scholarly journals VICTIMS OF EXTRAJUDICIAL REPRESSION AND SUBJECTS OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR COUNTERREVOLUTIONARY CRIMES IN THE TERRITORY OF UKRAINE (1918–1922 AD)

2019 ◽  
pp. 14-17
Author(s):  
Honchar D. S.

The article examines the relation between the Bolshevik political doctrine and the activity of the extraordinary commissions in theUkrainian SSR in 1918-1922. The forms and methods of combating counterrevolutionary crimes are shown. The mechanism of implementation of the “red terror” policy in the context of the struggle with counterrevolution was explored. The legal basis for the work of extraordinary commissions on repression is analyzed. Compared the legalization of responsibility forcounter-revolutionary crimes and the practice of its application. The article analyzes the class affiliation, the social status of victims ofextrajudicial repressions by extraordinary commissions. Compares the experience of the Jacobin terror during the French Revolution and the Bolshevik “red terror” policy. The author presentsstatistical data on the number of victims of repression, their social status, class membership both during the Jacobin dictatorshipin France and during the implementation of the “red terror” policy in Ukraine. The author mentions information from archival sources about the activities of extraordinary commissions and their repression. The normative basis of the policy of “red terror”, a special legislation that was active in this field is explored. The author in the articlepresents assessments of the activities of the Bolshevik bodies of state security in Ukraine from the side of real eyewitnesses, participantsin those events, party figures, and publicists of those times. The provisions of secret documents that aimed at manually managing the policy of “red terror” were set forth. The author presentsa series of statistical data on the performance of state security bodies in Ukraine. The genesis of the development of criminal-law policyin the field of struggle with counterrevolutionary crimes was explored. The article analyzes the provisions of the Criminal Code of the USSR in 1922, which concern the establishment of criminal responsibilityfor counter-revolutionary crimes. Significant differences of the current criminal law in the field of crimes against the nationalsecurity of Ukraine and the Bolshevik criminal legislation regarding the fight against state crimes were revealed.

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-154
Author(s):  
Muchammad Chasani

The regulation of corporate criminal liability in Indonesia's criminal justice system is basically a new and still debatable issue. It is said that because in the Criminal Code is not recognized and regulated explicitly about the corporation as a subject of criminal law. This is a natural thing since the WvS Criminal Code still adheres to the principle of "societas delinquere non potest" or "non-potest university delinquere", that is, a legal entity can not commit a crime. Thus, if in a society there is a criminal offense, then the criminal act is deemed to be done by the board of the corporation concerned. Regarding the corporate criminal responsibility system in Indonesia, in the corruption law Article 20 paragraph (1), if the corporation committed a criminal act of corruption, then those responsible for the criminal act shall be the corporation only, the management only, or the corporation and its management. Thus, it can be said that the regulation of corporate criminal liability in the legal system in Indonesia is expressly only regulated in special criminal legislation, because the Criminal Code of WvS still adheres to the principle of "societas delinquere nonpotest" so it is not possible to enforce corporate criminal liability in it.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 324-330
Author(s):  
V.V. Popov ◽  
◽  
S.M. Smolev ◽  

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.


Author(s):  
R. V. Zakomoldin ◽  

The paper analyzes special norms and provisions of the RF Criminal Code reflecting the specifics of criminal law impact towards such a particular subject as military personnel. The author studies the nature, meaning, and varieties of special criminal law norms. The paper highlights the diversity of such norms and their presence in General and Special parts of the criminal law. In this respect, the author explains that these norms have a dual purpose: they are applied both instead of general norms and along with them, supplementing and specifying them. The author emphasizes the certainty, necessity, and reasonability of special norms and provisions in criminal law. The study pays special attention to military criminal legislation as a special criminal legal institution and a set of special rules and provisions that allows differentiating and individualizing criminal responsibility and criminal punishment of servicemen, taking into account the specifics of their legal status and the tasks they perform in the conditions of military service. The author considers special norms and provisions of the General Part of the RF Criminal Code regulating particular military types of criminal punishment and the procedure for their imposition (Articles 44, 48, 51, 54, 55), as well as the norms and provisions of the Special Part of the RF Criminal Code on crimes against military service (Articles 331–352). Besides, the study identifies close interrelation and interdependence of special norms and provisions of the criminal law with the criminal procedure and criminal executive legislation because they are the elements of a single mechanism of criminal law impact on military personnel, and only their combination ensures the effectiveness of such impact. Based on the analysis, the author formulates the conclusions and proposals to introduce amendments and additions to the RF Criminal Code concerning military criminal legislation. First of all, the author proposes highlighting the section “Criminal liability of military personnel” and the chapter “Features of criminal liability and punishment of military personnel” in the General part of the RF Criminal Code and abandoning the provision of part 3 of Art. 331 in the Special part.


2020 ◽  
pp. 39-45
Author(s):  
V. F. Lapshin ◽  
E. H. Nadiseva

The implementation of criminal liability for an unfinished crime, interrupted at the stage of preparation, is not consistent with the basic criminal law requirements, since the act committed at the stage of preparation, clearly does not contain any signs of a crime or its composition. At the same time, the imposition of punishment is carried out in accordance with the sanction of the norms of the Special part of the criminal code, which indicates the existence of an act not actually committed by the convicted person. This allows us to raise questions about the legality and necessity of bringing a person to criminal responsibility for an act recognized as preparation for the Commission of an intentional crime. The analysis of provisions of the current criminal legislation, sources of scientific literature, and also materials of judicial practice on criminal cases about incrimination of preparatory actions, allowed to draw a conclusion according to which attraction of the person to responsibility for Commission of the act characterized as preparation for Commission of crime, contradicts the principle of legality and justice. In this regard, it is proposed to change the current criminal legislation, eliminating the rules on the preparation of the Institute of unfinished crime.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Bokovnya

The article studies the problem of punishment purposes in terms of increasing the importance of social justice and more consistent protection of the rights of victims from criminal acts. It substantiates a model of the hierarchical construction of purposes of criminal punishment based on analysis of the historical laws concerning the purposes of punishment and a comparative study of the legislation of modern states. According to the author, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should first outline the purposes of criminal legislation or criminal responsibility, and in terms of it should already specify the purposes of punishment and other measures of a criminal and legal nature. The RF Criminal Code should regulate the purposes of all measures of criminal and legal character. He also considers as reasonable the concrete definition of the content for purposes of restoring the social justice by indicating in the law the fact that punishment and other ways of criminal and legal character contribute to its restoration. The article also substantiates a proposal of regulating the property damage. The article also substantiates a proposal for regulating property damages and moral damage compensations as a different measure of criminal and legal character.


Author(s):  
E. V. Blagov

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.


Author(s):  
Artem Aleksandrovich Pastushenko ◽  
Elena Yuryevna Antonova

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.


Author(s):  
Василий Некрасов ◽  
Vasiliy Nekrasov

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.


Lex Russica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 83-96
Author(s):  
V. B. Khatuev

Without knowledge of history, without a deep retrospective analysis of any legal institution it is impossible to imagine the ways for its further improvement. This is quite true of the institute of murder by mother of her newborn child. This paper attempts to investigate the evolution of criminal responsibility for the murder of a newborn child by the mother, to establish the attitude of the legislator to this type of crime at different stages of development of the Russian criminal legislation — from the time of Ancient Russia to the present. To this end, the main historical legislative acts on the regulation of criminal law against this act are analyzed.The problem of the considered type of murder is extremely relevant. In the Russian doctrine of criminal law there are two positions concerning Art. 106 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation providing the softened criminal responsibility for this crime. According to one of them, the article is relevant but it needs to be improved; according to the second point of view, it is subject to exclusion and the guilt of such a murder should be criminalized on general grounds for a classified murder. The author of the article speaks in favor of the latter point of view.


Author(s):  
Vladyslav Kubalskyi

The article is devoted to research of positions of foreign legislation, that envisage criminal responsibility for public appeals to committing crimes against national safety. Attention is accented on the problems of improving of legislation of Ukraine in this sphere. The suggestions of the Ukrainian scientists, related to improving of norms of Division І Special part of the Criminal code of Ukraine, that regulate responsibility for public appeals to committing crime against bases of national safety, are analyzed. The purpose of the article is to identify the main ways to improve the criminal legislation of Ukraine, which provides for liability for public appeals to commit crimes against national security, based on doctrinal approaches of domestic scholars and foreign experience of criminal liability for such crimes. In modern conditions, the problem of improving criminal law for public appeals to commit crimes against the foundations of national security of Ukraine, criminal liability for which is provided for in Part 2 of Art. 109 and Part 1 of Art. 110 of the Criminal code of Ukraine. Research on these issues without an analysis of foreign experience in this sphere seems to be extremely limited. It is proposed to supplement the Criminal сode of Ukraine with the article «Public appeals to actions aimed at harming the foundations of national security of Ukraine». The expediency of combining crimes, the responsibility for which is provided by Part 2 of Art. 109, part 1 of Art. 110, part 1 of Art. 2582, art. 295, art. 436, part 2 of Art. 442 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in one criminological group under the general name «public calls to commit crimes against national security».


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document