scholarly journals The Institute of Monetary Penalties in Criminal Law: Condition and Prospects

Author(s):  
Andrei Zvonov

Ever since the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation was adopted, new amendments have been added to it every year. Thus, the system of criminal law measures has been regularly improved through changes to the existing norms, the abolishment of old norms and the introduction of new ones. On the whole, modern Russian criminal policy is aimed at increasing the number of possible measures of influencing lawbreakers. One of the latest innovations is the institute of court fines introduced by the Federal Law № 323-ФЗ of July 3, 2016. It is a beneficial innovation. Monetary penalties can now be used practically at all stages of court procedures: before delivering a judgment - as a court fine, and as part of the sentence when a fine is a criminal penalty. This could have a positive impact on court procedures and the enforcement of criminal measures, it could also increase income to the budget in the unstable financial conditions. However, the imposition of monetary penalties has some drawbacks, as it may not be always possible to control the payment of fines by the perpetrators, especially when such payments are done one-time. There are some other issues and negative sides connected with the further development of the institute of monetary penalties. The analysis of penalties enforcement allowed the author to identify one vital drawback - a gap in the legal regulation regarding the control that a specially authorized agency has over the perpetrators. While this could be considered acceptable in the case of court fines, it is not adequate for the goals of criminal punishment. The results of the generalized analysis of punitive measures allow the author to conclude that it is necessary to make monetary penalty a measure that is different from criminal punishment; it should be enforced in cases of exemption from criminal liability or as an obligatory addition to criminal punishment.

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):  
Satenik Vrezhovna Shakhbazyan

The subject of this research is the process of state legal regulation of evolution of the definition of crime and category of crimes within the Russian criminal law. Special attention is given to the analysis of normative sources, which allows determining the key stages of development of the doctrine on crime and categorization of crimes. The author substantiates the opinion that normative documents of the Soviet period regulated the provisions regarding crime and categorization of crimes to the fullest extent, which laid the groundwork for the development of current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The conducted analysis of sources allowed concluding that the criminal legal policy in definition of crime and category of crimes, implemented by a legislator at various stages of social relations, is characterized by priority vectors in criminal policy of the state and caused by objective needs of the society. The complicated by their nature criminal-legal relations are constantly changing, which justifies the need for improvement of criminal legislation. The author comes to the conclusion that formalization and further development of the doctrine on crime and categorization of crimes retains its relevance in light of reform in criminal legislation.


Author(s):  
V.I. Antonov ◽  
E.V. Antonov

The article examines criminal law with administrative prejudice, as well as the history of the emergence and development of norms with administrative prejudice in the modern criminal legislation of Russia on various grounds. This topic is relevant today because the Russian legislator constantly includes new norms containing administrative prejudice in the criminal code of the Russian Federation. The problems of applying norms with administrative prejudice in practice are considered. It is noted that the criminal legislation in force in the XX century actively applied administrative prejudice as a method of legal regulation of public relations arising in the process of implementing the criminal policy of the Soviet state. The article analyzes the criminal legislation of Russia from the point of view of further development of criminal legislation in the direction of improving the institution of administrative prejudice and increasing the number of norms with administrative prejudice.


2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (11) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Алла Гравина ◽  
Alla Gravina

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.


Author(s):  
Vаleria A. Terentieva ◽  

The systematic nature of criminal law forms the main features of the industry, namely: normativity, universalism, that is, the absence of casuistry and obligation. The strict consistency of both the entire industry and its individual institutions allows avoiding the redundancy of criminal law regulation, clearly determining the legal status of a person in conflict with the law. However, the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation do not always meet these requirements due to defects in legal technology, and, sometimes, gaps in regulation. In practice, the courts, in an effort to minimize the above defects, sometimes resort to excessive criminal law regulation; as an example, the article gives the ratio of the application of suspended sentence and placement in a special educational institution of a closed type. The article analyzes sentences to minors in which Art. 73 and Part 2 of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation were simultaneously applied in one sentence for the same act. For a comprehensive study, the article analyzed sentences to minors held in special educational institutions of a closed type for the period from 2014 to 2020, criminal statistics posted on the website of the Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, as well as various points of view of leading legal scholars. The research methods of static observation, analysis and synthesis, the system-structural method, as well as a number of factographic methods, were used. The study develops from the general to the specific, i.e., first, systematicity is analyzed as a property of the branch of criminal law and then as a property of a legal institution, namely, the release of minors from criminal liability. Consistency as a property of the institution of exemption from criminal punishment presupposes the impossibility of intersecting elements within one institution. Special attention is paid to the legal nature of suspended sentence as the most common punishment measure for minors, and its effectiveness. Then the cases of the simultaneous application of Art. 73 and Part 2 of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are analyzed. In the course of the study, the author examines the features of suspended sentence and placement in a special educational and educational institution of a closed type, compares these two forms of criminal liability, and highlights the differences. The conclusion is that the simultaneous placement in a special educational institution of a closed type and suspended sentence are a redundancy of criminal law regulation. The article raises the question of the need to improve the Criminal Code in terms of the development of placement in a special educational and educational institution of a closed type as a type of exemption from criminal punishment: the court is to be provided with the opportunity to control the juvenile offender’s correctional process.


2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 02017
Author(s):  
Aleksandr Viktorovich Pobedkin ◽  
Andrey Petrovich Fil’chenko ◽  
Tatyana Valentinovna Pinkevich ◽  
Natalia Eduardovna Martynenko ◽  
Vladimir Yurievich Zhandrov

The consequence of the pandemic caused by COVID-19 was the introduction of social restrictions, which led to an increase in the number of users of social networks, as well as their activity on the Internet. The involvement of citizens in the digital environment has changed the targets of criminal efforts of the criminals. The public’s fear of the coronavirus was subjected to criminal exploitation, new forms and methods of theft appeared, as a result, the spectrum of crime shifted to the criminal use of information and communication technologies (hereinafter – ICT. The purpose of the study is to analyze the dynamics of the indicators of Russian crime during the pandemic, to assess the adopted criminal-political decisions in terms of adequacy to the changes in crime, to develop on this basis the proposals for criminal law improvement able to increase the consistency of the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and its compliance with the requirements of the criminal-political situation in Russia. The assessment of the sectoral structure consistency in the regulation of criminal liability for committing crimes in the special conditions of a pandemic was used as the main research method. The research was carried out by the authors based on the dialectical method, which made it possible to manage changes in social reality by means of legal response, other scientific methods: sociological, modeling, concrete historical, comparative were applied as well. The results obtained showed that overcoming the negative changes in crime requires adjusting the vector of criminal policy from liberalization towards tightening in relation to crimes committed using ICT. It is proposed to expand the list of aggravating circumstances, limit the use of some mechanisms for terminating criminal liability associated with exemption from it, and review the possibilities of applying conditional conviction to persons who have committed crimes in a pandemic, up to and including refusal of this form of implementation of criminal liability. The formulated new proposals for improving the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation restore the consistency of the criminal law and increase the consistency of criminal-political decisions during a pandemic.


2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 02005
Author(s):  
Aleksander Nikolayevich Varygin ◽  
Irina Alekseyevna Efremova ◽  
Vladimir Gennadyevich Gromov ◽  
Pavel Anatolyevich Matushkin ◽  
Anastasiya Mikhaylovna Shuvalova

A prerequisite for this research is a high public hazard of violent crimes committed against persons executing justice or preliminary investigation since this shakes the foundation of justice and buttress of state power in general. This suggests the need to research the prevention of such crimes using criminal legal methods. The primary goal of the research lies in the analysis of the modern condition and development of relevant proposals to improve the current criminal law of the Russian Federation in terms of regulation of criminal liability for the discussed criminal offenses, which will have a positive effect on their prevention. Research methods: dialectical method of cognition, as well general scientific (analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, logical, systemic-structural methods) and particular methods of cognition (scientifically statistical, formally legal). The novelty is related to an integrated approach to research the problem of prevention of the discussed offenses and proposals developed on this basis to improve the Russian Federation criminal law, which will increase efficiency in the prevention of these offenses. Results: efficiency of preventing such offenses greatly depends on clear legal regulation of legal norms suggesting criminal liability for committing them. There is a pressing need to complement the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with new wordings of these elements of crimes and changes that would allow formulating a definitive norm clearly defining the scope of persons affected and adopting a Plenum Decree at this stage for this category of criminal cases, which would clarify the implementation of evaluative categories of the discussed elements of crimes.


Author(s):  
Dongmei Pan

The article discusses the latest changes in the Criminal Code of the People’s Republic of China that were introduced at the end of 2020. The amendments were adopted after numerous revisions and discussions, and were officially published on December 26, 2020. As a result, fifteen new offences were added to the Criminal Code, and 47 articles were modified or amended. These amendments refer to financial security, intellectual property, security of public healthcare, production of food and medications, and the regulation of criminal liability for crimes connected with minors. Thus, they reflect the reaction of criminal legislation to public life through the criminalization and penalization of some publically dangerous actions. At the same time, they indicate the direction of Chinese criminal policy that combines «leniency» and «strictness». For example, most of the newly added offences are minor. On the whole, changes and amendments to the current Criminal Code of China are connected with different institutes of criminal law: reduction of the age of criminal liability for some offences; addition of new offences; introduction of changes and amendments to the dispositions and sanctions of some of the existing offences; provision of an opportunity to impose penalties that are under the lower limit determined by the corresponding Article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of China if the property obtained in the crime is recovered, or the economic damage to the victim is compensated.


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. 17-22
Author(s):  
T. R. Sabitov

The article analyzes the latest trends in Russian criminal policy related to its property-restoration focus. The author aims to emphasize the fact that criminal policy in Russia has significantly changed in its quality. The new rules on exemption from criminal liability increasingly emphasize receiving monetary compensation as a condition for such exemption. The articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are analyzed: on liability for non-payment of wages, pensions, scholarships, allowances and other payments; on exemption from criminal liability in connection with compensation for damage; on exemption from criminal liability with a fine; on liability for tax and other crimes. Considering the new criminal law norms on exemption from criminal liability, the author comes to the conclusion that these norms are increasingly contrary to the principle of personal responsibility, since the legislator increasingly proceeds from the task of restoring property interests than from the criterion of the presence or absence of public danger.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document