scholarly journals Violation of sanitary and epidemiological rules: issues of criminalization and legislative regulation

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (8) ◽  
pp. 110-117
Author(s):  
Yu. S. Norvartyan
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Technical Approach ◽  
Principle Of Justice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Severe Punishment ◽  
Administrative Code

The article discusses some problems of criminalization and lawmaking in the field of countering crimes involving violations of sanitary and epidemiological rules. From the point of view of the legal and technical approach, Part 1 of Article 236 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation contains a construction of a complex composition, which can be called «delinquent-material». In such a composition there is both a mass disease (poisoning of people) and the threat of a mass disease (poisoning of people) they are considered not as acts, but as a socially dangerous consequence. In other words, this kind of criminal-legal construction includes, firstly, the violation of the rules itself and, secondly, socially dangerous consequences in the form of mass illness or poisoning of people or creating a real threat of the onset of these consequences. At the same time, violation of sanitary and epidemiological rules without the occurrence of socially dangerous consequences or the threat of such consequences entails administrative responsibility under Articles 6.3 — 6.7 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.The author notes that an act that creates a real threat to law enforcement facilities provided for in Part 1 of Article 236 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation has a lower degree of public danger compared to such actions (inaction) that inadvertently lead to mass illness or poisoning of people. Equalizing the limits of criminal liability for the commission of the two abovementioned torts is a violation of the principle of justice. In this regard, the author of this article proposes in Part 1 of Article 236 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to establish responsibility for violation of sanitary and epidemiological rules if such violation created a threat of mass illness or poisoning of people. In turn, criminal liability for violation of sanitary and epidemiological rules, which inadvertently caused mass illness or poisoning of people, should be established in Part 2 of Article 236 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for a more severe punishment.

scholarly journals Issues of Regulation and Application of the Criminal Law Norm providing for Responsibility for Occupying the Highest Position in the Criminal Hierarchy (Article 210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (10) ◽  
pp. 159-170
Author(s):  
I. V. Pantyukhina ◽  
L. Yu. Larina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Traditional Understanding

The paper is devoted to a detailed analysis of article 210.1 "Occupation of the highest position in the criminal hierarchy", which was introduced in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation by Federal law No. 46-FZ of 01.04.2019. The authors considered the construction of this norm from the point of view of the elements of the crime and the coordination of these features with the provisions of the General part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. As a result of a systematic study of the norms of the Russian criminal law, comparison with foreign experience (Georgia), and analysis of law enforcement practice, the discrepancy between the new criminal law norm and the provisions of certain institutions of criminal law was revealed. In particular, the content of article 210.1 contradicts certain principles of the criminal law (articles 6, 7 of the Criminal Code), the basis of criminal liability (article 8 of the Criminal Code), the norms of the Institute of preparation for a crime (part 1 of article 30 of the Criminal Code), as well as the goals of criminal punishment (part 2 of article 43 of the Criminal Code). To eliminate the identified shortcomings, the authors propose to include in the disposition of article 210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation an act in the form of using the highest position in the criminal hierarchy. The proposed changes (including an act in the form of "use of the position») make it possible to prosecute persons both permanently and temporarily performing the functions of such persons, to leave outside the scope of its application persons who fully walked away from crime and not in any way affect criminal damage. They will allow you to bring the rule into compliance with the traditional understanding of the offense and those provisions of the General part of the Criminal Code, in which the regulated norms in the current edition are not made consistent.

scholarly journals Criminal liability for illegal banking activities in the context of countering criminal money cashing

2020 ◽  
pp. 140-144
Author(s):  
Dmitry Ovchinnikov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Law Enforcement Officers ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Economic Sector ◽  
The Russian Federation

Currently, the economic sector of public relations is characterized by exceptional criminality. One of the main phenomena responsible for this is illegal money cashing. Almost every business entity considers it acceptable and even necessary to resort to various criminal schemes for obtaining unaccounted cash and tax evasion. The very type of this crime has actually become a thriving and profitable business, which consists in providing services for withdrawing funds from legal circulation. While the existing judicial and investigative practice in the issue of countering this phenomenon has not yet developed a clear answer about the need for appropriate qualifications. There are about a dozen articles of the criminal law in which law enforcement officers try to find the correct legal assessment, and at present, article 172 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation “Illegal banking activities” deserves special attention.

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.

Crime prevention through criminal liability of legal entities: problems of theory and law enforcement practice

2020 ◽  
pp. 216-224
Author(s):  
Mikhail Dvoretskiy
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Foreign Companies ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Entities

We investigate the possibility of introducing criminal liability of legal entities in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. We analyze the provisions of regulatory enactment providing for this substantial reform. We consider initiatives and projects proposed by public authorities to amend and supplement domestic legislation. We examine the positions of reputable ex-perts, famous scientists and high-demand practitioners, who express opposite opinions on the initiated correlations and participating in the discussion. We analyze the provisions of the conventions of international organizations pro-viding for the introduction of criminal liability of legal entities in the legisla-tion of member states, due to involvement in corruption crimes, if bribery of foreign officials and corporate corruption were used. The work discusses the provisions of the bill of 2015 finalized by the Investigative Committee of Russia on the introduction of criminal liability for legal entities for the com-mission of crimes contained in the current thirty eight articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, to which Russian, as well as a number of foreign companies and international organizations represented and separate units. We draw conclusions and make suggestions for further improvement of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation.

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.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR REPEATED DESTRUCTION OR DAMAGE TO PROPERTY

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (72) (2) ◽  
pp. 276-282
Author(s):  
A. P. Nagornyi ◽  
A. N. Popov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Code

This article analyzes the legal provisions providing for criminal and administrative liability for the destruction and damage of another’s property: the contents of Articles 167 and 168 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as those of Article 7.17 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation are examined in detail. The authors concluded that in case the amount of damage caused is less than five thousand rubles, then the criminal offense provided for in Article Art. 167 of the Criminal Code, is not formed, and only administrative liability is possible under Article 7.17 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. Practice shows that one and the same person can repeatedly commit an act for which liability is established under Article 7.17 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation with a maximum penalty of an administrative fine ranging from three hundred to five hundred rubles.

scholarly journals Failure to report a crime (Art. 205.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation): Problems of Interpretation and Law Enforcement

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (4) ◽  
pp. 197-201
Author(s):  
Ludmila Tarasova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Reliable Information ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Source Of Information

The relevance of the problems of interpretation and enforcement of prosecution for failure to report the person (s) preparing, committing and committing the crimes provided for in the disposition of the norm and not prosecuting for failure to report the acts provided for by Article 205.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, provided there is no information about the person (persons) who committed it, contributes to the effectiveness of countering terrorism. Evaluating the generally positive norm of the Criminal Law provided for in Article 205.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is proposed to change the name to “Failure to report a terrorist crime”, which will eliminate discrepancies with the disposition of the norm; information about a committed or committed crime, listed in the disposition of this provision, fixing in the disposition of criminal liability for failure to report grave and especially grave crimes. It is recommended in the comments to the article to clarify the concepts:“reliable information”, “the source of information” and “the method of obtaining such information”.

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.

Issues of Applying of Article 2741 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation «Unlawful Influence on Critical Information Infrastructure of the Russian Federation»

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 97-107
Author(s):  
Ya. О. Kuchina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Information Infrastructure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
Critical Information ◽  
The Russian Federation

A new article was introduced into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in 2017, which establishes criminal liability for unlawful impact on the critical information infrastructure of the Russian Federation. However, there is still no developed legal practice of applying this article, despite repeated statements of experts about the significant prevalence of crimes that encroach on the security of critical information infrastructure. The author of the article discovered one criminal case instituted on the grounds of a crime prohibited by Art. 2741 of the Criminal Code. The proposed article contains an analysis of the legal issues of this article, including the consideration of the specifics of qualification under Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 of Art. 2741 of the Criminal Code. The concept of critical information infrastructure as an object of crime is considered, suggestions are made about the features of qualification of acts that will minimize law enforcement errors.

Expert's Subscription and the Procedure for its Registration when Assigning a Forensic Examination

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 77-82
Author(s):  
V. V. Ustinov ◽  
◽  
P. A. Chetverkin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Inadmissible Evidence ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Forensic Examination ◽  
False Conclusion ◽  
Expert’S Opinion ◽  
The Russian Federation

Currently, due to the principle of adversarial proceedings, almost every expert's opinion is accompanied by its review by a specialist engaged by one or another party to the process. One of the shortcomings reflected in the reviews is a violation of the procedure for subscribing to the expert's warning of criminal liability for giving a deliberately false conclusion under article 307 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. Failure to comply with this very important procedure may result in the recognition of the expert's opinion as inadmissible evidence. In our opinion, the analysis of judicial practice and procedural rules governing this procedure, as well as the proposed recommendations, will help law enforcement entities in assessing the expert's opinion and its admissibility as evidence in the case.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document