On the Criminal Policy Concerning Juvenile Crime in Modern Russia

The attitude of the state towards underage criminals has considerably changed in the last decade, which is evident from the adoption of new normative legal acts determining the direction of state criminal policy concerning children. Thus, the Decree of the President of Russia declared 2018-2027 to be the Decade of Childhood, whose scope includes a comprehensive program of preventing underage crimes, the use of restorative techniques and methods of preventive work with children and their parents, etc. Sentencing practices and exemption from punishment have also been revised. The courts have started to apply criminal law measures more widely, to terminate criminal cases, exempt minors from criminal liability and punishment, and to use reconciliation programs. This lead to the reduction of both the number of young offenders institutions and the number of their inmates. At the same time, there is a trend for a harsher response of the state to some crimes of minors, which shows that the trend for the humanization of criminal policy concerning them is unstable. Widening the list of Articles included in Art. 20 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, for which the age of responsibility is 14, development of draft laws providing for the reduction of the age of criminal responsibility to 12 years for very grave crimes by the State Dumas Committee for the Development of Civil Society, and others, testify to the inconsistency of lawmaking work and the absence of adequate understanding of the essence of juvenile crime. The authors show that it is necessary to widen the application of double prevention norms: it is suggested that in each case of juvenile crime it is reasonable to raise the question of prosecuting parents for non-fulfillment or undue fulfillment of child-rearing obligations when there are grounds for such prosecution (Art. 156 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). It is also recommended to widen the application of norms of liability for involving minors in crimes and other anti-social actions.

Download Full-text

Exemption from Criminal Responsibility in Cases over Crimes in the Field of Economic Activity

Journal of Russian Law ◽

10.12737/7254 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 3 (1) ◽

pp. 0-0

Author(s):

Оксана Макарова ◽

Oksana Makarova

Keyword(s):

Russian Federation ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Economic Activity ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Liability ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Economic Security ◽

The State ◽

Constitutional Principle ◽

The Russian Federation

In recent years in our country the steady tendency to increase of authority of the state in the sphere of business and strengthening of economic security is observed. The state finds new opportunities of effective counteraction of crime in the economic sphere, including by means of liberalization and a humanization of the criminal legislation. Among the main acts aimed at the improvement of criminal law, can be called the Federal law of December 7, 2011 No. 420-FZ “On Amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation” which provides the special basis of release from criminal liability for commission of crimes in the sphere of economic activity. The specified basis is fixed in the new Article 761 “Exemption from criminal liability in cases of crimes in the sphere of economic activity” of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In the explanatory note to this document it is noted that “such addition of the criminal law is caused by the necessity of its further humanization and counteraction to abuses in the field of investigation of economic crimes”. In the article mentioned Article 761 thoroughly analyzed in conformity with the requirements of the legal techniques and modern economic realities. The special attention is paid to the conditions of release from criminal responsibility provided for in second part of Article 761, given their critical assessment. It seems to the author that the legislator, providing special possibility of the exemption from criminal liability in cases of crimes in the sphere of economic activity had departed from the constitutional principle of equality of citizens before the law and court, having allowed thereby an inequality between the persons who have committed a crime.

Download Full-text

Trends of the Development of Criminal Law at the Modern Stage

Journal of Russian Law ◽

10.12737/21994 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Social Conditionality of Criminal Liability for a Crime Under Art. 226-1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

Siberian Law Review ◽

10.19073/2658-7602-2020-17-3-356-366 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 17 (3) ◽

pp. 356-366

Author(s):

Elena Kalashnikova

Keyword(s):

Russian Federation ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Criminal Behavior ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Liability ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Economic Security ◽

The State ◽

The Public ◽

The Russian Federation

The article is devoted to theoretical justification for the introduction of criminal prohibitions on criminal assault in the illicit movement of goods, specified in article 226-1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; the principles and bases of criminalization of smuggling in connection with her increased public danger. The analysis of the main components of social conditionality of criminal responsibility allows us to establish the validity of the introduction of new or existing criminal law norms. The article considers the public danger of smuggling (art. 226-1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), as an obligatory sign of a crime, revealing its social nature and social conditionality of the criminal liability under article 226-1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, depending on the extent and nature of public danger of the given kind of crimes. The social assessment of an act as a crime is based on its social danger, which is legally established in a normative legal act (Federal law) adopted in accordance with the established procedure and included in the criminal code of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the fact that the public danger of smuggling is a threat to the foreign economic security of Russia. At the same time, there is a public danger of illegal movement across the customs border of the EEU (the customs border of the Customs Union within the framework of the EEU) of items specified in art. 226-1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is primarily concerned with causing harm to market economic relations developing in the EEU area, which forms a single customs territory, as well as causing material damage to the state in the form of unpaid customs payments, death or damage to particularly valuable wild animals and aquatic biological resources as contraband items. Smuggling as a negative social phenomenon includes the organization of activities related to violation of the customs and border regime. In the context of globalization and the development of market relations, smuggling is still the most common and most dangerous of customs crimes. Accordingly, the existence of a criminal law ban on its Commission remains socially conditioned, since it is a deterrent that allows the state to respond adequately to these types of criminal behavior.

Download Full-text

Problems of the Criminal Prosecution of Persons Who Committed Actions Constitution Implication in a Crime

Всероссийский криминологический журнал ◽

10.17150/2500-4255.2021.15(3).352-360 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 15 (3) ◽

pp. 352-360

Author(s):

Larisa Gotchina ◽

Marina Dvorzhitskaya

Keyword(s):

Russian Federation ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Liability ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Criminal Prosecution ◽

Criminal Cases ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Judicial Investigation ◽

Minimum Age ◽

The Russian Federation

The paper discusses highly latent actions constituting implication in a crime. The goal of this study is to identify the problems of criminally prosecuting persons who committed actions constituting implication in a crime, to qualify them and to develop recommendations for their elimination. Formal legal and comparative legal methods were used to obtain and process results relevant for the research, the statistical method was used to collect and analyze data on the examined crimes, and the sociological one — to conduct a survey of experts. An analysis of criminal cases made it possible to state that the problem of criminally prosecuting persons who committed actions constituting implication in a crime is connected with the problems of their qualification, and with widening the institute of implication through failure to report a crime; this action is included in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the topical issues of terrorism threat, a growing number of terrorist crimes and the necessity to protect the society from them. The authors believe that it is reasonable to recognize 16 years old as the minimum age of criminal responsibility for failure to report a crime. It is proven that the criminal character of implication in a crime could be based not only on the guilty verdict for the main case, but also on other procedural acts. It is concluded that implication in a socially dangerous act is possible for a person who does not possess the attribute of a subject of a crime due to his/her mental incompetence, and is also possible for a crime committed in complicity. It is stated that concealment of a crime is constituted by actions to conceal the event of the main crime, its traces, the objects obtained through criminal means, or the person who committed the main crime. It can be committed not only through physical, but also through intellectual actions. The authors suggest differentiating between criminal liability for the concealment of grave and especially grave crimes. The analysis of judicial investigation practice made it possible to identify typical models of qualifying actions constituting implication in a crime, as well as psychological, moral, criminological and criminal law features of a person who conceals a crime or fails to report it. Based on the authors’ position, a formulation of the decree of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation «On some issues of implication in a crime» is suggested.

Download Full-text

Criminal Responsibility for Collusions at Auctions

Actual Problems of Russian Law ◽

10.17803/1994-1471.2019.98.1.119-131 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 119-131

Author(s):

A. V. Danilovskaya ◽

A. P. Tenishev

Keyword(s):

Russian Federation ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Public Procurement ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Commodity Markets ◽

The State ◽

Economic Activities ◽

Negative Effect ◽

The Russian Federation ◽

Administrative Code

The anti-monopoly practice concerning agreements prohibited by the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition” traditionally defines the so-called collusions at tenders. Depriving the state of the opportunity to save budget funds, collusions at auctions do not only violate the procedure established by the law, but, by limiting competition, adversely affects the country’s economy.For collusion at an auction, both administrative (Article 14.32 “Conclusion of an agreement restricting competition, the implementation of concerted actions restricting competition, coordination of economic activities” of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation) and criminal responsibility (Article 178 “Restriction of competition”, as well as Articles 159, 285, 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) is set.However, the current version of Article 178 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which is supposed to be the main one in the fight against anti-competitive agreements, has significant drawbacks that make the fight against these dangerous anti-competitive agreements ineffective. The damage from the activities of all cartels (in the commodity markets, during the procurements by state-owned companies and the state, during the bidding for the alienation of state property) is estimated at 1.5-2% of GDP.Meanwhile, when carrying out public procurement and procurement of companies with state participation consume up to 30 trillion rubles a year. If the bidding is held under collusion, the reduction in the initial (maximum) contract price hardly reaches 1%; if the bidding is held in a competitive environment, the price decline reaches 20-30%. Perhaps not so obvious, but this does not mean that the collusion at auctions has a negative effect on competition. Companies compete neither in price nor in quality. Access to the state order, and therefore, an undoubted competitive advantage in the commodity markets, is obtained not by those companies that are better and more efficient, but by those that have been able to come to an agreement. Only in 2016, due to the low level of competition in trading, the budgets of all levels lost more than 180 billion rubles. Moreover, the Federal AntiMonopoly Service (FAS) considers this number underestimated — the application of the methodology adopted in OECD countries brings the figure of damage up to 1 trillion rubles per year.The current situation requires an appropriate response, in particular, introducing changes into the legislation of the Russian Federation that reflect the substantially increased public danger of anti-competitive agreements and will also contribute to the development of the practice of countering them.

Download Full-text

Some issues of criminal liability of citizens of the Russian Federation for participation in illegal armed formations on the territory of a foreign state

Russian justice ◽

10.18572/0131-6761-2021-1-18-20 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 1 ◽

pp. 18-20

Author(s):

Bagautdinov F.N. ◽

◽

Sharifullin R.A. ◽

Keyword(s):

Russian Federation ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Liability ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Foreign State ◽

The Russian Federation

The article deals with some issues of bringing citizens of the Russian Federation to criminal responsibility for participation in illegal armed formations on the territory of a foreign state (part 2 of article 208 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation).

Download Full-text

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

Penitentiary science ◽

10.46741/2686-9764-2020-14-3-324-330 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Criminal policy of Russia during a pandemic

SHS Web of Conferences ◽

10.1051/shsconf/202110802017 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 108 ◽

pp. 02017

Author(s):

Aleksandr Viktorovich Pobedkin ◽

Andrey Petrovich Fil’chenko ◽

Tatyana Valentinovna Pinkevich ◽

Natalia Eduardovna Martynenko ◽

Vladimir Yurievich Zhandrov

Keyword(s):

Information And Communication Technologies ◽

Russian Federation ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Criminal Liability ◽

Criminal Policy ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Main Research ◽

Legal Response ◽

The Russian Federation ◽

Political Decisions

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.

Download Full-text

Influence of the ideas of Ivan Yakovlevich Foynitsky on the formation of criminal responsibility for kidnapping in modern Russia

OOO Zhurnal Voprosy Istorii ◽

10.31166/voprosyistorii202012statyi68 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2020 (12-3) ◽

pp. 230-234

Author(s):

Natalia Martynenko ◽

Anatoly Maydykov

Keyword(s):

Russian Federation ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Liability ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Modern Concept ◽

Russian Scientist ◽

Special Part ◽

The Russian Federation

The article analyzes the ideas of the Russian scientist in the field of criminal law Ivan Yakovlevich Foinitsky (1847-1913) on the establishment of criminal liability for kidnapping. The influence of I.Y. Foinitsky's ideas on the modern concept of criminal law protection of a person from abduction is shown. It is concluded that the norm on responsibility for the abduction of a person existing in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, its location in the structure of the norms of the Special Part, in many respects includes the provisions laid down by I.Y Foinitsky.

Download Full-text

PROPERTY-RESTORATION LINE IN DEPENALIZATION CRIMINAL POLICYOF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Russian Family Doctor ◽

10.17816/rfd10706 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 17-22

Author(s):

T. R. Sabitov

Keyword(s):

Russian Federation ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Personal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Liability ◽

Criminal Policy ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Monetary Compensation ◽

The Russian Federation ◽

Compensation For Damage

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.

Download Full-text