The specifics of the subjects of crimes with administrative prejudice in the field of road safety

• Published in: Юридические исследования no. 3; pp. 51 - 61
• Main Author: Erte, Daria
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 01.03.2024
• ISSN: 2409-7136; 2409-7136
• DOI: 10.25136/2409-7136.2024.3.69995

The subject of this study is the key features of the perpetrators of crimes against road safety, the legal construct of which is made using administrative law. The special status of persons committing crimes of this kind is emphasized by gross disregard for the rules established by law, disregard for the regulations in force against them. Based on the analysis of statistical indicators of road traffic accidents caused by drivers of vehicles, the public danger of committing such criminal acts is justified. These acts imply the onset of criminal consequences only if the person who committed them has special features. The emphasis in this case is on the increased danger of the subjects themselves committing intentional violations of traffic rules, referring them to the malicious type of violators with legal nihilism. To define the concepts of this study, a dialectical methodology was used; in order to comprehensively understand the key features of subjects of crimes with administrative prejudice in the field of road safety, elements of sociological methodology were used. In the study of individual issues, private scientific methods were used, such as formal legal and comparative legal. The results of the conducted research are presented by the classification of signs possessed by the subjects of crimes with administrative prejudice in the field of road safety, their characteristics are given. The connection between the administrative prejudice and the subject as an element of the corpus delicti is substantiated, which, first of all, is justified by the assessment of the social danger of the offender and the choice of a preventive measure commensurate with the social danger of the offender. An important role in assessing public danger is played by determining the psychological portrait of the person who committed the crime, which covers the chronology of his administrative offenses and the frequency of violations of the same prescription. Based on the data obtained about the subject of the crime, the principles of proportionality of punishment and personal responsibility are implemented. In this case, these principles imply the influence of administrative prejudice on the fair distribution of sanctions, and previous administrative offenses aggravate the responsibility of the person.