scholarly journals Receipt of illegal remuneration by an ex-officer: law, theory, practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 57-62
Author(s):  
A. V. Ivanchin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Current Version ◽  
Legal Assessment ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

The article deals with the issues of criminal-legal assessment of situations when an official for a specified remuneration performs the necessary actions (inaction) in the service, and the remuneration itself is received after the loss of the officials status (deferred bribe). The author criticizes the established judicial practice of qualifying such cases as the final receipt and giving of a bribe, since it directly violates the provisions of Articles 3, 8, 29, 290, 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. If the recipient of the remuneration is not an official, then his act cant be qualified as a completed bribe-taking by an official by virtue of the law. The article proves that the only correct variant of the criminal-legal assessment of the offense in such cases is the imputation for the ex-official the preparation for receiving a bribe under Article 290 of the Criminal Code with reference to Part 1 of Article 30 of the Criminal Code. Equally, in the actions of the bribe-giver in the analyzed situation from the standpoint of the current version of the criminal law, the author sees only a conspiracy with an official to give-receive a bribe, that is, preparation for giving a bribe, qualified under Article 291 of the Criminal Code with reference to Part 1 of Article 30 of the Criminal Code. In conclusion, it is stated that the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation has an obvious gap in investigated part, which requires elimination by amending the criminal law (after a thorough and balanced discussion of their draft).

scholarly journals Malfeasances: features of law enforcement.

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-337
Author(s):  
M.P. Pronina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Assessment ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article deals with the problems of law enforcement in the group of malfeasances. Official crimes are most dangerous due to the fact that they undermine the prestige of the authorities and directly violate the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations. In this regard the legislator has established criminal liability for officials who abuse their functional duties. In particular the author studies the problems of qualification arising in the legal assessment of crimes enshrined in Ch. 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, due to the highest level of their blanketness and evaluativeness. Examples of judicial and investigative practice on competition issues of general and special rules are given. Difficulties are revealed in the legal assessment of the actions of officials when determining the signs of abuse of office, enshrined in Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Arguments are presented that are a clear demonstration of the fact that the solution to the identified problems of applying the norms of the criminal law lies in the plane of reducing the level of conflict of laws of criminal legislation. Practical proposals are being made to include amendments to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 09.07.2013 No. 24 “On judicial practice in cases of bribery and other corruption crimes” (clause 12.1) and Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 16.10.2009 No. 19 “On judicial practice in cases of abuse of office and abuse of office” (p. 21.1). The solution of the stated problems in the field of application of the norms of the criminal law consists in the development of a uniform practice of application of the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, reduction of the level of gaps in criminal legislation, the development of methodological and scientific recommendations with the participation of law enforcement officials and scientists, the preparation of draft laws and plenums of the Supreme Court aimed at elimination of gaps and gaps.

About the Thefts Provided by item «g» of Part 3 of Article 158, Articles 1593, 1596 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 86-98
Author(s):  
E. V. Peysikova ◽  
◽  
Yu. I. Antonov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article is devoted to the analysis of judicial practice in cases of the thefts provided by item «g» of part 3 of article 158 and articles 1593 and 1596 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The article notes the challenges in applying these rules in practice; demonstrates their restrictive features with regards to the doctrine of Criminal law. The article is written for the purpose of uniform application of these norms in practice after entry into force of the Federal Law of 23 April 2018, № 111-FZ.

scholarly journals PROBLEMS OF LEGISLATIVE REGULATION OF THE MURDER OF A NEWBORN CHILD BY A MOTHER (ARTICLE 106 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 639-646
Author(s):  
E.R. Gafurova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Sociological Study ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Newborn Child ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Structure ◽  
Criminal Legislation

This article examines the features of the Russian criminal law norm that provides for liability for the murder of a newborn child by a mother. We analyzed the data of the Judicial Department on the statistics of convicts for 2016 and 2019 under Article 106 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in relation to the indicators of other privileged elements of murder, indicating the latency of this type of crime. The article also examines some features of the legislative structure of Article 106 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, accompanied by examples of judicial practice. The article examines the criminal law norms providing for responsibility for infanticide, the legislation of Italy, Austria, Switzerland, Holland and Denmark, and highlights the distinctive features of Article 106 of the Russian criminal legislation. The article presents proposals for possible improvement of the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on responsibility for the murder of a newborn child by a mother, confirmed by the indicators of a sociological study.

scholarly journals Leniency programmesfor cartel: mature reforms

2018 ◽  
pp. 24-33
Author(s):  
K. N. Aleshin ◽  
S. V. Maksimov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Main Factors ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

The problems of interpretation of criminal law and administrative law institutes of active repentance (“leniency programmes”) in relation to cartels are considered.The definition of the effectiveness of the institution of active repentance is given as the ability of this institution to achieve the goals stipulated by law (in the aggregate or in a particular combination): 1) termination of the committed offense (crime) (“surrender”),2) assistance in investigating the relevant administrative offense (crime), 3) compensation for the harm caused by his offense (crime), 4) refusal to commit such offenses (crimes) in the future.The condition of the quadunity of these goals is investigated. It is noted that among the main factors reducing the effectiveness of administrative law and criminal law institutions of active repentance (“leniency programmes”) in relation to a cartel is the legal inconsistency of these institutions.Proposals are being made to amend par. 3 of the Notes to Art. 178 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Note 1 to Art. 14.32 of the Code of the Russian Federation Code of Administrative Offenses iin order to bring together the relevant institutions of active repentance.The necessity of legislative consolidation of general procedural rules for the implementation of the person who participated in the conclusion of the cartel, the law granted him the right to active repentance is substantiated.

scholarly journals Efficiency of practical application of criminal law prohibition in the sphere of economy of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (4) ◽  
pp. 118-123
Author(s):  
Vladimir Tunin ◽  
Natal'ya Radoshnova
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Economic Crime ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Economic Crimes

The article considers the practical effectiveness of the criminal law prohibition in combating economic crime in the Russian Federation. 22nd Chapter of the Criminal code currently includes 58 articles. This is maximum number of articles in relation to other chapters of the criminal code, in the same Chapter of the Criminal code. Accordingly the need for such a number of prohibitions in the economic sphere should be confirmed by judicial practice. However, a completely different picture emerges. Based on the analysis of the statistical reports of the Judicial Department under the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the authors conclude that the enforcement practice in cases of economic crimes is insufficient.The authors express their opinion on the reasons for the ineffectiveness of the practical application of the articles constituting the 22nd Chapter of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation, and suggest ways to address them.

scholarly journals Binding Nature of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Explanations in Criminal Law

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 95-107
Author(s):  
I. A. Klepitskiy
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Nulla Poena Sine Lege ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

The question of the legal nature and the binding nature of explanations of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation remains debatable in the literature. When considering criminal cases, the courts do not always follow the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court. It seems that the explanations of the Supreme Court, while not being a source of criminal law, are nevertheless binding on courts and officials applying the norms of criminal law. This is a general rule, to which there are exceptions. First, there are erroneous explanations of the Supreme Court, which are not based on the established judicial practice and are not supported by it. Second, there are outdated explanations of the Supreme Court that do not meet modern legal realities. Third, there are explanations of the Supreme Court, which, in relation to a particular situation, require an expansive or restrictive interpretation. In these three situations, the Supreme Court’s explanations do not bind the law enforcement officer. The binding nature of the Supreme Court’s explanations is determined by the value of the law as such. Questions of law require a uniform resolution. An alternative to a uniform interpretation of the law is arbitrary administration. Arbitrary administration is not within the competence of the judge. There is no case law in Russia. The works of legal scholars in modern Russia also cannot satisfy the need for a uniform interpretation of the law. The significance of the explanations of the Supreme Court determines the high requirements for their quality. The Supreme Court’s explanations should not directly contradict the law. The Supreme Court’s explanations should not change unless there is an urgent need to do so. The rule nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege, being an achievement of legal culture, binds the Supreme Court. By clarifying the practice of applying the law, the Supreme Court forms and preserves judicial doctrine, thereby providing legal certainty.

On the compliance of the provisions of Article 185.4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with the laws of corporate governance

2020 ◽  
pp. 503-514
Author(s):  
Nikolay Ryzhenkov
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Stock Market ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Design And Application

Raiding, along with corruption, has long been one of the most pressing problems for domestic business. For incomprehensible reasons, in contrast to the corruption crimes, which received due attention from the legislator and legal scholars, crimes committed in the stock market, after their reckless introduction, have been deprived of attention for almost a decade. At the same time, the most dangerous methods of raider seizures currently do not fall under criminal law prohibitions at all, and the existing prohibitions, in turn, have such a low legal potential that leaving this problem without atten-tion raises serious concerns. We consider the design and application of Article 185.4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation – Obstruction or illegal restriction of the rights of securities holders, intended to become the “flagship” of anti-raiding legislation. Through a systematic analysis of the prescriptions of the criminal law and a few judicial practice, we identify the low quality of criminal law prohibitions included in Article 185.4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, we establish and substantiate the impossibility of causing damage in the required amount, we prove the lack of practical need for the relevant norm, we formulate a proposal for its exclusion from the text of the criminal law in full.

scholarly journals Reasons for the Existence of “Dead Norms” in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
pp. 037-044
Author(s):  
A. V. Kursaev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Assessment ◽  
Negative Results ◽  
The Russian Federation

The relevance of the article lies in the presence of problematic issues related to the socio-legal assessment of the existence of legal prohibitions in law, which are rarely applied in practice. The author analyzes the reasons for the presence of “dead norms” in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The negative results of criminalization that lead to the emergence of “dead norms” in criminal law are considered. The content of objective factors that lead to the existence of “dead norms” is revealed. Due to the complexity and ambiguity of determining the reasons for the existence of “dead norms”, special attention is paid to measures to improve their enforcement effectiveness.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document