Criminal law and digital crime: problems and solutions

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Евгений Русскевич ◽  
Evgeniy Russkevich
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Computer Data ◽  
Digital Crime ◽  
Problems And Solutions ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Theoretical Issues

The monograph is devoted to the complex of theoretical and applied problems of adaptation of the domestic mechanism of criminal law protection to the "digitalization" of crime in the conditions of formation of the information society. Along with General theoretical issues, foreign criminal legislation and the provisions of international law are deeply analyzed. The paper presents a refined criminal-legal characteristics of crimes in the field of computer information, including the novelties of the Russian criminal law — the illegal impact on the critical information infrastructure of the Russian Federation (article 2741 of the criminal code), developed proposals for the differentiation of criminal liability for attacks on the security of computer data and systems, developed scientifically sound recommendations for qualification. The monograph is designed for researchers, teachers, practicing lawyers, students and postgraduates of law schools and faculties.

Criminal law and "digital crime": problems and solutions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evgeniy Russkevich
Keyword(s):  
Information And Communication Technologies ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Computer Data ◽  
Problems And Solutions ◽  
Draft Resolution ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The monograph is devoted to a complex of theoretical and applied problems of adapting the domestic mechanism of criminal law protection to the "digitalization" of crime in the conditions of the formation of the information society. Along with general theoretical issues, foreign criminal legislation and provisions of international law are being thoroughly analyzed. The paper presents an updated criminal-legal description of crimes in the field of computer information, including novelties of Russian criminal legislation - unlawful impact on the critical information infrastructure of the Russian Federation (Article 2741 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), developed proposals for the differentiation of criminal liability for attacks on the security of computer data and systems, developed scientifically sound recommendations for qualification. In the second edition, the issues of differentiation of criminal liability for digital crimes by means of the General and Special Parts of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are separately worked out. The analysis of the problems of qualification of crimes in the field of computer information, as well as other crimes committed using information and communication technologies, outside of Chapter 28 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Taking into account the results obtained, a draft resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation "On judicial practice in cases of crimes in the field of computer information" is presented. It is intended for researchers, teachers, practicing lawyers, students and postgraduates of law schools and faculties.

scholarly journals The goals of criminal punishment as a reflection of modern criminal policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 324-330
Author(s):  
V.V. Popov ◽  
◽  
S.M. Smolev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The presented study is devoted to the issues of disclosing the content of the goals of criminal punishment, analyzing the possibilities of their actual achievement in the practical implementation of criminal punishment, determining the political and legal significance of the goals of criminal punishment indicated in the criminal legislation. The purpose of punishment as a definition of criminal legislation was formed relatively recently, despite the fact that theories of criminal punishment and the purposes of its application began to form long before our era. These doctrinal teachings, in essence, boil down to defining two diametrically opposed goals of criminal punishment: retribution and prevention. The state, on the other hand, determines the priority of one or another goal of the punishment assigned for the commission of a crime. The criminal policy of Russia as a whole is focused on mitigating the criminal law impact on the offender. One of the manifestations of this direction is the officially declared humanization of the current criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. However, over the course of several years, the announced “humanization of criminal legislation” has followed the path of amending and supplementing the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: introducing additional opportunities for exemption from criminal liability and punishment, reducing the limits of punishments specified in the sanctions of articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and including in the system of criminal punishments of types of measures that do not imply isolation from society. At the same time the goals of criminal punishment are not legally revised, although the need for such a decision has already matured. Based on consideration of the opinions expressed in the scientific literature regarding the essence of those listed in Part 2 of Art. 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the goals of punishment are determined that each of them is subject to reasonable criticism in view of the abstract description or the impossibility of achieving in the process of law enforcement (criminal and penal) activities. This circumstance gives rise to the need to revise the content of the goals of criminal punishment and to determine one priority goal that meets the needs of modern Russian criminal policy. According to the results of the study the conclusion is substantiated that the only purpose of criminal punishment can be considered to ensure proportionality between the severity of the punishment imposed and the social danger (harmfulness) of the crime committed. This approach to determining the purpose of criminal punishment is fully consistent with the trends of modern criminal policy in Russia, since it does not allow the use of measures, the severity of which, in terms of the amount of deprivation and legal restrictions, clearly exceeds the social danger of the committed act. In addition, it is proportionality, not prevention, that underlies justice – one of the fundamental principles of criminal law.

scholarly journals Mediation in Bribery: Gaps in the Legal Interpretation

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vadim Zamaraev
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Comprehensive Analysis ◽  
Legal Interpretation ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Objective Aspect

The article considers and analyzes some gaps in the legislative interpretation of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It examines the objective aspect of the crime, and also presents the problems of prosecuting for mediation in bribery according to the specifics of the qualification of this socially dangerous act. The author substantiates the grounds and limits of criminal liability for mediation in bribery, taking into account the act of committing various forms of this crime. On the basis of a comprehensive analysis of criminal legislation and scientific works of not only Russian scientists, but also foreign experts in the field of criminal law, the main prospects for the development and solution of the above mentioned problematic issues related to gaps in the legislative interpretation of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are proposed. Special attention is also paid to certain issues of qualification of the investigated act, which directly depend on the amount of the bribe. As a result of the study, it is recommended to introduce some changes and additions to Parts 1 and 5 of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Perpetrators of corporate crimes in commercial organizations in Italy and Russia

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 120-130
Author(s):  
Georgy Rusanov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Commercial Organizations ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Economic Crimes ◽  
Official Status ◽  
Italian Legislation

Purpose The purpose of this paper is dedicated to the features of subjects of official crimes in commercial organizations in accordance with the laws of Italy and Russia. Design/methodology/approach Based on the study of Russian and Italian legislation, it was revealed that the Italian criminal law provides for a more extensive system of the criminal law provisions on liability for corporate economic crimes. Findings These norms are in various normative legal acts (civil legislation, separate legislative acts). In the Russian criminal legislation, the norms in the sphere of corporate crimes in the sphere of economy are systematized and are located in a separate chapter of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the list of acts for which liability is provided is significantly narrower than in the Italian criminal law. Originality/value In general, the institute of criminal liability for subjects of economic crimes with special features is adopted and developed as in the Russian criminal law as in the Italian criminal law. The existence of this institution shows the awareness by legislators of the increased danger to the society of such persons’ actions owing to the fact that the existence of the official status, special powers of certain duties or the lack of an appropriate indication on the contrary allows such a person to commit an act that is not available to other persons.

scholarly journals Problems of exemption from criminal liability for restricting competition

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 02012
Author(s):  
Andrey Viktorovich Sarubin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Comparison Analysis ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article considers the problems of exemption from criminal liability for restricting competition (Art. 178 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The criminal legislation of Russia and the practice of its application in terms of exemption from liability for restriction of competition are analysed. It is thought that the main objectives of the criminal-law prohibitions contained in Chapter 22 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, is to ensure the criminal-legal protection of economic relations, preventing the growth of crimes that threaten the development of financial institutions of the state. Purpose of work: Identify problems of exemption from criminal liability for restricting competition in the modern practice of preliminary investigation and court, and propose ways to improve the criminal law on the exemption from criminal liability for restricting competition. Methods. The methodological basis of the research was the general dialectical method of scientific knowledge, which has a universal character, as well as methods of logical deduction, induction, cognitive methods and techniques of observation, comparison, analysis, synthesis and description, formally logical. Results. The research revealed the problems of application of the criminal law on the exemption from criminal liability for restriction of competition and suggested ways to improve paragraph 3 of the notes to the Art. 178 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, providing for the possibility of exemption from criminal liability for restricting competition.

scholarly journals Illegal Production of Medical Agents and Equipment (Article 235.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 845-855
Author(s):  
Aleksey Rarog
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Optimal Solution ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Special Rules ◽  
Criminal Legislation

Illegal production of medical agents and equipment poses a global threat to public health of all countries, not to mention its harm to the economy. Human life and health should be protected not only by industry laws that regulate the production and distribution procedures, but also by criminal legislation that establishes liability for most dangerous violations of prohibitions in medicine and pharmacology. The legislative experience of foreign (mostly European) countries shows that the optimal solution to the problem of criminal liability in cases of grave violations of the production and trade procedures for medical production is to introduce criminal law norms with blanket dispositions, where the components of the actus reus of the offence are described though regulatory laws that set special rules and prohibitions for medical services and pharmaceuticals. The analysis of international legal norms and criminal legislation of some foreign countries and the Russian Federation allows the author to prove that it is necessary to single out medical criminal law as a specific sub-branch of Russian criminal law, where pharmaceutical criminal law could become an autonomous institute. The author presents an analysis of the constituent elements of the crime under Art. 235.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and concludes that the terminology of criminal law does not fully correspond to the concepts in healthcare legislation, and also that the analyzed norm in its present edition should not be included in the Chapter on crimes against public health and morals; the author offers his own version of this norm.

scholarly journals The Development and State of Criminal Legislation on Responsibility for Smuggling Strategically Important Goods and Resources

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 77-91
Author(s):  
T. D. Ustinova ◽  
A. S. Rubtsova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Customs Union ◽  
Biological Resources ◽  
Rare And Endangered ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The paper is devoted to monitoring the development in the Russian criminal legislation of responsibility for the illegal movement of strategically important goods and resources across the customs border of the Customs Union within the EurAsEC or the State border of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the author argues the correctness of the indication in the disposition of Art. 226.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation a State Border as a place of commission of the crime under consideration. The author provides a detailed list of strategically important goods and resources, since the establishment of the subject matter of a crime makes it possible to qualify the offense and differntiate criminal smuggling from smuggling the responsibility for which is envisaged only in administrative legislation. The author substantiates the statement according to which this type of smuggling infringes not on public safety, but on relations in the field of economic activity. Therefore, a proposal is made to return the criminal law rule to Ch. 22 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, it is proposed to establish criminal liability for smuggling flora and fauna items classified as strategically important goods and resources in a separate article in the Chapter entitled "Environmental Crimes" with due regard to the social danger of this act. The liability should not be related to the value of the goods and resources being moved. Taking into account only the cost of biological resources in their protection under criminal law does not reflect the real social danger of these acts. The need for the protection of biological resources using criminal law instruments is caused not only and not so much by economic preconditions but by the need to preserve rare and endangered representatives of flora and fauna for future generations—the most important components of the ecosystem of the entire planet. The author draws conclusions largely aimed at observing the systematic nature of the criminal law due to the peculiarities of the object of the offence.

scholarly journals Illicit Enrichment: a New Approach to Criminalizing the Act

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 593-600
Author(s):  
Alexander Golovin ◽  
Natalia Bugayevskaya
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Legal Document ◽  
State Income ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The authors analyze the necessity and expediency of incorporating the norm on liability for illicit enrichment into Russian criminal legislation in accordance with the requirements of Art. 20 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption of 2003. The ratification of this international legal document placed Russian lawmakers under an obligation to modernize the anti-corruption legislation, including an obligation to recognize the illegal character of the actions of those officials whose assets have increased disproportionally to their legal income. The authors recognize the existence of different approaches to estimating illicit enrichment as corpus delicti. They rebut the allegation that establishing criminal liability for illicit enrichment does not correspond to the principles of criminal and criminal procedure law; they draw parallels with the current corpora delicti (illegal entrepreneurship and others) in criminal law and prove that establishing that a person possesses certain assets does not contradict the principle of guilt and the principle of the presumption of innocence. The criminal law analysis of illicit enrichment was carried out using the method of modeling corpus delicti with the use of constructions suggested by other scholars and the authors of the draft law on changes in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation regarding this corpus delicti. The criticism of the suggested models and the research of some elements of corpus delicti, specifically, the objective side of illicit enrichment, led the authors to the conclusion that it is impossible to include this corpus delicti into law because it does not correspond to the requirements of the constitutional and criminal law principle of justice. The impossibility of criminalizing illicit enrichment does not contradict the recommendatory character of conventional norms and does not result in a gap in law. The problem is solved on the basis of legislation on public service, civil and civil procedure legislation. The examined court practice regarding the cases in which the prosecutors requested to turn into a state income the assets whose licit acquisition has not been proven makes it possible to claim that international anti-corruption standards connected with illicit enrichment have been put into practice.

scholarly journals TYPES OF LIABILITY IN THE MODERN RUSSIAN CRIMINAL LAWS

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 56-60
Author(s):  
Lyubov Yu. Larina ◽  
◽  
Inga V. Pantyukhina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Different Types ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Fact ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Modern Russian

The article substantiates the existence of criminal liability and other types of liability in the criminal legislation. The authors give a classification of types of criminal liability depending on the legal fact entailing responsibility and specific measures that make up the content of a particular type. It is proposed to distinguish two main types-primary and secondary responsibility, each of which is divided into separate varieties. They argue for the need to include in the criminal code of the Russian Federation rules on the responsibility of minors who are not subject to criminal liability; make predictions about the possibility of new measures of responsibility in criminal law. In view of the different types of liability, the question of liability of legal persons under criminal law could be considered differently.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document