الإشتراك في القانون الجنائي السوداني لسنة 1991م

Abstract

المستخلص تناولت الرسالة الإشتراك الجنائي مقارناً بالشريعة الإسلامية وتمت دراسة النظرية العامة للجريمة على إعتبار أن الاشتراك يتعلق بإرتكاب أكثر من شخص للجريمة. ثم تناول أنواع الجرائم من جرائم وقتية أو مستمرة وجرائم إيجابية أو سلبية وجرائم مضرة بالمصلحة العامة وأخرى مضرة بالمصلحة الخاصة، وما يترتب التفرقة بين أنواع الجرائم من نتائج وناقش البحث تقسيم القانون الجنائي للجرائم إلى ثلاثة أنواع حدود وقصاص وتعازير. وتمت دراسة ركني الجريمة المادي والمعنوي بصورتيه القصد والإهمال أو الخطأ. ثم طرح الباحث المبادي الأساسية للإشتراك الجنائي مستعرضين تعريف الإشتراك في اللغه وإختلاف الفقهاء في تعريفه إصطلاحياً وفقاً للمعيار الذي إتخذه الفقهاء للتعريف وتطرقت الرسالة الى أركان الاشتراك الجنائي وهما تعدد الجناة ووحدة الجريمة وهذان الركنان هما اللذان يحددان الاشتراك الجنائي ويميزانه عن تعدد الجرائم و الاشتراك الضروري, وإستعرضنا المذاهب الفقهية المعددة للاشتراك الجنائي والموحدة له. ثم درس البحث صور الاشتراك أو المساهمة الجنائية والتي قسمتها بعض القوانين الى مساهمة أصلية ومساهمة تبعية وقسمها فقهاء الشريعة الاسلامية الى إشتراك بالمباشرة وإشتراك بالتسبب والنهج الذي أخذ به المشرع السوادني في القانون الجنائي لسنة 1991م حيث أجملها تحت مسمى الإشتراك الجنائي. واخيراً بين البحث تقسيمات و صور الاشتراك في القانون الجنائي من (إشتراك تنفيذاً لاتفاق جنائي وأشتراك دون إتفاق جنائي والأمر بإرتكاب الجريمة والإكراه عليها وجريمة الإتفاق الجنائي والتحريض والمعاونة ) بصورة مستفيضة، وقد إنصب تركزينا في كل ماتقدم ذكره على القانون الجنائي لسنة 1991م وما أرسته السوابق القضائية من مبادي ومدى الإختلاف بين القانون الحالي والقوانين العقابية السابقة، وإنتهى البحث بأهم النتائج والتوصيات.

Abstract

The study dealt with the Criminal participation compared with Islamic Sharia, the research studied the general theory of the crime, on the grounds that participation in crime means that more than one person committed the crime. Then the researcher discussed the types of temporary, continuous, positive and negative crimes, and crimes damaging public life and others harmful to individuals, and the consequent distinction between the types of crimes, and also discussed the fact that criminal law identified three types of crimes, Hidood punishment and Taazer, the researcher studied the two pillars of crime ;the material and the moral through : intent, negligence or error. Then the research discussed the basic guideline principles of definition of criminal participation in language,and the different jurists definitions in accordance with the standard taken by the scholars for the definition,and then addressed the pillars of the criminal participatiOn i.e. the plurality of offenders and the crime done individually, and these two are cornerstones that determine criminal participation and differentiate it from multiple crimes and necessary participation. The researcher reviewed the schools of Islamic jurisprudence on criminal participation. Then the research studied ways of participation or criminal contribution, which is divided by some laws into original contribution and contribution by dependency,the Islamic law divided it into direct contribution and contribution due to some reasons,and this definition is taken by the Sudanese legislator in the Criminal Code of 1991, where it was put under the name of the Criminal participation. And finally the study extensively showed the divisions and ways of participating in criminal law such as (participation pursuant to a criminal act and participation without criminal conspiracy and the order to commit the crime or using force and the crime of criminal conspiracy, incitement and help), in all this mentioned, we concentrated to the Criminal Code of 1991 and jurisprudence Principles of the extent of the difference between the current law and the previous penal laws, and the research came to findings and recommendations ; the most important are as follows: The most important findings: Criminal law for the year 1991 did not identify criminal participation or what is known in some legal systems as criminal contributing and contribution due to dependency, also it did not take the definition of Islamic law scholars of the division into direct participation and participation due to certain reasons, it just defined all sorts of participation under one name, that is Criminal participation. Sudanese legislator and Islamic criminal jurisprudence approved the idea of the moral actor, and legislator defined responsibility as if the criminal committed the crime alone. Also of the most important findings is that conviction under Article 21 of the Criminal Code of 1991, that there must be an agreement and a former management between the perpetrators to achieve the common purpose, in addition, to the presence of the perpetrators of the crime to commit the common purpose, and the last requirement is the fully commitment of the agreed crime, and that Article 21 is not limited to acts covered by the agreement, but includes all acts committed in order to be committed as long as it is familiar depending on the normal course of things. The legislator in Article (24) punished the preparatory work, even if there is no initiation and implementation of the agreement and these are murders or banditry or crimes against the state punishable by death and that because of its gravity. The difference between incitement and participation in implementation of the agreed crime is that the will of the instigator prevails over the will of the instigator as the first has the idea of crime and makes efforts to convince the second party and convince him to display, and otherwise the will of both is equal in terms of importance Each of them convinced the idea of crime without having to tap in an effort to convince each other, or if the idea of the crime was with one of them, the display marks the immediate acceptance of the other. The most important recommendations: Recommendations have been concentrated in a special text about participation in Hidood crimes,to avoid what was raised from different jurisprudence by judges of the Supreme Court, and recommended also, to re-word the definition of the criminal agreement as it is currently criticized because it identified what is known by what is known that it defined agreement by agreement,and we suggest the following definition (the Union of two wills or more to commit crime). Among the most important recommendations as well ; is the deletion of the words (in the case of commition of a crime) in paragraph (3) of Article (24) as the crime if it occurred as a result of a criminal agreement it falls under Article (21) as that the criminal agreement is only limited to the agreement or attempt, if is that it did not go to the implementation phase, the applicable text is Article (21) and thus, we propose that the third paragraph to be amended as follows (who committed the crime of criminal conspiracy shall be punished by imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, and in the case of proceeding, he shall be liable to the penalty prescribed to proceed).