LEGAL CONTENT OF CATEGORY“PREPARATION FOR PERFORMANCE OF AN INTENTIONAL CRIME”

2020 ◽  
pp. 39-45
Author(s):  
V. F. Lapshin ◽  
E. H. Nadiseva
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Principle Of Legality

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.

LEGAL CONTENT OF CATEGORY“PREPARATION FOR PERFORMANCE OF AN INTENTIONAL CRIME”

2020 ◽  
pp. 39-45
Author(s):  
V. F. Lapshin ◽  
E. H. Nadiseva
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Principle Of Legality

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.

scholarly journals LEGAL CONTENT OF CATEGORY“PREPARATION FOR PERFORMANCE OF AN INTENTIONAL CRIME”

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-45
Author(s):  
V. F. Lapshin ◽  
E. H. Nadiseva
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Principle Of Legality

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.

ON THE FORMAL ASPECT OF REGULATION OF THE CRIMINAL LEGAL IMPACT IN RESPECT OF MILITARY PERSONNEL IN THE RF CRIMINAL CODE

2021 ◽  
pp. 5-11
Author(s):  
R. V. Zakomoldin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Military Personnel ◽  
Military Service ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation

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.

scholarly journals Criminal responsibility for public appeals to committing crimes against national safety in foreign legislation

2021 ◽  
pp. 403-410
Author(s):  
Vladyslav Kubalskyi
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Foreign Experience ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation

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».

scholarly journals CORPORATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN INDONESIA ON THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMPARISON

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-154
Author(s):  
Muchammad Chasani
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Corporate Criminal Liability ◽  
Responsibility System

The regulation of corporate criminal liability in Indonesia's criminal justice system is basically a new and still debatable issue. It is said that because in the Criminal Code is not recognized and regulated explicitly about the corporation as a subject of criminal law. This is a natural thing since the WvS Criminal Code still adheres to the principle of "societas delinquere non potest" or "non-potest university delinquere", that is, a legal entity can not commit a crime. Thus, if in a society there is a criminal offense, then the criminal act is deemed to be done by the board of the corporation concerned. Regarding the corporate criminal responsibility system in Indonesia, in the corruption law Article 20 paragraph (1), if the corporation committed a criminal act of corruption, then those responsible for the criminal act shall be the corporation only, the management only, or the corporation and its management. Thus, it can be said that the regulation of corporate criminal liability in the legal system in Indonesia is expressly only regulated in special criminal legislation, because the Criminal Code of WvS still adheres to the principle of "societas delinquere nonpotest" so it is not possible to enforce corporate criminal liability in it.

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

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-123
Author(s):  
Dongmei Pan
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Modern China ◽  
Economic Damage ◽  
Public Healthcare ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation

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.

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.

Criminal law of the Russian Federation. Special part

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lyudmila Inogamova-Hegay ◽  
Elena Antonova ◽  
Tat'yana Klenova ◽  
Ivan Klepickiy ◽  
Aleksandr Korobeev
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Educational Standards ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
State Educational

The textbook is prepared by leading scientists, professors, doctors of legal Sciences on the basis of international documents, the Constitution, Criminal code, other Federal legislation, scientific literature, judicial practice in recent years. Meets the requirements of the Federal state educational standards of higher education of the latest generation. For students of higher education institutions.

scholarly journals About Some Problems of Criminal liability Regulation for Terror Crimes

2018 ◽  
pp. 21-24
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Responsibility ◽  
Practice Improvement ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Individual Article ◽  
Financing Of Terrorism ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article is devoted to the problem of criminal legal responsibility regulation for terror crimes. The authors analyze the legislative design of such crime compositions, provided by Ch. 24 of the current RF Criminal Code, first of all, the novels included in the Criminal Law in 2013 - 2017, the sanctions on criminal law norms, as well as the effectiveness of their implementation in practice. Critical remarks are made and proposals are introduced aimed at criminal legislation, as well as law enforcement practice improvement. The authors raise the problems of punishment imposition for committed crimes, in particular, criticize the legislator’s position on the imposition of less stringent sanctions for more dangerous forms of assistance to terrorists, and on the imposition of stricter sanctions for less dangerous forms of assistance to terrorism. Judicial practice is analyzed with the purpose to reveal the effectiveness of individual article provision application from RF Criminal Code. They performed the comparison of the criminal law revisions, and they analyzed the introduced changes. The authors make specific proposals to amend certain provisions of the criminal law, in particular, on the criminalization of responsibility for the financing of terrorism as an independent crime.

scholarly journals Consequences of failure to pay a court fine

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 639-650
Author(s):  
Nina Yu. Skripchenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legislative Regulation

The article discusses issues that arose during enforcement of the new grounds for exemption from criminal responsibility, enshrined in 2016, in connection with a court fine (Article 76.2 of the Criminal Code). Despite the criticism of its legislative regulation, demand for a new way of ceasing criminal prosecution began to appear in connection with the non-payment of a fine. Having determined the voluntary execution of a court fine, the legislator did not settle the issue of the further execution of the fine in cases where there are valid reasons for non-payment. After analyzing the existing proposals to solve this problem, the author confirms that the elimination of the gap would be facilitated by the legislative obligation of the bailiff to establish the circumstances by which the judicial penalty is not paid, as well as the addition of the list of decisions made by the bailiff to suspend enforcement proceeding. Analysis of judicial practice showed that Art. 76.2 of the Criminal Code began to be applied in cases where the court has justification for implementing less onerous grounds for the defendant to be exempt from criminal liability. Legislative duplication of the conditions under which criminal prosecution can be terminated for various reasons calls into question the wide alternative of the latter, as well as the embodiment of the idea of humanizing criminal law, which is the basis for securing a new ground for exemption from criminal liability. The article substantiates the proposal to supplement the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court dated June 27, 2013 with a provision allowing the release of a person from criminal responsibility with a judicial fine in cases where the court has no basis for suspending criminal prosecution for unconditional types of exemption from criminal liability. The author draws attention to the gap in the legislation, part 3 of Article 78 of the Criminal Code, which is related to the renewal of the statute of limitations for criminal liability when an individual avoids paying a court fine.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document