scholarly journals RULES ON INCHOATE CRIME IN THE CRIMINAL LEGISLATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS

2016 ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Василий Некрасов ◽  
Vasiliy Nekrasov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Tools And Techniques

The article analyzes the issues of differentiation of responsibility and norm design technique on inchoate crime in the criminal legislation of the Republic of Belarus. The author examines the legislative definition of preparation for a crime, attempted crime and voluntary renunciation of criminal purpose. As a result of the study the author has found out the main methods and means of legislative technique, used by the Belarusian legislator. These are abstract and casuistic methods, the terminology of the criminal law and several others. Comparison of legal regulation of norms on unfinished crime in the Criminal code of the Republic of Belarus and the Criminal code of the Russian Federation has allowed to identify gaps made by the legislators of both countries in application of specific tools and techniques of legislative drafting. Court practice of the Republic of Belarus in cases of preparation for a crime and attempted crime also was analyzed in present article. The author has evidentiated the means of differentiation of the responsibility for committing inchoate crime, used by the Belarusian legislator. The definitions “inchoate crime” and “stage of the crime” were also analyzed in present study. As a conclusion the author has made the recommendations for improving the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus on regulation of criminal responsibility for an inchoate crime.

Signs characterizing the person occupying the highest position in criminal hierarchy

2020 ◽  
pp. 75-80
Author(s):  
Александр Викторович Сенатов
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Organized Crime ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation

В связи с изменениями, внесенными Федеральным законом Российской Федерации от 01.04.2019 № 46-ФЗ «О внесении изменений в Уголовный кодекс Российской Федерации и Уголовно-процессуальный кодекс Российской Федерации в части противодействия организованной преступности» в уголовном законодательстве появилась ст. 210, предусматривающая уголовную ответственность за занятие высшего положения в преступной иерархии. Данное преступление имеет специальный субъект, обладающий дополнительными признаками, которые должны быть закреплены в законе. Однако в уголовном законодательстве, а также постановлениях Пленума Верховного суда Российской Федерации отсутствует определение данного понятия, а также признаки, в соответствии с которыми необходимо привлечь лицо к уголовной ответственности. В статье проанализированы научные определения «преступная иерархия», «иерархическая лестница уголовно-преступной среды», лицо, занимающее высшее положение в преступной иерархии, а также выделены конкретные признаки, характеризующие специальный субъект, закрепленный ст. 210 УК РФ. Рассматривается опыт борьбы с организованной преступностью в Республике Грузия, а также материалы следственной практики в отношении лица, привлекаемого к уголовной ответственности по признакам состава преступления, предусмотренного ст. 210 УК РФ. Due to the changes made by the Federal law of the Russian Federation of 01.04.2009 No. 46-FZ “On modification of the criminal code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation regarding counteraction of organized crime” to the criminal legislation there was Art. 210 providing criminal liability for occupation of the highest position in criminal hierarchy. This crime has a special subject with additional features that must be enshrined in the law. However, in the criminal legislation, as well as the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme court of the Russian Federation, there is no definition of this concept, as well as signs according to which it is necessary to bring a person to criminal responsibility. The article analyzes the scientific definitions of “criminal hierarchy”, “hierarchical ladder of criminal environment”, the person occupying the highest position in the criminal hierarchy, as well as the specific features, fixed Art. 210 of the Criminal Code. The article also discusses the experience of combating organized crime in the Republic of Georgia, as well as materials of investigative practice in relation to a person brought to criminal responsibility on the grounds of a crime under Art. 210 of the Criminal Code.

scholarly journals Criminal liability of juveniles in the Republic of Kazakhstan

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-26
Author(s):  
Aleksey Chistyakov ◽  
Saule Naurzalieva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Scientific Understanding ◽  
Theoretical Significance ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article reflects the study of juvenile delinquency in the Republic of Kazakhstan and their criminal responsibility. The scientific novelty of the research is that it was conducted on the basis of the new criminal legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in 2014. Therefore, the complex of issues, that were previously the subject of various studies in the light of modern realities and trends of criminal law policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, has received a new interpretation and argumentation from the perspective of the latest opportunities for study. First, the new legislative structure for determining the basis of criminal liability (Article 4 of the Criminal code of the Republic of Kazakhstan) required a reinterpretation of the content of circumstances that lead to emergence of criminal liability among juveniles. Secondly, the legally updated content of grounds for criminal liability of juveniles in the Republic of Kazakhstan has led to an update of the quality of criminal law relations that arise between juvenile offenders and state bodies, which also need a new scientific reinterpretation. Third, the new legal concept of the basis of criminal liability presupposes the existence of a new, in relation to the previous, content of the basis for the implementation of criminal liability of juveniles. Finally, the new criminal legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, along with the previously existing one, has introduced new forms and types of implementation of criminal liability of juveniles, which need an updated scientific and legal analysis. Its results and conclusions, obtained personally by the author, can be regarded as having scientific novelty for the above reasons. In addition, on the basis of the theory and practice research of criminal responsibility among juveniles in the Republic of Kazakhstan, the paper formulated proposals for improving the criminal legislation of not only the Republic of Kazakhstan, but also the Russian Federation, which also have a novelty. The theoretical significance of the research is to increase and systematize knowledge about the criminal liability of juveniles due to the presence of a new basis of criminal responsibility that has not been previously developed by the Russian criminal law science. The results of scientific understanding of new forms and types of implementation of criminal liability of juveniles, introduced by the Criminal code of the Republic of Kazakhstan in 2014, such as the obligation to apologize to the victim and the establishment of probation control, have theoretical significance. The conclusions, suggestions and recommendations contained in this work enrich the scientific understanding of the features of criminal liability of juveniles in the Republic of Kazakhstan. The practical significance of the work is that the provisions and recommendations contained in it can be used both in the Republic of Kazakhstan and in the Russian Federation: in the process of standard-setting activities in improving the norms of Chapter 6 of the Criminal code of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the norms of Section V of Chapter 14 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation; in the work of specialized inter-district courts for juveniles, considering cases against juveniles and assigning criminal penalties to them; by authorities and administration in the development of preventive measures.

scholarly journals AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES CHARACTERIZING SUBJECTIVE SIGNS OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 681-685
Author(s):  
V.I. Tikhonov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Subjective Side

The Institute of mitigating and aggravating circumstances is presented not only in the norms of the General part of the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. The application of these circumstances in the construction of individual elements of a crime allows the legislator to differentiate the orientation of the criminal law influence in relation to a specific crime element or in qualifying the fact of life reality. In law enforcement practice, proving the subjective side of a crime often causes significant problems. At the same time, motivation and achievement of a specific goal of committing a crime can have both a mitigating and an aggravating effect. The subjective side has a significant impact not only on the design of the offenses of the Special Part of the Criminal Law, but also on the process of sentencing through legal regulation of circumstances mitigating or aggravating criminal punishment. In this regard, both general and mandatory features of the subject of the crime also affect the procedure for establishing guilt and determining punishment in accordance with the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Of scientific interest is the study of the influence of the process of legal regulation of mitigating and aggravating circumstances in terms of the impact on this process of subjective signs of criminal behavior.

The necessary defense and excess of its limits: legislative improvement opportunities

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (3) ◽  
pp. 111-117
Author(s):  
Andrei Nikulenko ◽  
Maksim Smirnov
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The State ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Improvement ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article is devoted to the necessary defense as a circumstance that precludes the criminality of an act in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. The significance and importance of the existence of this norm is proclaimed both in the criminal law and in the Basic law of the state – the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The existence of a rule on necessary defense in the state emphasizes the development of its legal system, allowing citizens to defend their own interests and protect the interests of others, in ways not prohibited by law, thereby preventing exceeding the limits of necessary defense. A number of issues related to the application of the norms provided for in article 37 of the Criminal code of Russia, as well as the norms of the Special part of the Criminal code of Russia, which provide for liability for crimes committed when exceeding the limits of necessary defense, were raised. The study of the relevant norms makes it possible to identify the advantages and disadvantages of legal regulation of circumstances that exclude the criminality of an act, including the shortcomings of judicial and investigative practice. The author criticizes the existing approach and suggests ways to resolve these problems, including by correcting the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated September 27, 2012, № 19 «About application by courts of legislation on necessary defense and causing harm when detaining a person who has committed a crime». Because of the ambiguous and often inconsistent application of norms of the criminal legislation on necessary defense, the authors give the recommendations (in further reconstruction of the relevant provisions of article 37 of the Criminal Code) to use an enumeration approach of presenting the legal formulation of these rules that allow the defender to cause any harm to an attacker. At the same time, it creates the most understandable, for citizens, formulation of the norm that allows lawfully causing harm to public relations protected by criminal law.

scholarly journals Criminal infraction as a mean of differentiating criminal responsibility and punishment

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
pp. 62-67
Author(s):  
E. A. BABAYANTS ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

Discussions caused by the initiative of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the introduction of a new category of offenses – criminal infraction which can occupy an intermediate link between an administrative offense and a criminal offense – do not stop. The article reveals the concept of a criminal infraction, lists its main features, considers the feasibility of introducing this category into domestic criminal legislation. A brief analysis of the legislation of a number of foreign countries is also given, the possibility of applying such experience in Russian conditions is assessed. The conclusion is formulated that it is necessary to recognize as fair the arguments challenging the necessity of adopting the draft law in the form in which it was submitted for consideration by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the fact that in those countries where the category of criminal offense was introduced, a fundamental reform of the criminal legislation was required: a total revision of the norms of the existing criminal legislation or the adoption of a separate Code of criminal infractions (for example, in Kyrgyzstan). Based on this the draft law under consideration appears to be a half-measure, which will lead to the complication of the existing legal regulation. The most correct way to resolve the problem under consideration would be to reduce the number of minor offenses in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

scholarly journals The Basis for Exemption from Criminal Responsibility

2018 ◽  
pp. 161-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. V. Blagov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Main Body ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article considers the reason, adequate cause, justifying exemption from criminal responsibility. In the criminal law literature there are numerous decisions on this issue, but their main body alone can not explain why a person is exempted from criminal responsibility. The author concludes that the basis for such liberation must be sought in the personality of the culprit. Under current criminal legislation, justifying the exemption from criminal responsibility can only be elimination or significant reduction in the public danger of the person who committed the crime. In the future, it is necessary to formulate the relevant provisions of the criminal law so that the basis for this exemption is only elimination of the public danger caused by the individual. Accordingly, Art. 76. 2 and part 1 of Art. 90 are subject to exclusion from the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and, on the contrary, inclusion in the chapter on the exemption from criminal responsibility of the relevant provisions of Art. 80.1 and part 1 of Art. 81 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals ABOUT MATERIAL SIGN OF EMBEZZLEMENT

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 212-218
Author(s):  
V. V. Narodenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Literal Interpretation ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Bank Accounts ◽  
Material Things ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article describes provisions which are in the first note to Article № 158 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation and also signs of embezzlement enshrined in criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. Literal interpretation of the specified provisions of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation leads to a conclusion that things having physical expression and sign of corporality can act as a subject of embezzlement. Meanwhile the author of the article criticizes provisions of the criminal law. The author states thesis that despite the instruction in the Criminal code of the Russian Federation on obligation of harm causing to the owner by embezzlement, not only things but also other property can be as a subject of specified criminal encroachment. The article also describes arguments about illegal withdrawal of separate non-material things. Analyzing judgments it is possible to say that practice interprets the first note to Article № 158 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation in broad. It is necessary to understand as property not only things but also other benefits, in particular, non-cash money on bank accounts, paperless securities. Thus, despite difficulties, illegal actions for withdrawal of specified benefits judicial and investigative practice are qualified as embezzlement. These conclusions can be extended to situations connected with illegal withdrawal of other objects which are property but without material expression. The author suggests changing the existing definition of «embezzlement» and replacing the concept "owner" with the uniformed term “possessor of a right”.

scholarly journals Criminal law protection of certain principles of the budgetary system of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
pp. 60-69
Author(s):  
Artem Aleksandrovich Pastushenko ◽  
Elena Yuryevna Antonova
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Inappropriate Use ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The subject of this research is the criminal law guarantees for the implementation of the principles of appropriate and targeted spending of budgetary resources as an element of ensuring national security of the Russian Federation. The author conducts the assessment of normative and law-enforcement material that determines the legal essence of the indicated principles of budgetary system of the Russian Federation. The article explores case law of implementation of certain norms of criminal legislation of the Russian Federation associated with contravention of the principle of appropriate use of budgetary allocations. This article is first to juxtapose the measures of criminal law protection of the principles of appropriate and targeted spending of budgetary resources. Based on the acquired results, the current position on the absence of penalties for the inappropriate use of budgetary allocations is being disputed. The conducted comparative analysis of the measures of criminal responsibility reveals large disparity with regards to protection of the two key principles of budgetary system of the Russian Federation. The author also established the presence of criminal elements that carry out preclusive function, which narrows down the capabilities of criminal law of the Russian Federation. The article offers an optimal and effective method for eliminating this problem and improving protective capabilities of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, including the tasks of ensuring national security.

Trends of the Development of Criminal Law at the Modern Stage

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (11) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Алла Гравина ◽  
Alla Gravina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Main Stream ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyses the modern criminal law, factors having negative effect on its development according with social, political and economic needs in the Russian Federation. Humanism is the main stream determining these trends. The author treats exercise of the principle of humanism in General and Special parts of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The work provides criminal statistics of the recent years. It pays particular attention to the reasons disturbing stability of law, leading to excess of legal regulation and excess of repressiveness of criminal law. It is impossible to predict the trends of criminal law without taking into account the political, social, economic development of the society, which determine the criminal policy of the country. The stability of law is also determined by them. The main methods of criminal policy are criminalization, decriminalization, penalization and depenalization. The article considers influence of criminalization and decriminalization on criminal law. The main trends in the development of criminal law is the further differentiation of criminal responsibility and expanding the list of forms of punishment not connected with isolation of guilty person from a society; introduction of less severe punishment. Some forms of differentiation of criminal liability such as — returning of administrative prejudice to criminal law, transfer of certain types of punishment to the category of other measures of criminal law applicable to the exemption from criminal liability; forecasting of introduction some new types of offences to the Criminal Code as well as support of the preparation of the Concept of modernization of criminal law.

scholarly journals On the Appropriateness of the Use of the Term “Inducement” in Article 2301 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 433-444
Author(s):  
A. V. Syntin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Medical Personnel ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Other ◽  
Long Time ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The One ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The problem of prohibited substances (methods) abuse in sport has existed for quite a long time. On the one hand, by criminalizing certain anti-doping rules violations, legislation expanded the liability limits of coaches, sports medical personnel, and of other specialists in the field of sports, which can be regarded positively. On the other hand, it made certain mistakes which impeded the effectiveness of these laws enforcement. Among other things, there is a problem with definition of the term “inducement”. The term itself is defined in the note to article 2301 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code, but there is a controversy in demarcation of inducement. methods. While deception, the use of violence and instructions as inducement methods are socially dangerous at substantial level and can be regarded as methods of committing the crime, the provision of information or the prohibited substances themselves (means of using methods) cannot be regarded as methods of committing the crime. Such a definition of inducement means also leads to contradictions with the corpus delicti under Article 2302 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code. In addition, there are also different interpretations regarding the methods of inducement, coercion, involvement in the other corpus delicti, which, all together with the lack of a unified interpretation of the terms affects the possibility of bringing the guilty persons, especially coaches, sports medical personnel and other specialists in the field of sports, to criminal responsibility. The survey conducted among lawyers also has revealed difficulties in distinguishing these terms in practice. Based on the criminal legislation analysis, the author comes to the conclusion that the amendments in the Russian Federation Criminal Code are necessary.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document