scholarly journals Simple disposition of an article in a special part of the Criminal law (on the example of kidnapping)

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-58
Author(s):  
D. V. Golenko
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Scientific ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

Justification of the study. the creation of a criminal law is a laborious and important process. When constructing articles of the criminal code, the legislator used various techniques and methods of presenting legislative material. One of the types of dispositions of an article is a simple disposition. Its application by the legislator raises questions among practitioners when qualifying crimes, and gives rise to discussions in the theory of criminal law. Methods. The methodological basis of the research was formed by general scientific and special methods of cognition: analysis, induction, systemic, comparative legal, formal legal methods and others. Results. The authors analysis of the simple disposition of the article, which provides for criminal liability for kidnapping, is carried out. The problems arising in the process of designing and applying Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are investigated. As a starting point, the explanations contained in the acts of the highest judicial bodies, judicial statistics were taken. The ways of improving the norms on criminal liability for kidnapping, proposed in the theory of criminal law, have been studied. Recommendations for the legislator and law enforcement officers have been formed. Conclusion. A simple disposition should be applied in exceptional cases when describing crimes of small and medium severity. The signs of a crime described in a simple disposition should be clear to the law enforcement officer due to the established uniform practice of applying the law. The lack of a unified understanding of the signs of a crime that are not described in a simple disposition leads in practice to legal uncertainty. Explaining the application of articles from a simple disposition leads, in fact, to the construction of corpus delicti by the judiciary. However, the design of the corpus delicti is the prerogative of the legislator. Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not meet the criterion of clarity and gives rise to a different understanding in practice of the signs of the objective and subjective aspects of the composition of the abduction of a person. The solution to the emerging problems is to change the simple disposition of Article 126 to a descriptive disposition, including an indication of the signs of the objective and subjective side of the crime. The scientific novelty of the research lies in the fact that the simple disposition of the article for the first-time acts as an independent object of research and analysis on the example of the disposition of Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The authors approach to assessing the applicability of a simple disposition, positive and negative trends in its application by the legislator and the judiciary is proposed.Key words: Simple disposition of an article in a special part of the Criminal law (on the example of kidnapping) Abstract: Justification of the study. the creation of a criminal law is a laborious and important process. When constructing articles of the criminal code, the legislator used various techniques and methods of presenting legislative material. One of the types of dispositions of an article is a simple disposition. Its application by the legislator raises questions among practitioners when qualifying crimes, and gives rise to discussions in the theory of criminal law. Methods. The methodological basis of the research was formed by general scientific and special methods of cognition: analysis, induction, systemic, comparative legal, formal legal methods and others. Results. The authors analysis of the simple disposition of the article, which provides for criminal liability for kidnapping, is carried out. The problems arising in the process of designing and applying Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are investigated. As a starting point, the explanations contained in the acts of the highest judicial bodies, judicial statistics were taken. The ways of improving the norms on criminal liability for kidnapping, proposed in the theory of criminal law, have been studied. Recommendations for the legislator and law enforcement officers have been formed. Conclusion. A simple disposition should be applied in exceptional cases when describing crimes of small and medium severity. The signs of a crime described in a simple disposition should be clear to the law enforcement officer due to the established uniform practice of applying the law. The lack of a unified understanding of the signs of a crime that are not described in a simple disposition leads in practice to legal uncertainty. Explaining the application of articles from a simple disposition leads, in fact, to the construction of corpus delicti by the judiciary. However, the design of the corpus delicti is the prerogative of the legislator. Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not meet the criterion of clarity and gives rise to a different understanding in practice of the signs of the objective and subjective aspects of the composition of the abduction of a person. The solution to the emerging problems is to change the simple disposition of Article 126 to a descriptive disposition, including an indication of the signs of the objective and subjective side of the crime. The scientific novelty of the research lies in the fact that the simple disposition of the article for the first-time acts as an independent object of research and analysis on the example of the disposition of Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The authors approach to assessing the applicability of a simple disposition, positive and negative trends in its application by the legislator and the judiciary is proposed.

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.

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.

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 On the construction of the purpose of punishment in criminal law

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-53
Author(s):  
S. A. Borovikov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Clear Guideline ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The One

The subject of consideration of this paper is the study of the purposes of punishment enshrined in article 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the similarities and differences in the approaches used to determining the purpose of criminal punishment in the laws of different countries and historical periods, the need for a critical assessment of the existing legislative decision. In the course of a comparative analysis the conclusion is formulated that the current version of the purposes of punishment in criminal law is overly broad, which creates the illusion of its achievement and in some cases the competition of its parts among themselves. So the first of those mentioned in article 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation the purpose of restoring social justice is a quality that should be inherent in punishment. The second of the purposes stated in the law – the correction of the convict – is one of several ways to achieve it. However the very purpose of the punishment is not to correct the convict. The third of these purposes – the prevention of crimes – is most consistent with the purpose of punishment, but it is quite lengthy and requires clarification. In addition it does not contain a clear focus on a person who can or has committed a crime. According to the results of the analysis it is proposed to carry out an adjustment of the purposes of criminal punishment in the law. The purpose of punishment should be one and have a common focus. In this regard it is proposed to define as the purpose of punishment – retention persons from committing crimes. The single and understandable purpose of punishment on the one hand will be a clear guideline in constructing the type and size of both the main and additional punishments in the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part, and on the other will allow the courts to choose the punishment that most corresponds to the intended result.

scholarly journals Aggravating circumstances

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-161
Author(s):  
A. P. Kuznetsov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Preventive Role

In the article on the basis of the latest amendments made to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation circumstances aggravating the punishment are investigated, attention is drawn to some controversial legal and technical decisions in their formulation. The criminal law on the strength of influence of certain circumstances on the chosen punishment is clearly not enough, which does not contribute to enhancing the preventive role of the law, the elimination of subjectivism and discord in practice. Most scientists and practitioners support the idea of specifying, emphasizing that it will be easier to apply the law, circumstances of the case will be visibly linked to the chosen measure of criminal law impact, the importance of references in sentences to data on the case will increase, the preventive role of criminal law will increase, the prerequisites for a uniform understanding will be strengthened and application of the Criminal Code. It was not by chance that in the Soviet period of development of the science of criminal law, a tendency emerged to single out: a) main and b) other mitigating and aggravating circumstances. Consequently it is necessary to take into account the whole range of issues relating to the practical implementation of the idea of legislative specification of the strength of influence of individual circumstances: the circle of circumstances, which it may concern; the extent to which such circumstances influence the punishment (including the expediency of specifying in the law how much the punishment increases or decreases, or what is the upper or lower new limit within which the court selects the punishment taking into account the “main” circumstance). According to Part 2 of Art. 63 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation if the aggravating circumstances are provided for by the relevant article of the Special Part as a sign of a crime, it in itself cannot be re-taken into account when imposing a punishment. In the criminal law doctrine an exhaustive (closed) list of aggravating circumstances has not been approved by scientists, who believe that this method does not take into account changes in the sphere of public life to a certain extent.

scholarly journals Article 176 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: The Problems of Application and the Ways of Improvement

Legal Concept ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 164-168
Author(s):  
Saida Berkovskaya
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Market Economy ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Methodological Framework ◽  
Scientific Cognition ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Criminal Legislation

Introduction: at present, it is impossible to imagine a modern market economy without loans. This is also evidenced by the data of the Bank of Russia on the volume of business lending. In the Russian criminal legislation, one of the barriers to the development of negative trends in lending is Article 176 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, in the law enforcement practice, there are problems with the application of Article 176 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Purpose: to identify the problems of application of Article 176 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and identify the ways to solve them. Methods: the methodological framework for the study is based on the methods of scientific cognition, which include the historical-legal, comparative-legal, formal-legal, logical and systematic approaches. Results: the paper discusses the problems of applying Article 176 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which establishes the liability for illegal receipt of credit and preferential credit conditions, as well as for illegal receipt of a state target loan, as well as its use for other purposes. To solve these problems, it is necessary to improve the disposition of the criminal law norm on credit fraud. Conclusions: as a result of the conducted research, it is established that currently in Russia, lending is an important tool for financing entrepreneurship. At the same time, under the influence of various factors, the cases of non-repayment of loans to the credit institutions have become more frequent. In this regard, the legal solutions are needed that can affect the growth of the negative processes in the field of lending, in particular, it is necessary to improve the criminal law provision providing for the liability for illegal obtaining of credit.

scholarly journals The prevalence of petty bribery as a principle of establishing a criminal prohibition for its commission

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (4) ◽  
pp. 57-62
Author(s):  
Mihail Alaf'ev
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Main Method ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Relative Prevalence ◽  
Legislative Decision

Numerous changes in the criminal law associated with the emergence of new norms providing for responsibility for criminal liability inevitably raise the question of the validity of criminalization. Its positive solution is possible only if the new criminal law prohibition is established in accordance with the principles of criminalization, one of which is the relative prevalence of the act. The article is devoted to the assessment of the prevalence of petty bribery in order to determine the correctness of the legislative decision to establish independent criminal liability for this crime (Article 2912 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The main method of research is a statistical method that allows us to establish the prevalence of bribery in the amount not exceeding 10 thousand rubles at the time of the adoption of this legislative decision, and also during the period of validity of article 2912 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the share of the analyzed crime in the structure of bribery and corruption offences. In addition, the author analyzed 120 sentences of courts for petty bribery. As a result of the research, the author concludes that petty bribery is a fairly common offence in the structure of both bribery and corruption crimes, which indicates its public danger and the validity for the criminal prohibition of its commission. It was established that the establishment of a separate norm on liability for petty bribery allowed law enforcement agencies focusing the efforts to counteract bribery in the amount of more than 10 thousand rubles.

scholarly journals Criminal liability for illegal production and circulation of medicines, medical devices and dietary supplements: issues of legislative technique and law enforcement

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
pp. 96-101
Author(s):  
N. YU. SKRIPCHENKO ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Dietary Supplements ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Substandard Medicines ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

The article is devoted to the criminal law means of countering the illegal production and circulation of medicines, medical devices and dietary supplements. The importance of the pharmaceutical industry has increased in the face of the global pandemic of the novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19), and the demand for medicines has led to an increase in the turnover of counterfeit medicines and medical devices. Among the criminal law means that prevent the appearance of counterfeit and substandard medicines on the market, a special place is occupied by criminal repression, the possibilities of which have significantly expanded in recent years. So in 2014, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation was supplemented with three articles providing for liability for the illegal production and circulation of counterfeit, substandard medicines and Сетевой научно-практический журнал частного и публичного права 97 Стратегическая роль фармацевтического производства определяется не только экономической привлекательностью выпускаемого продукта, спрос на который ежегодно растет в связи увеличением численности населения, повышением продолжительности жизни, популяризацией здорового образа жизни, но и его ведущей ролью при реализации мер, направленных на повышение рождаемости, сдерживание заболеваемости и снижение смертности. Ключевое значение фармацевтической отрасли стало заметным в условиях мировой пандемии COVID-19, вызываемой коронавирусом SARS-CoV-2. Слабый рост реальных доходов населения ориентирует потребителя на поиск более бюджетных лекарственных препаратов, снижая требовательность к их качеству. При этом подстегиваемый коронавирусной паникой растущий спрос на лекарственные средства и ослабление государственного контроля за фармрынком в форме разрешения онлайн-продаж безрецептурных препаратов через интернет-аптеки определяют увеличение оборота фальсифицированных лекарственных средств и медицинский изделий. Отмечая расширение нелегального рынка медицинских препаратов, который по масштабам сопоставим с оборотом наркотиков, представители уголовно-правовой науки обращают внимание на то, что в отличие от наркоторговли потребителем некачественного лекарства может стать любой, независимо от социального статуса и уровня доходов1 . При этом повышенная общественная опасность криминального оборота лекарственных препаратов определяется не только экономическими потерями государства, легальных производителей (которые несут и репутационный урон), потребителей, но и реальной угрозой не только здоровью, но и жизни человека (а с учетом масштабов и распространения – населения), поскольку применение подделок может не только стать непосредственной причиной наносимого вреда, но и повлечь нарушение схемы лечения, что особенно критично в случаях использования пациентами жизненно необходимых препаратов2. Среди средств, препятствующих появлению на рынке фальсифицированных и недоброкачественных медикаментов, особое место занимает уголовная репрессия, возможности которой в последние годы заметно увеличились. Так, Федеральным законом от 31.12.2014 № 532-ФЗ «О внесении изменений в отдельные законодательные акты Российской Федерации в части противодействия обороту фальсифицированных, контрафактных, недоброкачественных и незарегистрированных лекарственных средств, медицинских изделий и фальсифицированных биологически активных добавок»3 УК РФ был дополнен тремя статьями, предусматривающими ответственность за незаконное производство лекарственных средств и медицинских изделий (ст. 235.1 УК РФ), обращение фальсифицированных, недоброкачественных и незарегистрированных лекарственных средств, медицинских изделий и оборот фальсифицированных биологически активных добавок (ст. 238.1 УК РФ) и подделку документов на лекарственные средства или медицинские изделия или упаковки лекарственных средств или медицинских изделий (ст. 327.2 УК РФ). До этого момента виновных в производстве недоброкачественных и фальсифицированных лекарств привлекали к ответственности по ст. 238 УК РФ «Производство, хранение, перевозка или сбыт товаров, не отвечающих требованиям безопасности», при этом подавляющее большинство уголовных дел прекращалось по нереабилитирующим основаниям, так как деяния, предусмотренные ч. 1 ст. 238 УК РФ, являются преступлениями небольшой medical devices, forgery of documents for medicines or medical devices (Articles 235.1, 238.1, 327.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The implementation of the new norms in practice posed the questions of not only differentiating the relevant acts from related and competing acts, but also defining the key features of the offenses for law enforcement officials. The article indicates certain provisions that require permission at the legislative level and clarifications of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

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 Legislative and textual approach to notes articles of chapter 22 of the Criminal code Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
pp. 161-168
Author(s):  
Alexandra Sitnikova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Economic Crime ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Textual Approach ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Instrumental Methods ◽  
Theoretical Foundations

The purpose of the work is to develop provisions that constitute the theoretical foundations of the legislative textual approach to remarks as normative texts that supplement, concretize or clarify the texts of articles of the Special part of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. Methodology. As a methodological basis, we used the dialectical method of cognition, which, in combination with instrumental methods of research, allowed us to obtain new conclusions. The main results: 1) the notes to the articles of chapter 22 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation are specialized criminal law provisions; 2) the legislative textual approach makes it possible to classify them into notes-definitions, notes-clarifications, notes-exceptions and calculative notes; 3) notes are one of the instruments of criminal law policy. Conclusion. The criminal law prescriptions formulated in the notes to the articles of chapter 22 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation establish in criminal law definitions of criminal legal categories, specify cost attributes, disclose the content of value attributes, and provide the law enforcement with rules for calculating the value of items of economic crime.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document