The implementation of differentiation of criminal responsibility with the aim of ensuring maximum adherence to the principle of justice is a complex task. Therefore, the legislator needs to carefully apply the means of differentiating such responsibility and analyze whether there are criteria for its implementation in general. The purpose of this article is to analyze whether the legislator, in carrying out the differentiation of criminal responsibility, specifically relies on criteria for changing the social danger of the basic criminal offense, taking into account certain distinguishing features, as well as considering the characteristics of the person who committed such an act. It also compares the provisions of the draft Criminal Code of Ukraine, which was published by a working group, and investigates it specifically from the perspective of implementing differentiation of criminal responsibility.

During the study, a number of general scientific and special methods were used, including comparative, doctrinal, structural, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, and so on.

The work provides arguments in support of the following theses: differentiation of criminal responsibility should be carried out only on the basis of those signs that significantly change the social danger of the committed criminal act; it must be carried out in relation to the most common criminal offenses in practice; for acts that are less common in practice, it is necessary to differentiate criminal responsibility only taking into account that feature that sharply changes the social danger of the act; differentiation must be timely; the differentiation of criminal liability taking into account another criterion –the characteristics of the person who committed the criminal offense should be reduced to a minimum.

The author was able to compare the differentiation of criminal responsibility in the current criminal law and the draft new Criminal Code of Ukraine 2019 in terms of taking into account multiplicity, complicity, and stages of committing a criminal offense. As a result of the study, the expediency of abandoning such distinguishing features as repetition and the abandonment of differentiation of criminal responsibility in the case of committing a criminal offense by a group of persons without prior conspiracy has been questioned. In conclusion, it is necessary to summarize that no matter how much the authors of any law or the legislator try to take into account all possible nuances that may arise in practice, there is still a certain layer of issues that they will overlook and which will then become problematic in law enforcement.

Bibliography

Journal articles

1. Antoniuk N, ‘Zminy do rozdiliv proty osnov natsionalnoi bezpeky: kryminalizatsiia chy dyferentsiatsiia kryminalnoi vidpovidalnosti’ (2022) 11 Pravo Ukrainy 40 (in Ukrainian). Websites 2. Proiekt Kryminalnoho kodeksu Ukrainy <https://newcriminalcode.org.ua/upload/ media/2023/01/30/proyekt-kryminalnogo-kodeksu-ukrayiny-stanom-na-30-01-2023. pdf> (accessed: 30.01.2023) (in Ukrainian).