There is much importance in the issue of the conceptual framework of criminal law and its components – concepts, categories and legal terminology for the theory and practice of criminal law. However, it is still waiting for a proper scientific research and therefore is not sufficiently developed. The purpose of this article is to provide a general characterization and clarify the significance of the conceptual framework for the theory and practice of criminal law, and to study its components: concepts, categories and legal terminology, establish their essential and basic features, system-forming relations and connections. The conceptual framework of criminal law is seen as a system of interrelated and interacting elements: concepts, categories and legal terminology which in their entirety form a respective composite legal concept. The essence of this framework is that in the text of law its elements represent the real-world objects (phenomena) associated with the domain of social relations which arise and function in connection with crimes, punishments and other procedures under criminal law. The functional role of concepts, categories and terminology of criminal law is to define criminal law provisions, institutions, legal structures, and other regulatory legal constructs which make up the contents of criminal law, and to entrench the same in the text of law. Following the analysis made, the author justifies the conclusion about major importance of the conceptual framework and its elements for the science of criminal law, law-making and the application practice of law on criminal liability. Concepts are interpreted as logical and legal constructs of criminal law which reflect and entrench in their contents the essential common typical features of a certain class (type) of real-world objects (phenomena) in the domain of crimes, punishments and other criminal law procedures which distinguish them from other objects (phenomena). The logical structure of concepts defines their contents and the scope expressed in a verbal form. Depending on the scope of generalization, specific and generic concepts are distinguished, and depending on the role in criminal law science and practice – doctrinal and legal concepts. The main features of criminal law concepts are examined: formal certainty and accuracy which allow determining their contents and scope rather clearly and completely in each particular case and, accordingly, establishing the range of realworld objects (phenomena) which are reflected in relevant concepts. At the same time, the author examines the evaluation concepts having no clearly defined contents and scope, with the procedure of their application associated with the evaluation and cognitive activity and, accordingly, with the law administration discretion. It is proposed to limit their use in criminal law, and at the same time recommendations are made on the special procedure of their application. Categories are interpreted as fundamental criminal law concepts having an extremely broad scope, such as “law on criminal liability”, “concept of crime”, “corpus delicti” and its elements, the concept of punishment and etc. It is emphasized that categories have a major methodological importance, in particular, for the purpose of streamlining the system of concepts and for a more thorough understanding of each of them. The author maintains the position that the contents of the conceptual framework of criminal law, along with the concepts, also incorporate (just like in other branches of law) the categories inherent in it as an indispensable and very important attribute. The terminology of criminal law is defined as a system of legal terms – special-purpose language units made of characters using which the concepts and categories incorporated in the contents of criminal law are defined (entrenched) in the text of law in a verbal form. The article examines the essential features of criminal law terms as the fundamental units of terminology, with a focus on the rigid connection of criminal law terms and its concepts and categories. Basic requirements to the terminology of criminal legislation are formulated. In conclusion, the main provisions of the issue under research are given and its importance is emphasized for improvement of criminal law-making, the current criminal law application practice and the development of legal science.

Bibliography 
 

Authored books 
1. Babaev V, Sovetskoe pravo kak logicheskaya sistema: uchebnoe posobie [Soviet Law as a Logical System: Training Manual] (Akademiya MVD SSSR 1978) (in Russian). 

2. Boyko A, Yazyk ugolovnogo zakona i ego ponimanie: monografiya [Criminal Law Language and Its Understanding: Monograph] (Yurlitinform 2010) (in Russian).

3. Gott V i dr, Kategorii sovremennoy nauki (stanovlenie i razvitie) [Categories of Modern Science (Establishment and Development)] (Mysl’ 1984) (in Russian).

4. Gubaeva T, Yazyk i pravo. Iskusstvo vladeniya slovom v professional’noy yuridicheskoy deyatel’nosti [Language and Law. The Art of Owning a Word in Professional Legal Practice] (Norma 2004) (in Russian).

5. Kirillov V i Starchenko A, Logika: uchebnik dlya yuridicheskikh vuzov [Logic: Textbook for Law Schools] (5-e izd pererab i dop, Yurist 2002) (in Russian).

6. Kobzeva E, Teoriya otsenochnykh priznakov v ugolovnom zakone [Theory of Evaluation Features in Criminal Law] (Yurlitinform 2009) (in Russian).

7. Konverskyi A, Lohika: pidruchnyk dlia studentiv yurydychnykh fakultetiv [Logic: Textbook for Students of Higher Educational Institutions] (Tsentr uchbovoi literatury 2004) (in Ukrainian). 8. Kvitko I, Termin v nauchnom dokumente [The Term in a Scientific Document] (Vysshaya shkola1976) (in Russian).

9. Liubchenko Marianna, Yurydychna terminolohiia: poniattia, osoblyvosti, vydy: monohrafiia [Legal Terminology: Concepts, Special Features, Types: Monograph] (Pravo 2015) (in Ukrainian).

10. Rozental’ M, O kharaktere razvitiya filosofskikh kategoriy [On the Nature of Development of Philosophical Categories] (Kommunist 1977) (in Russian).

11. Trostiuk Z, Poniatiinyi aparat Osoblyvoi chastyny Kryminalnoho kodeksa Ukrainy: monohrafiia [Conceptual Framework of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine: Monograph] (Atika 2003) (in Ukrainian).

12. Tsalin S, Logichesiky-slovar’ spravochnik [Logic Reference Dictionary] (4-e izd isprav i dop, Fakt 2006) (in Russian).

13. Vasil’ev A, Pravovye kategorii: metodologicheskie aspekty razrabotki sistemy kategoriy teorii prava [Legal Categories: Methodological Aspects in the Development of the System of Theory of Law Categories] (Yuridicheskaya literatura 1976) (in Russian).

14. Voyshvillo E, Ponyatie kak forma myshleniya: logiko-gnoseologicheskiy analiz [The Concept as a Form of Thinking: Logical Gnosiological Analysis] (Izd-vo MGU 1989) (in Russian).

15. Zherebkin V, Logicheskiy analiz ponyatiy prava [Logical Analysis of Legal Concepts] (Vishcha shkola 1976) (in Russian).

Edited and translated books

16. Il’ichev L i drugie (red), Filosofskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar’ [Philosophical Encyclopaedic Dictionary] (Sovetskaya entsiklopediya 1983) (in Russian).

17. Kondakov N, Logicheskiy slovar’-spravochnik [Logic Reference Dictionary] (otv red Gorskiy D, vtoroe ispravlennoe i dopolnennoe izdanie, Nauka 1976) (in Russian).

18. Konverskiy A, Logika traditsionnaya i sovremennaya: uchebnoe posobie [Traditional and Modern Logic: Teaching Manual] (Lidnikov E per, Ideya-Press 2010) (in Russian).

19. Panov M, ‘Osnovy metodolohii nauky kryminalnoho prava’ [‘Basics of Methodology of Criminal Law Science’] v Panov M, Problemy metodolohii nauky kryminalnoho prava: vybrani naukovi pratsi [Issues of Methodology of Criminal Law Science] (Anisimov H ta Haltsova V uklad, Petryshyn O ta Borysov V peredm, Pravo 2018) (in Ukrainian).

20. – –, Problemy metodolohii nauky kryminalnoho prava: vybrani naukovi pratsi [Issues of Methodology of Criminal Law Science] (Anisimov H ta Haltsova V uklad, Petryshyn O ta Borysov V peredm, Pravo 2018) (in Ukrainian).

21. – –, ‘Problemy metodologii formyrovaniia poniatyinoho apparata yurydycheskoi nauky’ [‘Issues of Methodology in Forming the Conceptual Framework of Legal Science’] v Panov M, Problemy metodolohii nauky kryminalnoho prava: vybrani naukovi pratsi [Issues of Methodology of Criminal Law Science] (Anisimov H ta Haltsova V uklad, Petryshyn O ta Borysov V peredm, Pravo 2018) (in Ukrainian).

22. Pigolkin A (red), Yazyk zakona [Language of Law] (Yuridicheskaya literatura 1990) (in Russian).

23. Titov V ta inshi, Lohika: pidruchnyk dlia studentiv vyshchykh navchalnykh zakladiv [Logic: Textbook for Students of Higher Educational Institutions] (za zah red prof Titov V, Pravo 2005) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

24. Chernobel’ G, ‘Formalizatsiya norm prava’ [‘Formalization of the Norms of Law’] (1979) 4 Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i prav 29 (in Russian).

25. Frolov E i Pitetskiy V, ‘Garantii zakonnosti i otsenochnye ponyatiya v ugolovnom prave’ [‘Guarantees of Legality and Evaluation Concepts in Criminal Law’] (1976) 6 Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo 87 (in Russian).

26. Kovalev V, ‘Optimal’noe sootnoshenie formal’nogo i otsenochnogo v ugolovnom zakone’ [‘Optimal Ratio of Formal to Evaluated in Criminal Law’] (1973) 11 Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo 68 (in Russian).

27. Panov N, ‘O tochnosti norm ugolovnogo prava i sovershenstvovanii zakonodatel’noy tekhniki’ [‘On the Accuracy of Criminal Law Provisions and Improvement of Legislative Technique’] (1987) 4 Pravovedenie 79 (in Russian).

28. – –, ‘Otsenochnye ponyatiya i ikh primenenie v ugolovnom prave’ [‘Evaluation Concepts and their Application in Criminal Law’] (1981) 7 Problemy sotsialisticheskoy zakonnosti 99 (in Russian).

29. – –, ‘Otsenochnye ponyatiya: metodologicheskie aspekty issledovaniya i primeneniya v ugolovnom prave’ [‘Evaluation Concepts: Methodological Aspects of Research and Application in Criminal Law. Issues of Methodology of Criminal Law Science’] [2016] 2(7) Vіsnyk Asotsіatsіi krymіnalnogo prava Ukrainy 1 (in Russian).

Thesis abstracts

30. Pitetskiy V, ‘Otsenochnye ponyatiya v sovetskom ugolovnom prave’ [‘Evaluation Concepts in Soviet Criminal Law’] (avtoref dis kand yurid nauk, Sverdlovskiy yuridicheskiy institut 1979) (in Russian).

31. Shapchenko S, ‘Otsenochnye priznaki v sostavakh konkretnykh prestupleniy’ [‘Evaluation Features in the Corpus Delicti of Particular Crimes’] (avtoref dis kand yurid nauk, Kievskiy gosudarstvennyy universitet 1988) (in Russian).