scholarly journals Topical Problems of Criminal Prosecution for Illegal Banking Transactions

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 962-970
Author(s):  
Diana Alekseeva ◽  
Irina Mikheeva ◽  
Tatyana Suspitsyna
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Bank Employees ◽  
Uniform Assessment ◽  
Unambiguous Interpretation

In recent years there has been an increase in the number of crimes under Art. 172 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation («Illegal banking»), whose subjects, among other things, act as intermediaries for their clients and are not one of the sides in a contract with the bank. Such practice is not indisputable, because innocent people could be prosecuted if there is a mistake in the qualification of actions. The authors of the article assess the actions of physical persons providing the services of intermediaries for the bank clients who open accounts, make payments, conduct encashment and different cash operations. Specifically, the authors note that different actions of the bank and the client connected with banking transactions are designated in law in the same way, which leads to controversial situations, including the qualification of such actions as crimes. The authors determine the legal nature of banking as an aggregate of systemic banking operations and conclude that the actions of physical persons — intermediaries who are not bank employees or managers or other persons authorized by the clients of the bank — do not correspond to the characteristics of a crime under Art. 172 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. They stress that the current edition of Art. 172 of the CC of the RF does not allow for an unambiguous interpretation of the subject of the analyzed corpus delicti; the authors also present data from court practice that testify that it does not have a uniform assessment. The position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on this issue raises questions. The authors support the legal approach according to which Art. 172 of the CC of the RF refers to a special subject (head or other employee of a credit organization). They also point out that the disposition of the norm, in the part that includes subjective characteristics, makes it possible to prosecute a person for both intentional and negligent actions, which is not very well-grounded; the authors support the position that a person can only be prosecuted for illegal entrepreneurship if the intention is determined.

The Subject of a Crime Under Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 87-92
Author(s):  
E. G. Bykova ◽  
◽  
A. A. Kazakov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Practical Significance ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Code

The change in the disposition of Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation led to questions from law enforcement officers about from what moment a person is considered to be held administratively liable and what to mean by the commission of a similar act. The article carries out a systematic legal analysis of the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, as well as the position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in order to formulate proposals for solving the indicated problems. The fundamental method was dialectical. The formal legal method was used in the study of regulations governing certain aspects of the legal assessment of unlawful acts that take into account administrative precedence. Using a comparative legal method, a distinction was made between situations where a person was ordered to be held administratively liable and an administrative penalty was imposed. Scientific publications on the subject were analyzed. It was concluded that the current version of Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, containing a formally indefinite legal category, raises the problem of calculating the one-year period during which a person can be prosecuted under this norm if there is an administrative precedence. In addition, it is justified that a «similar act» should be understood only as an administrative offense, responsibility for which is provided for in Art. 20.3.1 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. The use of criminal law by analogy is unacceptable, therefore, it is proposed to amend the disposition of Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code to eliminate the identified gap. The problem identified could be the basis for further scientific research. The practical significance is due to the fact that the positions formulated by the authors can be taken into account in the process of improving criminal law, when amending the relevant explanations of the highest court in this category of cases in order to form a unified practice of applying criminal law.

scholarly journals The subject of judicial control in consideration of complaints: controversial issues of legal regulation

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-109
Author(s):  
El'vira Mirgorodskaya
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The purpose of this study was an attempt to theoretically understand the subject of judicial consideration of complaints against decisions, actions (inaction) of officials carrying out criminal prosecution. The research was carried out on the basis of comparative legal, formal logical, empirical, statistical methods. Judicial statistics for the year 2020 have been provided, and legislation has been studied from a historical and contemporary perspective, taking into account the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The problem is that, in practice, for about 20 years the courts have had difficulties in determining the subject of complaints, since neither in theory nor in practice a consensus has been developed on this issue. The Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation also does not contain a definition of the concept of «subject matter». The situation is aggravated by the presence of evaluative concepts in the text of the law, leading to a varied understanding of the subject of appeal by the courts, which leads to a violation of the constitutional rights of citizens at the pre-trial stages of criminal proceedings. In the article, taking into account the analysis of the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, legislation and the opinion of scientists, a recommendation was made to amend the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation to specify the subject of consideration of complaints in accordance with Art. 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in order to eliminate existing contradictions in practice and increase the level of protection of individual rights in pre-trial proceedings.

scholarly journals The impact of administrative prejudice upon the content of penal prohibition

2021 ◽  
pp. 99-115
Author(s):  
Sergei Gennadevich Losev ◽  
Viktor Ivanovich Morozov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Record ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Subject ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Impact

The object of this research is the legal relations arising in the context of implementation of the norms of criminal law of the Russian Federation that establish liability for repeated administrative offenses. The subject of this research is the practice of application the criminal law norms of the Soviet and post-Soviet periods that regulate the institution of administrative prejudice, and acts of interpretation of the Russian Constitution, in which the Supreme Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation deals with the problems of the use of separate articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation that contain the norms with administrative prejudice, and parts of interrelation between the institutions of administrative prejudice and recurrence of offenses. The subject of this research is also justification of existence the institution of administrative prejudice in the national criminal law, main flaws in interpretation of the articles that describe the norms of the institution of administrative prejudice in the text of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Taking into consideration all shortcomings in interpretation of the articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the author offers unified definition of the composition with administrative prejudice. It is suggested to reintroduce the concept of recurrent offense in the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, taking into account the fact of administrative liability, outstanding criminal record, or criminal record that has not been expunged. The case if the legislator deems it necessary to take into account not identical, but homogeneous recurrence should be stipulated in the note to the article of the Special Part. The author also offers to include the Article 16.1 into the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the following wording: “The repeated offense is considered an act committed by a person who has previously been subjected to administrative penalty for similar type of offense, unless stipulated otherwise in the corresponding articles of the Special Part of the effective Code”.

scholarly journals The Theory of Criminal Law Should Not Be Reduced to the Analysis and Criticism of Criminal Legislation

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-140
Author(s):  
Anatoly Naumov
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Principle Of Legality

In both normative and sociological senses criminal law includes three components — criminal legislation, judicial practice, and criminal law doctrine, and the development of this branch of law is possible only in their unity. The criminal law doctrine is to a certain extent superior to the other components of the "triad" and involves the development of the branch’s principles, goals and objectives. At the same time, the improvement of criminal law is not the only goal of the theory of criminal law. It should not be limited only to criticism of the current legislation and proposals for its improvement. However, the vast majority of modern domestic criminal law publications, such as monographs, articles in legal periodicals, dissertations, are devoted to criticism of the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Indeed, the current criminal law is not perfect, but the "imbalance" of research into the "law-making" side significantly reduces the scope of criminal law doctrine. And there will always be demand for theoretical studies on the analysis of the subject and method, system and objectives of criminal law, its sources.Debatable, for example, still is the issue of the legal nature of the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and, in particular, the judgments of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court are a special kind of judicial interpretation and a fairly reliable tool for the courts to understand "the letter of the criminal law" and it’s applicability to the particular case. As for the assessment of the legal nature of the judgments of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the criminal law doctrine often fails to notice that they touch upon the methodological problems of the theory of criminal law. In relation to a number of criminal law prohibitions, judgments of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation are a source of criminal law, along with the Criminal Code. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation specified the most important principle of criminal law — the principle of legality and clarified the characteristics of criminality of socially dangerous acts prohibited by criminal law, which is directly related to the issue of criminal liability. In this sense, the Constitutional Court formulated a new and important addition to the content of the principle of legality — the certainty of criminal law rules, and, first of all, the criminal law prohibitions. Thus, the judicial authority overtook the criminal law doctrine in solving one of the most important issues for criminal proceedings.

PROBLEMS OF A CRIMINAL-LEGAL NATURE ARISING IN THE INVESTIGATION OF CRIMES RELATED TO THE ILLEGAL WITHDRAWAL OF CAPITAL ABROAD (ARTICLE 193 AND ARTICLE 193.1 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-151
Author(s):  
Roman S. POZDISHEV ◽  
Dmitriy V. Nazarychev
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Exchange Transactions

The article is devoted to the peculiarities of the criminal-legal characteristics of crimes related to the illegal withdrawal of capital abroad, in particular to the ratio of crimes under Art. 193 and Art. 193.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The problem is considered in the context of the investigative practice of the internal affairs bodies of the Russian Federation for 2019-2020, which reveals many difficulties associated with the qualification of currency crimes and the differentiation of a single ongoing crime from a set of crimes. This circumstance determines the relevance of the study. Scientific novelty is expressed in the conclusions reached by the team of authors as a result of the analysis of a significant volume of procedural documents in the category of criminal cases under consideration, including decisions to refuse to initiate a criminal case, decisions to terminate a criminal case, indictments, sentences, which are characterized by the scale on a territorial basis and cover more than 40 regions of Russia. Among the most significant results of the study, one should point out the author’s conclusion about the absence of a unified approach to classifying currency crimes as continuing in legal science and practice, as well as criteria that make it possible to distinguish between the totality of currency crimes and continued currency crime. In order to implement a systematic approach and the subsequent clarity of the stated results, the ratio of evasion from fulfilling obligations to repatriate funds and performing foreign exchange transactions to transfer funds to non-residents’ accounts using forged documents was carried out by highlighting individual elements of these crimes and comparing them with each other, as a result which revealed the distinctive features of the objective side, the subjective side and the subject of the considered type of crime. The research methodology is presented by dialectical, formal-logical, systemic, sociological, functional, comparative-legal and formal-legal methods.

To the Matter of Procedural and Legal Problems of Detaining a Person on Suspicion of Committing a Crime

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.V. Bolshakov ◽  
◽  
I.D. Nazarov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Moment

The subject of the research within the framework of the article is the criminal procedure institute for the detention of a person on suspicion of committing a crime. The legal nature of this institution is analyzed, and comments are given on the normative legal acts and judicial practice regulating the issues of detention. The theoretical basis of the research is based on the publications of the last two decades on this problem, in particular, reflecting the discussion of the process scientists S. A. Shafer, S. B. Rossinsky and A. A. Tarasov, the subject of which was the issue of the legal nature of a suspect detention in a criminal case. In the paper, the authors ask the following questions: What is the detention of a person on suspicion of committing a crime in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation? From what moment does the detained person acquire the status of a suspect? Is it possible to detain a person before initiating a criminal case? The study concludes that a person acquires the actual status of a suspect from the moment of direct detention, that is, before documenting this status and, as a result, before initiating a criminal case. Amendments to the articles of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation are proposed, and the authors` versions of the definitions of the concepts «detention of a suspect», «the moment of actual detention» and «pre-trial proceedings» are given.

scholarly journals The Establishment of Criminal Responsibility for Retail Sale of Alcoholic Products to Minors: An Analysis of the Feasibility

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (10) ◽  
pp. 150-158
Author(s):  
K. V. Dyadyun
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Retail Trade ◽  
Retail Sale ◽  
Existing Problems ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The paper analyzes the objective and subjective features of article 151.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The problems of interpretation and application of this norm are investigated, taking into account the goals and objectives underlying its creation. Special legislation regulating the sphere under study is considered. The studied imperfections of regulation of the subject of the crime (the relationship between the concepts of alcoholic and alcohol-containing products), problems of distinguishing acts from related compounds (article 151 of the Criminal Code), the complexity of the classification. The analysis of crime-forming features is presented: "repeatability", "retail", and "sale". Imperfections of the legislative and law enforcement approach in this aspect are revealed. In particular, the key features and correlation of the concepts of wholesale and retail trade are analyzed; the problems of assessing what was done with remote methods of selling alcohol; the content aspects of the categories "duplicity and repetition" in the context under study. The question of the expediency of replacing the term "sale" with "illegal sale" in the disposition of article 151.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is studied. The regulation of features of the subject of the studied elements is considered, and existing problems are identified. The question of the expediency of norms with administrative prejudice in the criminal law was raised. Some problematic aspects of sentencing for retail sale of alcoholic products to minors are identified; and issues of establishing the subjective side of the elements. The paper analyzes the opinions of various authors regarding the possibility of improving the norm of article 151.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, taking into account the study of statistical data and materials of judicial practice. The author indicates the need for an integrated approach in the fight against alcohol abuse among young people. The conclusion is presented regarding the validity of the existence of the studied norm in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the current version.

scholarly journals Genesis of establishment and development of the judicial system of the Russian Federation in the late XX – early XXI centuries: institutional and normative characteristics

2021 ◽  
pp. 26-36
Author(s):  
Valentina Mikhailovna Bol'shakova
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The subject of this research is the evolution of the structure of judicial system of the Russian Federation in the late XX – early XXI centuries. Description is given to the changes undergone by the Russian judicial system after dissolution of the Soviet Union. The author follows the dynamics of the normative legal changes that regulate judicial proceedings, as well as reveals the institutional framework of the modern structure of judicial system of the Russian Federation. The article illustrates the institutional and normative changes within the structure of judicial system of the Russian Federation in the late XX – early XXI centuries based on application of the comparative-legal and systemic methods of research. The novelty and the main conclusions lie in the following: it is established that the Russian Federation has issued the normative legal acts that contribute to the strengthening and unification of the Russian judicial system, uniformity of social guarantees and compensations set for judges. Currently, the judicial system of the Russian Federation is founded on the principle of combining administrative-territorial and district organization. It is determined that the judicial system of the Russian Federation consists of 1) the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation; 2) the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation; 3) federal courts of general jurisdiction; 4) arbitration courts; 5) magistrates’ courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. It is noted that since January 1, 2023, the Constitutional (statutory) courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation will be abolished.

scholarly journals The subject of the crime under article 258¹ of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
pp. 186-191
Author(s):  
Farhat Mukhambetov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Wild Animals ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Biological Resources ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Made In

An attempt is made in this work to reveal the content of the subject of the crime under art. 258¹ of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation “Illegal extraction and circulation of especially valuable wild animals and aquatic biological resources belonging to the species included in the Red Book of the Russian Federation and (or) protected by international treaties of the Russian Federation”. The necessity of division of art. 258¹ of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation into two articles, separately providing for liability for illegal production and trafficking of especially valuable wild animals and illegal extraction of especially valuable aquatic biological resources. The differences in the subject of the crime under art. 256 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation, from the subject of the crime under art. 258¹ of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. The necessity of a substantial expansion of the List of especially valuable especially valuable wild animals and aquatic biological resources belonging to the species included in the Red Book of the Russian Federation and (or) protected by international treaties of the Russian Federation for the purposes of articles 2261 and 258¹ of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation due to inclusion in him of all representatives of the Red Book of the Russian Federation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document