scholarly journals Technique of war crimes regulation in the 1960 Criminal Code of the RSFSR

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 574-581
Author(s):  
Yulia O. Goncharova
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article analyses the technique of regulating war crimes in the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1960. The author notes the need for a retrospective analysis of the legislative technique of war crimes in order to consider this type of crime most holistically. Despite the existence of discussions in the theory of criminal law about the concept of legislative technique and the elements included in it, the author interprets legislative technique as a set of means and techniques used to give the content of legislative norms an appropriate form. This article also notes the need to distinguish the category of «war crimes» in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation, as this term is widespread in international criminal law. The author attributes the following provisions of the Criminal Code to war crimes: Article 356 («Application of prohibited means and methods of warfare»), Article 357 («Genocide») and Article 359 («Menary»). The author conducts a comparative analysis of the legislative technique of the norms on criminal liability for war crimes of the current criminal legislation and criminal legislation of the Soviet period. From the analysis, some features of the technique of regulating war crimes of the Soviet period are revealed, namely: a) most of the elements of war crimes were designed using the casual reception of legislative equipment; b) the Soviet legislator used a direct way of presenting the norms without applying references; c) the note was used to build some formulations of war crimes, but did not This paper also examines a number of imperfections in the technique of regulating war crimes in the 1960 Criminal Code.

The “Kouwenhoven” Case

2019 ◽  
Vol 181 ◽  
pp. 568-704
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Activity ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Arms Embargo ◽  
Witness Statements

Economics, trade and finance — Economic sanctions — Liberia — UN Security Council Resolutions 1343 (2001) and 1408 (2002) — Implementation of arms embargo under Dutch law — Whether sanctions regime violatedInternational criminal law — Difference between perpetrator and accomplice liability — Complicity in war crimes — Requirement that defendant promoted or facilitated the commission of war crimes — Conditional intent — Whether defendant consciously accepted the probability that war crimes would be committed in connection with his material support — Risk of doing business with a government engaged in international criminal activityInternational criminal law — Evidence — Admissibility and weight of witness statements — Factors relevant to assessing witness statements obtained in post-conflict environment — Coercion of witnesses — Whether inconsistencies in witness statements requiring acquittalInternational criminal law — Circumstances excusing unlawful conduct — National emergency — Whether violations of arms embargo and laws and customs of war justified by right to self-defence under international lawJurisdiction — Universal jurisdiction — War crimes — Prosecution of a Dutch national for offences committed abroad — Whether conduct of investigation by Dutch authorities making prosecution inadmissible — Whether amnesty scheme in Liberia barrier to prosecution — No violation of fair trial rightsWar and armed conflict — Existence of armed conflict — Whether armed conflict international or internal — Limited gap between norms applicable to international versus non-international armed conflict — Whether violations of laws and customs of war giving rise to individual criminal liability under Dutch law — The law of the Netherlands

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW AND AR (AZERBAIJAN REPUBLIC) LEGISLATION GENOCIDE CRIME AND ITS COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS WITH OTHER INTERNATIONAL CRIMES

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (04) ◽  
pp. 48-52
Author(s):  
Erkin Humbat Musayev Humbat Musayev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
International Law ◽  
Key Words ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Transnational Crime ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Crimes

Key words: international law, international criminal law, genocide, war crimes, transnational crime

Criminal law and digital crime: problems and solutions

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Евгений Русскевич ◽  
Evgeniy Russkevich
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Computer Data ◽  
Digital Crime ◽  
Problems And Solutions ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Theoretical Issues

The monograph is devoted to the complex of theoretical and applied problems of adaptation of the domestic mechanism of criminal law protection to the "digitalization" of crime in the conditions of formation of the information society. Along with General theoretical issues, foreign criminal legislation and the provisions of international law are deeply analyzed. The paper presents a refined criminal-legal characteristics of crimes in the field of computer information, including the novelties of the Russian criminal law — the illegal impact on the critical information infrastructure of the Russian Federation (article 2741 of the criminal code), developed proposals for the differentiation of criminal liability for attacks on the security of computer data and systems, developed scientifically sound recommendations for qualification. The monograph is designed for researchers, teachers, practicing lawyers, students and postgraduates of law schools and faculties.

scholarly journals Criminal liability for illegal implementation of medical and pharmaceutical activity: comparative analysis of legislation of the post-Soviet states

2021 ◽  
pp. 35-45
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Dmitrievna Sungurova
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Pharmaceutical Activity ◽  
The Russian Federation

The goal of this research consists in comparison of the normative legal acts that regulate the questions of criminal liability for illegal implementation of medical and pharmaceutical activity in Belarus, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, and the Russian Federation. The article employs the general scientific methods of cognition: analysis, synthesis, generalization. For identification of differences in the content of the corresponding legal norms, the author applies the comparative legal method, which consists in comparative analysis of the normative legal acts of the post-Soviet states. The research materials contain the norms of criminal law, as well as normative legal acts in the sphere of licensing. The novelty of this work consists in the fact that pursuit of ways to improve the national criminal law, the author assesses the possibilities of reception of certain provisions of the foreign legislation. The article explores the approaches towards systematization of crimes for illegal conduct of medical and pharmaceutical activity in the Criminal Code. The conclusion is made on the three approaches of the legislators towards establishment of origin of the object of crime. Analysis is performed on the current state of the practice of constructing criminal law sanctions of the norms on liability for illegal implementation of medical and pharmaceutical activity. The common feature of the Russian, Belarusian, Armenian, Kazakh, Azerbaijani, and Kyrgyz law consists in imposition of a fine as the basic punishment. The size of penalties are compared. It is proposed to expand the sanction of the Article 235 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with an additional penalty in form of revocation of right to hold a certain post or conduct a particular activity for a certain period of time.

scholarly journals The goals of criminal punishment as a reflection of modern criminal policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 324-330
Author(s):  
V.V. Popov ◽  
◽  
S.M. Smolev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The presented study is devoted to the issues of disclosing the content of the goals of criminal punishment, analyzing the possibilities of their actual achievement in the practical implementation of criminal punishment, determining the political and legal significance of the goals of criminal punishment indicated in the criminal legislation. The purpose of punishment as a definition of criminal legislation was formed relatively recently, despite the fact that theories of criminal punishment and the purposes of its application began to form long before our era. These doctrinal teachings, in essence, boil down to defining two diametrically opposed goals of criminal punishment: retribution and prevention. The state, on the other hand, determines the priority of one or another goal of the punishment assigned for the commission of a crime. The criminal policy of Russia as a whole is focused on mitigating the criminal law impact on the offender. One of the manifestations of this direction is the officially declared humanization of the current criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. However, over the course of several years, the announced “humanization of criminal legislation” has followed the path of amending and supplementing the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: introducing additional opportunities for exemption from criminal liability and punishment, reducing the limits of punishments specified in the sanctions of articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and including in the system of criminal punishments of types of measures that do not imply isolation from society. At the same time the goals of criminal punishment are not legally revised, although the need for such a decision has already matured. Based on consideration of the opinions expressed in the scientific literature regarding the essence of those listed in Part 2 of Art. 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the goals of punishment are determined that each of them is subject to reasonable criticism in view of the abstract description or the impossibility of achieving in the process of law enforcement (criminal and penal) activities. This circumstance gives rise to the need to revise the content of the goals of criminal punishment and to determine one priority goal that meets the needs of modern Russian criminal policy. According to the results of the study the conclusion is substantiated that the only purpose of criminal punishment can be considered to ensure proportionality between the severity of the punishment imposed and the social danger (harmfulness) of the crime committed. This approach to determining the purpose of criminal punishment is fully consistent with the trends of modern criminal policy in Russia, since it does not allow the use of measures, the severity of which, in terms of the amount of deprivation and legal restrictions, clearly exceeds the social danger of the committed act. In addition, it is proportionality, not prevention, that underlies justice – one of the fundamental principles of criminal law.

scholarly journals Mediation in Bribery: Gaps in the Legal Interpretation

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vadim Zamaraev
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Comprehensive Analysis ◽  
Legal Interpretation ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Objective Aspect

The article considers and analyzes some gaps in the legislative interpretation of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It examines the objective aspect of the crime, and also presents the problems of prosecuting for mediation in bribery according to the specifics of the qualification of this socially dangerous act. The author substantiates the grounds and limits of criminal liability for mediation in bribery, taking into account the act of committing various forms of this crime. On the basis of a comprehensive analysis of criminal legislation and scientific works of not only Russian scientists, but also foreign experts in the field of criminal law, the main prospects for the development and solution of the above mentioned problematic issues related to gaps in the legislative interpretation of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are proposed. Special attention is also paid to certain issues of qualification of the investigated act, which directly depend on the amount of the bribe. As a result of the study, it is recommended to introduce some changes and additions to Parts 1 and 5 of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

The Criminalization of War Crimes in Italy and the Shortcomings of the Domestic Legal Framework

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 679-697
Author(s):  
Giulio Bartolini
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Military Operations

Abstract The Italian domestic legal framework related to war crimes is characterised by several shortcomings. It is still largely centred on the provisions present in the 1941 wartime military criminal code, which have not been subjected to substantial legal restyling, regardless of the explicit and implicit obligations of domestic criminalization inferred from treaties ratified by Italy. Only in 2001–2002, at the time of Italian military operations in Afghanistan, were certain amendments to this code introduced, in order to partly adapt its content to current rules of international humanitarian law and international criminal law. However, such solutions have not brought about effective harmonization and were drafted within an incoherent legal framework, made even more complex by subsequent reforms addressing military missions abroad, thus resulting in the current unsatisfactory scenario which would require substantive reforms.

THE HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF LEGISLATION ON LIABILITY FOR FRAUD IN RUSSIA

2021 ◽  
pp. 12-20
Author(s):  
Andrey V. Arkhipov ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Russian Empire ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
First Time

The article examines the history of the emergence and development of Russian legislation on criminal liability for fraud. It is noted that for the first time fraud is mentioned in the legal acts of the second half of the 16th century - the Codes of Justice of Tsars Ivan IV and Fyodor Ioannovich. Initially, fraud was most often understood as a deft but petty theft, in which de-ception was used to facilitate its commission. The understanding of fraud as the theft of other people's property, committed by deception, began to be formed only in the second half of the 18th century with the publication on April 3, 1781 by Empress Catherine II of the Decree "On the court and punishments for theft of different kinds and the establishment of working houses in all the gubernias." In the 19th century, the clarifying process of the content of the term "fraud" continued. It was reflected in the first codified criminal laws of the Russian Empire - Code of crimi-nal and corrective penalties of Russia of 1845 and the Charter on Punishments imposed by the justices of the peace of 1864. A significant contribution to the development of the Russian criminal law on liability for fraud was made by a group of legal scholars involved in the de-velopment of the Criminal Code of the Russian Empire, in which the whole Chapter 33 (Arti-cles 591-598) contained the rules on liability for fraud. Although the 1903 Criminal Code was not fully enacted, it had a significant impact on the formation of criminal law on liability for fraud in subsequent regulations. During the Soviet period, the legislation on the responsibility for fraud continued to develop. For the first time, abuse of trust was mentioned as a method of crime, along with deception. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the adoption in 1993 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Federal Law 10 of 01.07.1994 made signifi-cant changes to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of 1960 that served as the basis for the system of crimes against property in modern Russia.

Perpetrators of corporate crimes in commercial organizations in Italy and Russia

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 120-130
Author(s):  
Georgy Rusanov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Commercial Organizations ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Economic Crimes ◽  
Official Status ◽  
Italian Legislation

Purpose The purpose of this paper is dedicated to the features of subjects of official crimes in commercial organizations in accordance with the laws of Italy and Russia. Design/methodology/approach Based on the study of Russian and Italian legislation, it was revealed that the Italian criminal law provides for a more extensive system of the criminal law provisions on liability for corporate economic crimes. Findings These norms are in various normative legal acts (civil legislation, separate legislative acts). In the Russian criminal legislation, the norms in the sphere of corporate crimes in the sphere of economy are systematized and are located in a separate chapter of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the list of acts for which liability is provided is significantly narrower than in the Italian criminal law. Originality/value In general, the institute of criminal liability for subjects of economic crimes with special features is adopted and developed as in the Russian criminal law as in the Italian criminal law. The existence of this institution shows the awareness by legislators of the increased danger to the society of such persons’ actions owing to the fact that the existence of the official status, special powers of certain duties or the lack of an appropriate indication on the contrary allows such a person to commit an act that is not available to other persons.

Individual Criminal Responsibility for the Financing of Entities Involved in Core Crimes: Aiding and Abetting

2021 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Ausserladscheider Jonas ◽  
Dire Tladi
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

War crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and the crime of aggression could not be perpetrated without those who finance them. This article examines the basis for criminal liability in international criminal law (ICL) for persons who finance entities that perpetrate core crimes. Despite the need for clear rules, neither international courts nor scholars agree upon (i) whether liability exists for individuals who finance entities that perpetrate core crimes; and (ii) if so, the circumstances under which such liability exists. This article argues that an individual who finances an entity that perpetrates a core crime should be held criminally liable under customary international criminal law as an aider and abettor. The objective of this article is to clarify the rules that would enable international courts and tribunals to identify the extent to which individual criminal liability attaches to the financing of core crimes, as well as the legal basis for such liability. By clarifying the criminal accountability of individuals who finance entities that perpetrate core crimes, this article also seeks to clarify the mental elements of the mode of liability of aiding and abetting.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document