Lobanova L.V. On the Issue of Facultative Features Characterizing the Object of a Crime
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/lc.jvolsu.2026.1.5
Lyubov V. Lobanova, Doctor of Sciences (Jurisprudence), Professor, Head of the Department of Criminal Law and Procedure, Volgograd State University, Prosp. Universitetsky, 100, 400062 Volgograd, Russian Federation, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4686-124X
Introduction: despite the fact that Lev Leonidovich Kruglikov’s works have long been highly appreciated, the importance of his contribution to the development of criminal law doctrine has hardly been fully demonstrated. The significance of this jurist’s arguments regarding the object of a crime, expressed within the framework of his concept of legal constructions, including the phenomenon of an optional object, which is characterized inconsistently in science, is not fully understood. Purpose: based on the conclusions formulated by L.L. Kruglikov: 1) to clarify the identity of the optional object of the crime; 2) to test the hypothesis that an object that is optionally violated by a crime belongs to the number of signs of its [crime] composition; 3) to find out the possibility for an optional object to serve as a reason for stating a multiplicity of criminal attacks; 4) to substantiate the scientific and practical significance of using the concept of “optional object.” The research methodology involves the use of methods common to criminal law science in their complexity. As a result, the optional object of the crime is shown as a feature that is not included in the legislative model of criminal encroachment; its autonomy from the traditional classification of objects of crime is established; the inability of an optional object to serve as a reason for stating a multiplicity of crimes is proved; arguments are given indicating the importance of using the concept of an optional object. Conclusions: 1) on the inadmissibility of attributing an object that is optionally violated by a crime to the number of elements of a crime; 2) the absence of a place for an optional object in classifications designed to analyze the signs of a crime of a certain type (variety) characterizing its object; 3) the absence of conditions for the full realization of the idea of transforming an optional object into a mandatory additional object of crime by constructing a qualified composition of such; 4) the absence of the need to qualify a criminal offense, having an optional object, in conjunction with another crime; 5) the circumstances indicating the need to use the concept of an optional object in scientific, legislative, and law enforcement activities.
Key words: facultative object, facultative features, legal construct, corpus delicti, multiplicity of crimes.
Citation. Lobanova L.V. On the Issue of Facultative Features Characterizing the Object of a Crime. Legal Concept = Pravovaya paradigma, 2026, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 38-45. (in Russian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/lc.jvolsu.2026.1.5
 5_Lobanova.pdfURL: https://j.jvolsu.com/index.php/en/component/attachments/download/3357 | 70 Downloads |