scholarly journals Legislator’s error: types, reasons, ways of correction

2019 ◽  
pp. 95-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. I. Rarog
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Political System ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Structural Elements ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Made In

The paper raises the question of the inevitability not only of judicial (in specific criminal cases) errors, but also of law enforcement errors (the practice of incorrect application of the criminal law established spontaneously or at the direction of higher judicial authorities), as well as legislative errors of political, system or technical nature. Considering the specific law-making mistakes made in the norms of the General Part and in each of the structural elements of many of the norms of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the author notes the appreciable work of the legislator to eliminate errors with satisfaction. At the same time, the paper provides specific examples of errors that are repeatedly noted in the special literature, still yet to be corrected, and suggests ways to correct them, in particular, amending the Regulations of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation regarding the procedure for discussing bills.

SYSTEM OF THE GENERAL PART OF THE CRIMINAL CODEOF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2020 ◽  
pp. 62-70
Author(s):  
E. V. Shchelkonogova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Systematic Approach ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Historical Aspect ◽  
Meaningful Relationship ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article examines the General part of the Criminal Code. It is considered from the point of view of a systematic approach, questions are raised about the meaningful relationship between the norms of the General Part and the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The historical aspect of the formation of the current structure of the Code is given, and the question of whether the General and Special parts of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are identical parts or not. The sections of the General Part are analyzed in order to identify their functional load and significance for law enforcement.

scholarly journals SYSTEM OF THE GENERAL PART OF THE CRIMINAL CODEOF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-70
Author(s):  
E. V. Shchelkonogova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Systematic Approach ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Historical Aspect ◽  
Meaningful Relationship ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article examines the General part of the Criminal Code. It is considered from the point of view of a systematic approach, questions are raised about the meaningful relationship between the norms of the General Part and the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The historical aspect of the formation of the current structure of the Code is given, and the question of whether the General and Special parts of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are identical parts or not. The sections of the General Part are analyzed in order to identify their functional load and significance for law enforcement.

scholarly journals The prohibition of driving a vehicle for committing a crime as a means of ensuring transport security

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 216-221
Author(s):  
Lyubov’ Yu. Larina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Vehicle Management

The article deals with the penalty of deprivation of the right to engage in vehicle management activities as a means of ensuring transport security. This penalty is often imposed for crimes committed while driving vehicles. At the same time, judicial practice in relation to various articles of the special part of the criminal code of the Russian Federation develops in different ways. The author analyses sentences and other judicial acts in criminal cases on crimes committed while driving vehicles. Based on the generalisation of theoretical material and judicial practice on the problem under consideration, the author formulated proposals for changing the current legislation and recommendations for law enforcement. The article substantiates the need for mandatory discussion by the court of the possibility of imposing a penalty in the form of deprivation of the right to engage in activities for driving vehicles in all cases of committing a crime while driving.

SYSTEM OF THE GENERAL PART OF THE CRIMINAL CODEOF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2020 ◽  
pp. 62-70
Author(s):  
E. V. Shchelkonogova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Systematic Approach ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Historical Aspect ◽  
Meaningful Relationship ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article examines the General part of the Criminal Code. It is considered from the point of view of a systematic approach, questions are raised about the meaningful relationship between the norms of the General Part and the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The historical aspect of the formation of the current structure of the Code is given, and the question of whether the General and Special parts of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are identical parts or not. The sections of the General Part are analyzed in order to identify their functional load and significance for law enforcement.

scholarly journals Problems of Protecting the Rights of a Private Prosecutor in Defamation Cases

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 651-660
Author(s):  
Natalya Artebyakina ◽  
Tatyana Makarova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Local Governance ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
False Information ◽  
Justices Of The Peace ◽  
The Russian Federation

The growing complexity of public relations creates a need for the criminalization of some acts and de-criminalization of others. Defamation is one of the offenses affected by this trend. Some time after its de-criminalization, the crime of defamation was brought back to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, there is no actual legal mechanism in Russia that victims of defamation could use to fully protect their rights. The authors point out a trend for acquittals in criminal proceedings initiated after the complaints of private prosecutors when they concern deliberately false information that besmirches the honor and dignity of other people and harms their reputation, when these complaints are filed with the governmental, including the law enforcement, authorities. They present their research of court statistical data regarding cases heard by Justices of the Peace under Part 1, Art. 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation between 2014 and the first half of 2018. The authors have analyzed the practices of Justices of the Peace in Ulyanovsk Region on criminal cases initiated under Part 1, Art. 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. They use the examples of specific criminal cases to prove that judges use clauses of Art. 33 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and Art. 6 of the Federal Law «On the Procedure of Handling Applications of Citizens of the Russian Federation» when deciding cases based on Part 1, Art. 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and protect the right of citizens to appeal to the governmental (including law enforcement) authorities; they point out that an appeal to governmental or local governance cannot be viewed as spreading deliberately false information. In this case, private prosecutors have no opportunity to protect their rights even if it is proven that the information is deliberately false, and they also have to bear additional expenses connected with the recovery of procedural costs. Besides, the research includes a comparative legal analysis of legislation on defamation in a number of foreign countries (the USA, China, the UAE and others) as well as the historical-legal analysis of the development of Russian legislation on liability for defamation.

Criminal law. General part

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Dvoryanskov ◽  
Elena Antonyan ◽  
Sergey Borovikov ◽  
Natal'ya Bugera ◽  
Aleksandr Grishko ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Law Enforcement Officers ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal State ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
State Educational ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The textbook is prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, federal laws, international legal acts. The concepts, categories and institutions of the General Part of criminal Law are considered in detail. All changes in the criminal legislation have been taken into account, and the latest scientific, educational and methodological literature on criminal law has been used. The material is presented in an accessible form for effective assimilation of the training course. The publication contains regulatory legal material as of May 1, 2021. Meets the federal state educational standards of higher education of the latest generation in the areas of training 40.03.01 "Jurisprudence", 40.05.01 "Legal support of national security", 40.05.02 "Law enforcement", 40.05.03 "Forensic examination", 40.05.04 "Judicial and prosecutorial activities". For students, cadets, trainees studying in these areas of training, judges, law enforcement officers, as well as for anyone interested in criminal law issues.

Public danger of crimes relapse

2020 ◽  
pp. 111-121
Author(s):  
Sergey Kartashov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Public ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Principle Of Justice ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
First Time

We point out that the danger is not the relapse of the crime, but the identity of the criminal, since the punishment for the person who committed the crime for the first time and the criminal who committed the crime again must be different, otherwise it would be contrary to the provision of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “Principle of justice”, which requires taking into account the degree of committed socially dangerous crime and the identity of the perpetrator. It is reflected that since 2012 there has been a revival of “special relapse” in some corpus delicti (Articles 131, 264.1, etc.). In addition, we clarify that, in a certain sense, relapse can also include corpus delicti with administrative prejudice, but their reflection in the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation contradicts the concept of crime (Article 14 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), but directly on administrative prejudice in the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation domestic legislator did not mention anything. We note that in the current legislation it is necessary to return to the use of the term “relapsed criminal”, since it is precisely the number and categories of crimes that indicate the public danger of the identity of the perpetrator. We also denote that the relapse of crimes does not increase the degree of public danger of a particular crime, but testifies to the public danger of the identity of the perpetrator committing a certain act prohibited by criminal law.

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 QUALIFICATION OF VIOLENCE IN CRIMES AGAINST JUSTICE COMMITTED AGAINST LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS DURING PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDINGS

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (72) (2) ◽  
pp. 197-204
Author(s):  
I. I. Golubov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Violence ◽  
Additional Qualification ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Law Enforcement Officials ◽  
Violent Acts ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Sole Criterion

The article defines the list of norms of Chapter 31 of the Special part of the criminal code of the Russian Federation, which establish responsibility for crimes against justice committed with the use of violence against law enforcement officials during pre-trial proceedings in a criminal case. Considered contained in article 296 and 313 of the criminal code the criminal code, the types of violence dangerous to life or health, and not dangerous to life or health; short brief legal description; the proposed main ways of solving the need for additional qualification of crimes under part 3 and 4 of article 296, part 3 of article 313 of the criminal code in conjunction with the norms of Chapter 16 of the criminal code. It is proved that the qualification of violent acts in the considered group of crimes is subject to the General requirements for the legal assessment of criminal violence, in particular, the rules for comparing the severity of sanctions of a special norm and the norms of Chapter 16 of the criminal code of the Russian Federation. It is also proved that the sole criterion of the severity of sanctions in the classification of the specified group of crimes is not an additional qualification is required and in cases when established in the articles of this Chapter aggravating circumstances not covered by the provisions of the standards, which establishes liability for the offence under the special rule, where violence is a way of committing it.

scholarly journals Genesis of regulation of special forfeiture in Ukraine

2021 ◽  
pp. 18-23
Author(s):  
Vadym SAMOILOV
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Law ◽  
Second Period ◽  
Current Stage ◽  
Made In

Introduction. This paper analyzes the development of norms on the implementation of special forfeiture in Ukraine since its independence. The purpose of the paper is determining the main periods of development of legal regulation of special forfeiture in Ukraine and highlighting the main features of each period. Results. According to the criterion of development of features of structural placement of norms on special forfeiture in the Criminal Code of Ukraine, three main periods of regulation of the specified measure of criminal character are allocated. The main features of the first period of regulation of special forfeiture, which is the regulation of the implementation of the specified measure of criminal nature at the level of norms of the Special Parts of the Criminal Codes of Ukraine of 1960 and 2001, are characterized. The main problems concerning the law enforcement of the rules on special forfeiture, which arose in connection with the legislative approach to special forfeiture at this stage, are described. The peculiarities of the second period of development of regulation of special forfeiture are described, during which the latter was carried out at the level of both the General Part of the Criminal Code and its Special Part. The conflicts between the provisions of the General and Special Parts of the Criminal Code regarding special forfeiture that arose at this stage are described, as well as some inconsistent legislative steps to amend the provisions of the law on criminal liability relating to special forfeiture. The main features of the current stage of legal regulation of special forfeiture are described. The problems of making changes to the legislation related to the adoption of laws that do not take into account the peculiarities of the development of legal regulation of special forfeiture are described. Conclusion. Relevant conclusions have been made, in particular, that special forfeiture, contrary to stereotypical views, is not a fundamentally new (implemented over the last decade) measure of a criminal nature in the criminal law of Ukraine. The stages of development of norms on special forfeiture are singled out. The chronological boundaries of each of the stages are set.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document