined such kind of crime complicity as crime incitement, because it poses its own definitions. Therefore, author divides signs that help to separate the crime provocation from the crime incitement and at that time to separate the crime provocation from the legal behavior of special persons. Besides, the analy-sis of legal nature of the crime provocation was made in compliance with psychological signs of this phenomenon. Crime provocation – is latent activity for person who is being provoked, that’s why provocative act is considered to be as stable activity of the person who provokes and it is not taken into account by person who is being provoked. Author says that legislation artificially narrowed the term of crime provocation, and legislator isn’t take into consideration such fact as high public danger of this phe-nomenon. So, in this situation can be provoked not only providing with undue benefits which is a component elements of a crime that is mentioned in Criminal Code, but another amount of crimes. Therefore, the author has offered to increase the responsibility in our legislation for the crime provocation.In this article the author has given a criteria that should be followed, and then, the acts of provocation which have legal goal and which are made by a special subjects during there law enforcement tactical intelligence operations, wouldn’t be qualified as form of crime complicity.