scholarly journals Socially Dangerous Consequences in the Norms on Economic Crimes: Problems of Recognition in the Law

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 53-63
Author(s):  
A. N. Kameneva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Extent Of Damage ◽  
Economic Crimes

The paper investigates the normative regulation of socially dangerous consequences of economic crimes set forth in Chapter 22 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. A legislative structure of economic crimes is rather heterogeneous. Some of them are determined as formal (registration of illegal transactions with real estate — Art. 170; illegal organization and conduct of gambling — Art. 171.2, etc.); others are defined as economic (illegal obtaining of credit — Art. 176; abuse of securities issue — 185, etc.); and the third are defined as formal economic (illegal entrepreneurship — Art. 171; restriction of competition — Art. 178 et al.).The paper analyzes the negative aspects of including the criteria characterizing socially dangerous consequences in the norms-notes to Chapter 22 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, determines the significance of criminological peculiarities of economic crimes in determining the extent of damage caused by economic crimes of different types; the influence of the nature and amount of damage established in the law on the exemption from criminal liability for the commission of economic crimes.It is concluded that a law-maker needs a more uniform approach to determining the types and sizes of consequences caused by economic crimes (types should be, as a rule,” economic”, and the size should be the same for all the crimes) and to the placement of quantitative indicators of consequences (in the note to Article 1 where sequences are specified); to achieving compliance with the rules of differentiation of responsibility in the construction of basic and qualified crimes (large and especially large scale of consequences should be indicate only for the latter); to imposing "unfavorable” sanctions from the point of view of the legal consequences of economic crimes, and, on the contrary, to giving a “favorable” character to the exemption from criminal responsibility under Art. 76.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in comparison with the specified sanctions.

scholarly journals The Basis of Criminal Responsibility

Lex Russica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 97-107
Author(s):  
E. V. Blagov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Actual Content ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

Despite the importance for criminal law, the basis of criminal liability remains quite controversial in the criminal law science. At the same time, it has been studied in numerous sources. However, instead of analyzing criminal law, many authors consider it their duty to first share their own ideas about the basis of criminal responsibility, regardless of the actual content of the law.This article is structured differently. It attempts to understand what the norm-maker himself meant when formulating the provisions of art. 8 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The author finds it necessary to identify and analyze the features introduced by him as the basis of criminal responsibility. At the same time, the views on the basis of criminal responsibility existing in the theory of criminal law are critically examined, the failure of both this basis and the wording of art. 8 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is recognized. The author expresses agreement with the logic of the introduction of a two-pronged basis of criminal responsibility provided by legislators. Based on the study the author proposes and justifies a new solution that better meets the urgent needs of the practice of criminal law implementation.

scholarly journals THE IDEAL AGGREGATE OF CRIMES STIPULATED BY ARTICLES 168, 264 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 37-40
Author(s):  
Evgeniy V. Khromov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Road Accidents ◽  
Property Damage ◽  
Legal Assessment ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Ideal

The issue of criminal legal assessment of the consequences of road accidents in the event of property damage is relevant. Disposition of Art. 168 of the Criminal Code provides for criminal liability for the destruction or damage of another’s property on a large scale, including through reckless handling of a source of increased danger. By virtue of h. 1 Article. 1079 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, vehicles are considered sources of increased danger.

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).

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

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.

To the issue of legal liability for informational and mental iatrogenesis and their correlation

2019 ◽  
pp. 165-174
Author(s):  
Nikolai Alekseyevich Ognerubov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Civil Liability ◽  
Legal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Medical Worker ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

We consider various approaches to understanding and classifying such phenomenon as “iatrogenesis”. Taking into account the specifics of the stated theme, we highlight informational and mental manifestations of iatrogenesis, we identify approaches where these types differ, as well as approaches where they are identical. Due to this, we analyze informational and mental iatrogenesis from the juridical science point of view. We define the reasons for the criminal liability of a medical worker for “classical” mental iatrogenesis as highly controversial. At the same time there is a civil liability, namely, the issue of causing moral harm. In the context of the consideration of informational iatrogenesis, we propose to pay attention to the provisions of Article 137 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Article 732 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, as well as the provisions of criminal legislation on offenses to which medical workers may be subject, and the provisions of civil legislation on redress for the non-pecuniary damage as a civil liability. The conducted research led to the conclusion that it is impossible to identify informational and mental iatrogenesis from a legal point of view. We substantiate the necessity of conducting work at the legislative level on a clear classification of iatrogenesis as a basis for further research on its individual differentiations, which have legal significance both in doctrinal and practical terms.

Exemption from Criminal Responsibility by Virtue of Reconciliation with Injured Party in Case of Neonaticide Committed by a Mother

10.12737/7632 ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Денис Гарбатович ◽  
Denis Garbatovich
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Child Victims ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Face ◽  
Newborn Child ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
First Time

The article deals with the grounds on which a person may be relieved of criminal responsibility in connection with reconciliation with the victim. In accordance with Article 76 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation that is based on the simultaneous implementation of the following conditions: 1) for the first time a crime of small or average gravity; 2) reconciliation with the victim; 3) compensation of harm caused to the victim. The face in the presence of the above conditions are not necessarily subject to unconditional exemption from criminal liability, this right depends on the discretion of a law enforcement official. Through an analysis of the norms of criminal law, judicial practice addresses the question whether it is permissible to exempt from criminal responsibility in connection with reconciliation with the victim´s mother, who killed her newborn child. Victims can be considered the closest relatives of the murdered child (father, grandparents)who are also relatives and friends in relation to the mother-killer. Victims may initially not interested in bringing her to justice and appropriate compensation to victims can be represented as some Convention and formality. Mother release from criminal responsibility for the murder of a newborn child in such circumstances, does not comply with the principle of justice, and not adequately solves the problem of the criminal code of the Russian Federation for the protection of the rights and freedoms against crime. Therefore, in the presented work provides General guidance on when such exemption from criminal liability is possible, and when it is not desirable.

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

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.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR GIVING FALSE EXPERT CONCLUSIONS IN THE FIELD OF PURCHASING GOODS, WORKS, SERVICES

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 84-90
Author(s):  
V.E. Zvarygin ◽  
D.S. Nazarova
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Illegal Activities

Illegal activities in the field of procurement of goods, works and services pose a threat not only to economic, but also to national security. The solution to this situation is possible only with an integrated approach, consisting not only in improving the efficiency of the regulatory authorities, but also in optimizing the current legislation. Article 107 of the Federal Law dated 05.04.2013 “On the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, work, services for the provision of state and municipal needs” provides the criminal liability of persons guilty of violating the laws of the Russian Federation and other regulatory legal acts on contract system in the field of procurement. However, until recently, the onset of criminal liability remained only “on paper”. The turning point in the criminal law regulation of relations in the field of public procurement was the year 2018, when federal laws were adopted that introduced amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation by criminalizing illegal acts in this sphere of public relations. One of the controversial articles by the structure of the criminal law elements is Article 200.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which established criminal liability for giving a knowingly false expert opinion in the field of procurement of goods, works and services.

scholarly journals On the Need and Possible Options for Changing the Rules for Determining Forms of Guilt

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 87-102
Author(s):  
D. A. Kokotova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Current Version ◽  
Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Law

The current version of part 2 of article 24 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which appeared because of changes made to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in 1998, is rightly criticized for uncertainty. In the literature, various proposals are made to change the rules for determining the forms of guilt. The existing regulation needs adjusting, since it does not ensure the achievement of the initial goal of improving law enforcement, which was originally intended in part 2 of article 24, and does not comply with the principles of equality and legal certainty. The need to ensure compliance with these principles and achieve the original goal of the rule under consideration requires rejecting proposals to "legalize" the discretion of the law enforcement officer, the possibility of which arose due to the uncertainty of the current version of part 2 of article 24. Due to this uncertainty, compliance with the provisions of the Special part will not solve the existing problems. Unifying negligent crimes into a separate chapter, dividing the crimes in the existing chapters by paragraphs, depending on the form of guilt, is too difficult a way if we are talking about improving the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Clear automatic consolidation of the possibility of both forms of guilt does not provide the required differentiation of punishment.Restoring the original version of part 2 of article 24 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is an acceptable and easiest way, but there is a reason to believe that the rule changed in this way will fail to ensure that the law enforcement officer follows it. The inclusion of a form of guilt clause in the description of each body of a crime might be an effective means of limiting the discretion of the law enforcement officer, but this method is difficult to implement. It combines the features of these two methods of fixing the rule in the form of a list of crimes involving a particular form of guilt, by analogy with how the age at which criminal responsibility begins is now established.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document