LEGAL CONTENT OF GUILT AND CULPABILITY IN THE CRIMINAL LAW OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

The article discloses the concept of guilt as a principle and a fundamental vector of the criminal law in Russia based on the imputation when the nature of crime is determined. The correlation of objective and mental elements of crime as the categories for its determination is given in an available and logical form. Some intellectual and conative characteristics of a person which prove the presence of mental element of crime in his behavior when he commits the act are emphasized. It is stressed that different combinations of intellectual and conative elements of consciousness form different types of guilt which are known to present the intent (both direct and indirect) and recklessness (flippancy and negligence) mentioned in Articles 25 and 26 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. According to the conclusion that guilt as an intellectual-conative system is the category of substantive law prescribed by legislators for definite types of behavior with socially-dangerous consequences the author analyzes the correlation of the above system with the concept of guilt in criminal and criminal procedure laws. As notions of guilt and culpability are not directly disclosed definitions of law it's necessary to examine the norms of both substantial and procedural law using the method of comparison of the form and content of the single process-criminal liability and its grounds. Taking into account the fact that law doesn't give reasons for its prescriptions when determining the acts and sentencing, the generally accepted thesis that jurisprudence is science but not the caprice of legislators the author interprets the sense of norms and notions and substantiates their logical and scientific validity. He separates the volume and content of guilt and culpability using the techniques of elementary logic. The analysis of semantic meanings of legislators' statements in official documents in the state language forms the basis for the interpretation. By reference to logic, any statement reflects the objective reality in person's consciousness and between phenomena and can be of different types. A guilty person and guilt are an "objective relation". So the term "culpability" can define the form of the phenomenon filled in any case by either intent or recklessness. The above scientific terms lead to the conclusion about the correlation of guilt and culpability as different notions of crime where guilt is a static category of the legislative model of intellectual-conative processes of a wrongdoer. Culpability is a cumulative subjective aspect of the same person under some definite, prohibited by criminal law form of objective behavior. The author concludes that culpability is a definite type of objective behavior when a concrete object of criminal law is encroached and when law specifies the form and type of guilt.