Meaning, Basis of Classification, Content of Classification of Forms of Complicity

The crime shows the connection and psychological impact between the accomplices. They all clearly see that the behavior of all the people in the case is dangerous to society. Each accomplice foresees that his behavior and the behavior of the other accomplices in the case of accomplices are dangerous, foresees that the behavior of all accomplices is the cause leading to harmful consequences.

The above analytical factors are the basis for affirming or excluding the criminal responsibility of other accomplices such as organizers, instigators, and assistants in cases where the perpetrator commits acts that exceed those of complicity. There is no co-conspirator if there is no connection, impact, or psychological influence between the perpetrators. Saying so does not mean that in cases with accomplices, all participants must know each other well, know each other's criminal acts. Trial practice shows that for some serious crimes against national security or organized drug trafficking rings with many participants, due to the nature of the crime, people can only know each other through each "link". The basic thing is that they are aware that their behavior is connected, attached to the behavior of others, and that there is a spiritual support link between them...

In addition to the signs of intentional crime analyzed above, complicity requires unity of purpose and motive when committing crimes for which the law stipulates that purpose and motive are mandatory signs of the crime. For example, Article 91 of the 1999 Penal Code clearly stipulates the crime of fleeing abroad or staying abroad to oppose the people's government; Article 167 of the crime of false reporting in economic management requires the motive of profit as a mandatory sign.

In summary, from the above analysis, from the perspective of criminal law science,

We believe that the concept of complicity can be defined as follows: "Complicity is a form of crime committed by two or more people intentionally participating in committing a crime."

Maybe you are interested!

1.1.2. Concept of complicity

According to the viewpoint of dialectical materialism, content and form have a dialectical relationship with each other. In complicity, the content of complicity and the form of complicity are always a unified entity, organically related, and mutually influencing each other. The content of complicity is all aspects, elements, and processes that create intentional participation in committing a crime. The form of complicity is the way of existence and movement of complicity, expressing the relationship of association, interaction, and mutual support between accomplices in the process of committing a crime, possibly from the time of planning and preparing to commit a crime to the time of carrying out the crime, the crime ends and conceals the crime, the offender. From the methodology of materialist dialectics on the relationship between the pair of categories of content and form, it can be affirmed that any complicity content exists in a certain form of complicity and vice versa, there is no form of complicity that does not contain a certain content of complicity. The form of complicity is determined by the content of complicity and the social danger of the crime committed. Therefore, the form of complicity is also subject to the provisions of the social danger of the crime committed by the accomplices, reflecting the social danger of the crime committed by the accomplices. On the other hand, the form of complicity is relatively independent and affects the content of complicity, having a certain influence on the social danger of the crime committed by the accomplices.

Thus, it can be understood that "the form of complicity is the expression of the relationship between accomplices through the level of coordination and division of work to carry out the act of complicity".

From the above concept, we can see that the form of complicity has the following characteristics:

Firstly, the form of complicity is the expression of the association relationship between accomplices, specifically:

Objectively, complicity requires two or more people, who must of course satisfy the signs of a criminal subject. On the other hand, these people must participate in the crime together, meaning that they can directly (the behavior of the perpetrator) or indirectly (the behavior of the organizer, the instigator, the accomplice) through the behavior of the perpetrator to commit a specific crime, in which the behavior of each person is a part of a unified relationship, influencing each other to create a common result of crime. Here, it is necessary to determine the behavior of the perpetrator as the center. Without the behavior of the organizer, the instigator, the accomplice, there can still be accomplices (complices who commit the same crime), but without the behavior of the perpetrator, there can be no accomplices. In the case of unintentional crime, the criminal behavior of each person, although having an objective connection in time and space, is completely independent of each other in terms of consciousness of the consequences.

Regarding the subjective aspect of complicity, as mentioned, it is the intention of the participants in committing a crime. This is a mandatory sign without which, if the above objective signs are satisfied, there is still no complicity. Intention is expressed in two aspects: reason and will. Regarding reason: Each accomplice must be aware that his/her participation in committing a crime is dangerous to society, and must also be aware that the behavior of others participating in committing a crime with him/her is also dangerous to society; they must foresee (or be forced to see) the dangerous consequences for society caused by his/her behavior as well as the general consequences of the crime.

that they participate in carrying out. Regarding will: Accomplices all desire to commit a common crime, have the same desire or are conscious of letting the consequences happen.

Not all forms of crime committed by two or more people are accomplices. For a crime committed by two or more people to become accomplices, not only must there be signs that two or more people also commit socially dangerous acts in the same case, but these people must commit the crime with intent, meaning that they must be the same master and have unity between their will and the expression of will, meaning that in this case these people are fully aware that their acts are socially dangerous and they fully desire to commit that crime. The form of accomplices is the outward manifestation of the objective aspect.

Second, the form of complicity is reflected through the nature and level of association between accomplices in the process of committing the crime.

Complicity is a form of crime committed by two or more people with the association between the accomplices. The nature of the association relationship is shown in the method of division of labor and coordination of activities with each other.

Coordination is the arrangement to act together or support each other to carry out a common plan to achieve a common goal. In complicity, the offenders intentionally discuss, collude closely with each other, and outline a plan to commit a crime. But there are also cases where the relationship between the accomplices is simply the intentional act of committing a socially dangerous act, without division of labor or close association with each other.

The level of coordination between accomplices can be very loose. For example: A, B, C come home from drinking and pass by Mr. D's house. They see it deserted, the gate unlocked, the motorbike parked in the middle of the yard, the key still in the ignition, so they sneak in, take it out, and all three get on the motorbike and drive away.

In this case, the coordination between A, B, and C is not tight. All participants are practitioners, together performing a socially dangerous act of stealing property.

The level of coordination between accomplices can also be very close. For example: A, B, C and D discuss and agree to produce firecrackers. A and B are assigned to directly produce, while C and D are assigned to “market” and transport these firecrackers for sale.

In this case, the accomplices had a pre-conspiracy, between the criminals they had agreed with each other from the preparation to the end, including measures to evade the law, creating in the consciousness of each person a crime plan with the smooth coordination of the participants. During the crime, from the preparation to the end, each criminal showed close coordination and association with each other. Each person was assigned a specific task and they all joined together to commit the crime and conceal the crime. Each member could be an organizer, an operator, an accomplice or an executor, they helped each other, creating conditions for each other to commit the crime.

The division of positions and roles among accomplices also shows the level of coordination in the activities of a group or collective. The more specific the division of roles, the more clearly it shows the level of fault, the level of coordination in committing the crime, showing the differentiation of roles among accomplices and the level of danger of the crime. In a case with accomplices, depending on the scale and nature, there may be people holding different roles according to the provisions of Clause 2, Article 3 of the Penal Code, including: " The organizer, the executor, the instigator, and the accomplice are all accomplices."

In which, the perpetrator is the person who directly commits the crime.

The perpetrator is the person who plays a decisive role in committing the crime, because they are the ones who directly commit the crime such as: directly receiving bribes, directly stabbing the victim with a knife... If there is no perpetrator, the crime will only stop at the stage of preparing to commit the crime, the purpose of the crime is not achieved, the material consequences of the crime have not occurred and the criminal responsibility of other accomplices will be considered according to the provisions of Article 17 of the Penal Code (only those who prepare to commit a very serious or especially serious crime will be prosecuted). The criminal responsibility of other accomplices clearly depends on the behavior of the perpetrator.

The organizer is the mastermind, leader, and commander of the crime. Only in the case of organized crime is there an organizer. The organizer may have the following behaviors: initiating the crime; planning the crime as well as the plan to conceal the crime; enticing and luring others to commit the crime; assigning responsibilities to other accomplices to unify the crime; controlling the actions of the accomplices; urging and motivating other accomplices to commit the crime...

An instigator is a person who incites, entices, or encourages another person to commit a crime. The act of inciting, enticing, or encouraging another person to commit a crime is only considered an accomplice when the inciting act is directly related to the entire activities of the other accomplices, and only after being incited does the person committing the crime intend to commit the crime. The inciting act must be specific, aimed at a specific crime and a specific criminal. If there are only general suggestive words, then the person is not an instigator and is not criminally responsible for the criminal act of the person committing the crime.

An accomplice is a person who creates mental or material conditions for the commission of a crime. This person also plays an important role in a case with an accomplice, helping the crime to be more favorable. An accomplice can help by giving advice, providing means of committing a crime such as knives, guns, promising to consume criminal property... The act of creating mental conditions is often expressed as: Promising to conceal or promising to give the criminal a certain mental benefit such as: promising to marry off a child, promising to promote, raise the salary of the criminal, showing the criminal how to commit a crime such as: telling the criminal what time the homeowner is usually away from home to come and steal, telling the criminal which way the victim goes so the criminal can ambush and beat him...

The act of creating material conditions for the commission of a crime is the act of providing means of crime such as: providing knives, guns, wooden clubs, motorbikes, cars... for the offender to commit the crime. Whether creating spiritual or material conditions for the commission of a crime, that act only creates easy conditions for the commission of the crime, the accomplice does not directly commit the crime. The act of creating conditions for the commission of a crime by an accomplice can also be the act of an organizer, but unlike the organizer, the accomplice is not the mastermind, leader, commander, but only has a secondary role in the case of accomplices. If other circumstances are the same, the accomplice will always be given a lighter punishment than other accomplices.

1.2. Meaning, basis of classification, content of classification of forms of complicity

1.2.1. Meaning and basis for classifying forms of complicity

In complicity, criminals have a connection to commit criminal activities, with many cases occurring in a very complex and diverse manner.

The basis for correctly identifying the form of complicity, the investigation, prosecution and trial agencies will more fully and accurately identify the level of danger of the crime and individualize the criminal responsibility of each accomplice. To correctly identify the form of complicity, it is necessary to classify the forms of complicity. Because the basis for classifying the forms of complicity is the basis reflecting the nature and level of the relationship in complicity when the accomplices share the intention to commit a crime, plan and realize the crime. Therefore, classifying the forms of complicity is a method to correctly perceive the forms of complicity. The form of complicity, like any form, must be based on certain classification bases.

Classification of complicity is the division of complicity into different groups based on a certain basis for certain purposes. The appropriate classification depends on the purpose of the classification and not necessarily on a certain basis.

In criminal law science in the world as well as in Vietnam, there are many different views on the forms of complicity. The division of complicity into different forms is because the bases for classifying them are not the same. Each classification is based on a certain basis and purpose, and the explanation for that classification also has its own rationale.

Criminal law science in many Western European countries has also conducted many studies on the classification of forms of complicity. Evaluating this classification, Dr. Tran Quang Tiep said:

Because they do not want to clarify the nature of crime as a dangerous act that violates the interests of the ruling bourgeoisie, bourgeois criminologists do not provide a basis for classification but divide the forms of complicity into the following types: forms of complicity

Comment