scholarly journals New Trends in the Development of Criminal Law in Modern China: a Review of Changes in Chinese Criminal Legislation

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.

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.


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».


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.


Author(s):  
Irina Kravchenko

The goal of the article is to define modern trends in criminal law policy in the Russian Federation. More thorough research should be carried out in connection with lively scientific discussions on defining the essence of criminal policy and the lack of a universal understanding of the contents and key trends of developing criminal law policy. The author researched two components of criminal law policy which are currently trending in the research community — humanism and liberalization. The author’s own understanding of these characteristics is presented in the article. The author also studied the clauses of the Concept of criminal law policy of the Russian Federation from the standpoint of their correspondence to humanistic and liberal ideas and carried out an analysis of changes in Russian criminal legislation with the aim of identifying modern trends in criminal law policy. The study is carried out for the period of the latest full five years (2016–2020). It is stated that the number of laws aimed at amending the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and the number of actually introduced amendments are diverse values. Most changes are aimed at amending the Special Part of criminal law and are connected with criminalization. There is a trend for strengthening the protection of economic interests and public security, which has a rather weak correlation with the widely recognized priority for the protection of the individual, civil rights and freedoms. In general, the analyzed period is characterized by tightening of criminal law policy. The key features of criminal law amendments are their inconsistency, lack of a system or a unified direction. The author concludes that, contrary to the expectations of the public, the humanism and liberalization are manifested very moderately at the current stage of criminal policy’s development, they do not constitute its defining characteristics and challenge its progressive character. One of the promising ways of solving the identified problems is increasing and strengthening the role of criminological research in the development of criminal law policy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 20-30
Author(s):  
Zulkarnain Zulkarnain ◽  
I Nyoman Nurjaya ◽  
Bambang Sugiri ◽  
Ismail Navianto

Corporate crime is a unique crime against which excellent deterrence should be combated. However, these efforts are inversely proportional to the criminal law policies that serve as the basis for their implementation. The KUHP, the key pillar of the statute, merely acknowledges natural persons as subjects of criminal law. And they do not regard companies as criminal law topics. Crime laws must also be renewed. On this basis, a criminal policy will be discussed in Indonesia about the criminal liability scheme. The results of studies indicate that criminalization of all types of corporate crime was regarded as a crime according to positive criminal law in Indonesia. The relationship between one and the other criminal code differs however. The Criminal Code notes that the crime modes sometimes perpetrated by the companies were considered a criminal offense but should be performed by a normal individual. In other words, it may be claimed that companies have not been considered subjects of criminal law by the Criminal Code. However, in some criminal law laws out of the Criminal Code, companies have been treated as targets of criminal legislation and should be responsible for their acts. In Indonesia, the criminal liability scheme introduced by the Positive Legislation seeks to identify and delegate hypotheses where the errors and the source of authorities they have are assessed. The requirements in one criminal law and the other, however, are comprehensively different. For instance, a criminal must not be the manager, but someone who does anything in or for the sake of a company and the act is carried out within the framework of a corporation. It is not, however, expressly specified by the draft Law on the Criminal Code that the criminal is convicted so as to understand that the criminal is not liable for the crime he commits because criminal liabilities were transferred to the company. The draft Criminal Code Act (RKUHP) has accommodated companies as subjects of criminal law and arranged procedures for criminal liability. It can be seen from the principle of the renewal of criminal law that future criminal law would regard business offences as criminal actions and that penal penalties will be imposed on the company. The established provisions clearly show that the model and philosophy embraced are the doctrines of vicarious responsibility, even though there are shortcomings in the model.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
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.


Author(s):  
V.I. Tikhonov

The Institute of mitigating and aggravating circumstances is presented not only in the norms of the General part of the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. The application of these circumstances in the construction of individual elements of a crime allows the legislator to differentiate the orientation of the criminal law influence in relation to a specific crime element or in qualifying the fact of life reality. In law enforcement practice, proving the subjective side of a crime often causes significant problems. At the same time, motivation and achievement of a specific goal of committing a crime can have both a mitigating and an aggravating effect. The subjective side has a significant impact not only on the design of the offenses of the Special Part of the Criminal Law, but also on the process of sentencing through legal regulation of circumstances mitigating or aggravating criminal punishment. In this regard, both general and mandatory features of the subject of the crime also affect the procedure for establishing guilt and determining punishment in accordance with the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Of scientific interest is the study of the influence of the process of legal regulation of mitigating and aggravating circumstances in terms of the impact on this process of subjective signs of criminal behavior.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-153
Author(s):  
E. L. Sidorenko

The subject of the research is the specifics of the criminal law protection of reproductive health in the Russian legislation. The topic was chosen due to the increasing dynamics of crimes related to limitation on the reproductive rights of women and men and unauthorized manipulation of the human genome. Despite the growing need for providing a regulatory framework for this kind of relationships, the system of their criminal law protection is only beginning to take shape, therefore, a necessity arises to revise traditional approaches to the protection of the individual. Therefore, the purpose of the paper was to understand the system of criminal law protection of reproductive health in terms of its compliance with trends of medical practices and dynamics of socially significant diseases based on both traditional principles of scientific analysis and the results of applying sociological methods of data processing, which made it possible to identify the most significant directions of the Russian criminal policy development. Moreover, the critical analysis method was used in the research that showed the inconsistency of the system of criminal law prevention of criminal abortions, contamination with socially significant diseases and illegal use of the human genome. Based on the research findings, an author’s model of criminal prevention of attacks on reproductive health has been built and its systemic assessment is given. It is concluded that the legislator is inconsistent in assessing the attributes of an unlawful abortion; the accounting of contamination with certain socially significant diseases is inadequate; the laws prohibiting the use of the human genome need to be included into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The conclusions formulated in the paper have practical importance and can be taken into account by the legislator in the reform of the current criminal legislation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document