The criminally-legal norm with the blanket content of signs of a criminal act, depending on the legislative description of the objective side of the corpus delicti, should be constructed on the basis of the following standard models:

1. In the case of criminalization of behavior, which the legislator does not associate with the onset of socially dangerous consequences (formal corpus delicti), the hypothesis of the norm should look as follows: «If someone violates (fails to comply) the rule (order, requirements) stipulated by law or international agreement of the Republic of Belarus, then …».
2. When criminalizing the behavior of persons responsible for compliance with relevant security requirements, if the crime is connected with the onset or the possibility of a socially dangerous consequence, it is advisable to state the hypothesis as follows: «If significant harm (death, serious or less serious bodily harm, destruction or damage of property in a large or very large amount, etc.) was caused or was created the possibility of causing it as a result of violation of safety rules by a person, responsible for their compliance, then …».
3. In other cases, when criminalizing behavior that is associated with the onset of socially dangerous consequences, the following model of the hypothesis of the norm may be used: «If someone causes significant harm as a result of a violation, failure or improper performance of the relevant safety rules (requirements), then …».

To use these models it is necessary: a) to form a list of articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code containing blanket signs of a criminal act; b) to monitor the current legislation with a view to establishing normative legal acts specifying the criminal-legal prohibition; c) make the appropriate changes and additions to the current legislation.

Key words: blanket signs, norm with blanket content of the signs of a criminal act, qualification of crime.

REFERENCES

1. Bibik, O.N. (2006), Istochniki ugolovnogo prava Rossijskoj Federacii, Jurid. centr Press Sankt-Peterburg.
2. Borovikov, N.S. (2009), Blanketnye normy v ugolovnom prave,  avtoref. dis. … kand. jurid. nauk: 12.00.08, Akad. jekon. bezopasnosti MVD Ros. Federacii. Moskva.
3. Gauhman, L.D. (2003), Kvalifikacija prestuplenij: zakon, teorija, praktika, JurInfoR , Moskva.
4. Dudorov, O.O. (2009), “Pro mistse blanketnoï dyspozytsiï normy kryminalno-pravovoï zaborony u konkretyzatsiï zmistu skladu zlochynu“, Visn. Akad. Advokatury Ukraïny. Kharkiv, No.1, pp. 257–260.
5. Kljuchko, R.N. (2007), “Blanketnost’ ugolovno-pravovyh norm i kriterii opredelenija istochnikov ugolovno-pravovogo regulirovanija“, Vesn. Grodzen. dzjarzh. un-ta. Ser. 4, Pravaznaўstva. Psihalogija No. 4. pp. 41–43.
6. Kuznecova, N.F. (2007), Problemy kvalifikacii prestuplenij, lekcii po speckursu Osnovy kvalifikacii prestuplenij, Gorodec, Moskva.
7. Lukashov, A.I. (2002), “K voprosu o sovershenstvovanii ponjatijnogo apparata Osobennoj chasti Ugolovnogo kodeksa Respubliki Belarus’“, Pravo i demokratija, sb. nauch. tr, Belorus. gos. un-t, Minsk, No. 13., pp. 214–227.
8. Lukashov, A.I. “ Problemy obratnoj sily zakona pri primenenii ugolovno- i administrativno-pravovyh norm s blanketnoj dispoziciej“, Teoreticheskie i prikladnye problemy primenenija ugolovnogo zakona: sb. nauch. tr. UO Akad. M-va vnutr. del Resp. Belarus’, Minsk.
9. Ljaskalo, A. (2014), “ Tolkovanie blanketnyh priznakov a. 176 UK RF“, Ugolovnoe pravo, No. 6, pp. 56–64.
10. Marchuk, V.V. (2013), Kvalifikacija prestuplenij, Akad. M-va vnutr. del Resp. Belarus’, Minsk.
11. Marchuk, V.V. (2014), “O nekotoryh voprosah sovershenstvovanija UK Belarusi“, Pravotvorchestvo i pravoprimenenie v uslovijah innovacionnogo razvitija obshhestva: sb. nauch. st, Grodn. gos. un-t; redkol, Grodno,. Vol. 2. pp. 233–237.
12. Marchuk, V.V. (2006), “Struktura ugolovno-pravovoj normy“, Pravo i demokratija: sb. nauch. tr, Belorus. gos. un-t, Minsk, No. 17. pp. 162–175.
13. Mihajlova, I.A. (2009), Blanketnye normy v ugolovnom zakone i ih primenenie organami vnutrennih del, avtoref. dis. … kand. jurid. nauk: 12.00.08; Akad. jekon. bezopasnosti MVD Rossii, Moskva.
14. Nashic, A. (1974), Pravotvorchestvo: teorija i zakonodatel’naja tehnika, translated by rum. Fodor, I., Progress, Moskva.
15. Obrazhiev, K.V. (2010) Formal’nye (juridicheskie) istochniki rossijskogo ugolovnogo prava, monografija, Jurlitinform, Moskva.
16. Pikurov, N.I. (1982), Kvalifikacija prestuplenij pri blanketnoj forme dispozicii ugolovnogo zakona: s konkretizaciej zapreta v administrativnom prave, avtoref. dis. … kand. jurid. nauk: 12.00.08, Mosk. vyssh. shk. milicii MVD SSSR. Moskva.
17. Pikurov, N.I. (1998), Ugolovnoe pravo v sisteme mezhotraslevyh svjazej, Volgogr. jurid. in-t MVD Rossii, Volgograd .
18. Pikurov, N.I. (2008), Material’no-pravovoe soderzhanie i processual’naja forma kvalifikacii prestuplenija s blanketnymi priznakami sostava. Ugolov. process, No. 8. pp. 3–11.
19. Pshipij, R.M. (2015), Blanketnaja dispozicija ugolovno-pravovoj normy: doktrinal’noe ponimanie, zakonodatel’nye podhody k konstruirovaniju i problemy primenenija (na primere glavy 22 UK RF), avtoref. dis. … kand. jurid. nauk: 12.00.08, Kubansk. gos. agrarn. un-t.,Krasnodar.
20. Reshnjak, M.G. (2013), Sovremennye problemy dejstvija ugolovnogo zakona v prostranstve, monografija, Jurlitinform, Moskva.
21. Stojakin, M.G. (1993), “Dopolnitel’nye osnovanija juridicheskoj kvalifikacii pravonarushenij“, Pravovedenie, No.1. pp. 90–94.
22. Chuhvichev, D.V. (2012), Zakonodatel’naja tehnika, Zakon i pravo, Moskva.
23. Iaremko, H.Z. (2010), Blanketni dyspozytsii v stattiakh Osoblyvoi chastyny Kryminalnoho kodeksu Ukrainy, avtoref. dys. … kand. yuryd. nauk: 12.00.08, Lviv. derzh. un-t vnutr. Sprav, Lviv.
24. Iaremko, H.Z. (2011), Blanketni dyspozytsiï v stattiakh Osoblyvoï chastyny Kryminalnoho kodeksu Ukraïny, monohrafiia, Lviv. derzh. un-t vnutr. sprav, Lviv.