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

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.

Resolution No. 48 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 26, 2019, “On the Practice of the Courts’ Application of Legislation on Liability for Tax Crimes”: An Analysis of the Main Novels

2021 ◽  
pp. 18-24
Author(s):  
Igor O. Tkachev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Current Version ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article provides a critical analysis of a number of provisions of the Resolution No. 48 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 26, 2019, “On the practice of the courts’ application of legislation on liability for tax crimes”. The author notes that the current version of the decree allows considering tax evasion as a formal crime. Thus, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation laid down the preconditions for classifying tax evasion as a continuing crime, which would significantly reduce the number of criminal cases terminated due to the expiration of the statute of limitations for criminal liability. The author also draws attention to the refusal of the Supreme Court to define the category “concealment of funds or other property” for the purposes of applying Art. 199.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It is noted that such a refusal may lead to a broader interpretation by the courts of this criminal law norm.

Legal and Actual Characteristics of the Institute Exemption from Criminal Liability

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 83-92
Author(s):  
V. K. Andrianov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Theory Of Law ◽  
First Time

Analysis of judicial practice shows that the greatest difficulties and errors in the courts and the prosecutors and investigators in the application of exemption from criminal liability, related to the issues of legal facts. It is no coincidence that most of the content of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 27 June 2013 No. 19 is devoted to clarifying questions about legal facts provided for by the norms of Chapter 11 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The purpose of this article is the legal and factual analysis of the release of the institute of criminal responsibility, which is in the general theory of law recognized by specific methodological direction in the explanation of legal phenomena In the article we developed a number of questions of legal conditions and facts with which the criminal law links the exemption from criminal liability: on the concept of the person who committed the crime for the first time; on exemption from criminal liability in the event of the commission of an unfinished crime and a crime of complicity; on the types of legal facts serving as the basis for such consequences; the amount of positive post-criminal behavior required for release; competition between the grounds for exemption from criminal liability; on the role of other social circumstances, when making the appropriate decision, etc.

scholarly journals On the Criminal Policy Concerning Juvenile Crime in Modern Russia

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 687-698
Author(s):  
Salman Dikaev ◽  
Milana Dikaeva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The State ◽  
Juvenile Crime ◽  
Child Rearing ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Russian Federation

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.

scholarly journals Novels of the Criminal Code on responsibility for abusesin public procurement: background and problems of qualification

2018 ◽  
pp. 34-43
Author(s):  
A. Ya. Asnis
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Service Contract ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Contract Managers

The article deals with the criminological grounds and background of the adoption of the Federal law of April 23, 2018 № 99-FZ, which introduced criminal liability for abuse in the procurement of goods, works and services for state or municipal needs (Art. 2004 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and for bribery of employees of contract service, contract managers, members of the Commission on the implementation of the procurement of persons engaged in the acceptance of the delivered goods, performed works or rendered services, other authorized persons, representing interests of customer in the scope of the relevant procurement (Art. 2005 of the Criminal Code).The author formulates private rules of qualification of the corresponding crimes and differentiation of their structures from structures of adjacent crimes and administrative offenses. The necessity of changing the position of the legislator regarding generic and direct objects of these crimes, the adoption of a special resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to explain the practice of applying the relevant innovations.

scholarly journals On the Issues of the Application of Part 6 of Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 79-84
Author(s):  
N. N. Korotkikh
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyzes some of the controversial, in the opinion of the author, recommendations of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 10 of 15.05.2018 «On the practice of the courts applying the provisions of paragraph 6 Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation». Lowering the category of crime always requires clear criteria by which the actions of the defendant could be qualified with a change in the gravity of the crime. Based on examples from judicial practice, the thesis is substantiated that “taking into account the factual circumstances of the case” and “the degree of its public danger” are evaluative e criteria and do not always allow to decide the validity of the application of part 6 article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The discrepancy between some of the recommendations contained in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is shown. It is concluded that it is impossible to exempt a person from criminal liability on the grounds specified in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

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

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).

scholarly journals Criminal Liability for Knowingly Unlawful Sentence, Decision or Other Judicial Act

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 93-102
Author(s):  
Pavel Metelsky ◽  
Nadezhda Verchenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
The Public ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Considerable Complexity

Introduction. The publication is devoted to the corpus delicti, provided for by Art. 305 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which, being, in fact, a special type of official abuse, stands out as the direct object of a criminal assault and a special subject, since it can be committed exclusively by professional judges. The main features of the objective and subjective parties, qualifying signs of the offense are revealed, some problems that arise when applying this criminal law are outlined. Purpose. The goal is to analyze the design features of the crime and issues that arise when applying this rule. Methodology. The method of a formal legal analysis of the norms of the criminal law and theoretical provisions on problems directly related to the application of this rule was used. Results. The public danger of a criminal act that undermines the very foundations of justice is obvious, in connection with which it stands out as an independent crime by all the Russian Criminal Codes, starting in 1922, the history of criminal responsibility for its commission can be traced in our country in general since the 16th century. The current criminal law prohibition is characterized by considerable complexity, due to both the blanket nature of the disposition of the norm itself and the presence of discrepancies in the understanding of the signs embodied in it. Conclusion. The implementation of criminal liability for this crime involves the establishment of not only circumstances directly related to the corpus delicti that lie in the criminal law field. The subject of an infringement, a judicial act, must be subjected to procedural review without fail, after which, subject to the consent of the Higher Qualification Collegium of Judges of the Russian Federation, in fact, and the mechanism of criminal prosecution is “launched”. That is, a truly “multi-way” combination of actions is necessary, carried out in several stages, and the problem itself to some extent becomes interdisciplinary, going beyond only criminal law.

scholarly journals Problems of proving guilt in criminal cases in connection with tax evasion

2019 ◽  
pp. 170-176
Author(s):  
V. V. Dubrovin
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The establishment of an intentional form of guilt and its specific type is mandatory for the implementation of the provisions of Art. 8 of the Criminal Code. In criminal proceedings in connection with tax evasion, a direct intent should be established in the act of the accused, otherwise the provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 28, 2006 No. 64 “On the practice of criminal law on liability for tax offenses”. One of the proofs of direct intent in the act of the accused may be the decision of the tax authority to prosecute for the tax offense, made according to the results of tax control measures (in-house or on-site tax audits). In the event that it establishes an imprudent form of the taxpayer’s guilt in committing a tax offense, in proving the guilt of the accused in the course of criminal proceedings there may be an intractable contradiction.

scholarly journals Criminal Misconduct: An Objective Need or a Declared Necessity?

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 142-154
Author(s):  
N. Yu. Skripchenko ◽  
S. V. Anoshchenkova
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The actively defended idea of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the inclusion of an offencse  of criminal misconduct in the criminal legislation was reflected in the revised draft federal law submitted to the  Parliament on October 13, 2020. The purpose of the study is to determine the key changes in the content of the  institutions of criminal misconduct and other measures of a criminal law nature proposed for consolidation in the  Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, to assess the objective need of the reforms initiated by the Supreme  Court of the Russian Federation. The methodological basis is a set of methods of scientific knowledge. General  scientific (analysis and synthesis, dialectics) and specific scientific research methods (system structural, formal legal)  were used. A comparative analysis of draft laws allows us to classify the substantive content of acts constituting a  criminal misconduct as key changes and the modification of other measures of a criminal legal nature. The authors  critically assess the idea underlying the classification of acts as criminal misconduct. By laying in the criteria for  the isolation of acts that are minimal in terms of the degree of danger, not legally significant elements of corpus  delicti, but the types and amount of punishments, the lack of criminal experience, the interests of the business  community, the developers of the draft law violate the system of law, since the proposed approach excludes the  assessment of the public danger of the act based on the significance of the protected by the criminal the law of  public relations. The meaning of the differentiation of criminal liability declared by the initiator of the reforms is  lost with the proposed duplication of other measures applied both to persons who have committed a criminal  misconduct and to those guilty of committing crimes of small or medium gravity, and the proposed conditional  nature of other measures levels the idea of liberalizing the criminal law. The paper focuses on the provisions of  the project that require revision and additional comprehension.

scholarly journals Problems of Applying Special Grounds for Exemption from Criminal Liability for Kidnapping

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatiana Bersh ◽  
Anna Khristyuk
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Practical Interest ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Mere Presence ◽  
The Russian Federation

Despite the positive attitude towards the presence of compromise norms in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, containing the possibility of exemption from criminal liability for a committed crime, their mere presence seems insufficient. It is important to introduce a mechanism for the functioning of the norms, which will describe in detail all the stages necessary for their application. The article discusses controversial issues of insufficient legislative regulation of exemption from criminal liability on the basis of the application of a note to Art. 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The opinions of scientists concerning the application of special grounds for exemption from criminal liability for kidnapping are generalized, the position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation regarding the understanding of the term “voluntary release of the kidnapped” is considered. A number of controversial issues that have not been taken into account by the legislator, which require mandatory regulation, are cited. The article examines the existing judicial practice of applying the note to Art. 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. A lack of uniformity in the law enforcement activities of the judiciary was revealed. Supplements are proposed to the new resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 24, 2019 No. 58 to increase the effectiveness of the application of the considered grounds for exemption from criminal liability. As a result, a proposal was put forward that is aimed at improving the note to Art. 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The issues raised in the article are of scientific and practical interest.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document