RELEASE FROM THE CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY OWING TO NOTES TO ARTICLES OF THE SPECIAL PART OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN IN RELATION TO CATEGORY OF MILITARY CRIMINAL OFFENCES

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 231-236
Author(s):  
B. B. Galiev ◽  
Author(s):  
Miodrag Bukarica

Court practice and illustrative examples of the legislator’s negligence in passing the appropriate laws and bylaws provisions point that, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the most acceptable would be separation of the criminal acts of legal entities, according to the legislative model of the Republic of Macedonia. Namely, the Republic of Macedonia has not passed a special law on criminal responsibility of legal entities, since the provisions on criminal responsibility (lex specialis) are included as a special chapter of the criminal law and are applied primarily, while the general provisions of the criminal law are applied only in cases not stipulated by the special provisions. Thus in the Special Part of the Criminal Code, along with the legal description, within certain criminal acts it is emphasized that a legal entity may be held responsible for the particular criminal act. Given that, in Bosnia and Herzegovina it would also be possible to determine (separate) criminal acts of a legal entity. The advantage of such solution lies in the fact that it is very simple in the technical sense since, on the occasion of passing amendments and alterations of the special part of the criminal law, no additional interventions shall be required in the criminal law or in the substantial legislation.


Teisė ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 79 ◽  
pp. 7-21
Author(s):  
Gintaras Švedas

Straipsnyje analizuojama Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamojo kodekso specialiosios dalies straipsnių sankcijos, jų rūšys, sankcijų sudarymo principai, taip pat probleminiai sankcijų sudarymo aspektai.The article deals with the sanctions and their kinds in the Articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania, the principles of the construction of the sanctions, as well as some problematical aspects of the construction of the sanctions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 59-68
Author(s):  
A. Iashchenko

The article is devoted to the research of measures of criminal justice response to prohibitions in the field of traffic safety and vehicle operation. It is noted that the primary role in state response to violation of criminal justice prohibitions in the field of traffic safety and vehicle operation is given to punishment, but no less important role is paid to other alternative to prohibition measures of criminal justice nature based on the concussion (special confiscation) or the encouragement (exemption from criminal responsibility or serving a sentence). It is concluded that the normative regulations of threats of application of certain punitive measures of criminal justice nature in sanctions of the articles of this section of the Special part in which the legislator defines the threat of application of various types of punishment for committing the crimes stipulated in crimes’ dispositions, needs specification from the point of view of the system interconnection, along with the provisions of the General Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, whereas the practice of application of special confiscation its further distribution and development, considering the proposed recommendations of its delimitation with the so called criminal procedural confiscation as means of criminal procedural concussion. In particular, it is noted that such clarification may be implemented either by enforcing additional penalties specified in the sanctions of Part 1, 2, 3 of Article 286, part 1 of Article 287 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, to the common list of types of punishments, with their separate meaningful definition in the corresponding articles of the section X of the General part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, or by covering normative definition in sanctions of the specified articles of section XI of the Special part of threats of application of such additional types of punishments according to the existing parts of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In this regard the sanctions of Article 286 and 287 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine propose to make appropriate changes. As for the practice of applying special confiscation for committing crimes in the field of traffic safety and vehicle operation, it is recommended that the question of its implementation should be based on the fact that the subject of special confiscation may be defined in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Art. 96-2 of the Criminal Code - items 6, 6-1 part 9 of Art. 100 of the Criminal Procedure Code, paragraph 2, part 1 of Art. 96-2 of the Criminal Code - item 2 part 9 of Art. 100 of the CPC, paragraph 3, part 1 of Art. 96-2 of the Criminal Code - item 5 part 9 of Art. 100 of the CPC, paragraph 4, part 1 of Art. 96-2 of the Criminal Code - item 1 part 9 of Art. 100 of the CPC items of the material world that possess a certain property value, and are usually considered as physical evidence in criminal proceedings initiated on the fact of committing certain crimes in the field of traffic safety and vehicle operation.


Author(s):  
Natalia Antoniuk

 Most of the aspects of differentiation of criminal responsibility for unfinished crime though being discussional, are duly researched in the criminal scientific studies. However, the sphere of unresearched institutes exists enabling us to speak about its influence on differentiation of criminal responsibility. This institutes are the mistake of fact and so called “delicts of endangering” The purpose of this research is to analyze the differentiated influence on criminal responsibility of crimes committed with the feature of mistake of fact and of delicts of endangering. It is planned to illustrate, basing on certain examples, the importance of these institutes for differentiation of criminal responsibility. By the way, the task of this article is to reveal the shortcomings of criminal law in force and to make propositions on their removing. Up to date, taking into consideration the provisions of part 3, 4 of Article 68 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, the court can`t impose punishment on person, guilty of committing a crime under effect of mistake of fact, qualified as attempt, higher than 2/3 of the maximal severe punishment (envisaged in article of special part of the Criminal Code). The court, as well, can`t (in most cases) impose life imprisonment even when the damage totally equals the damage caused by finished crime. For instance, planning to kill with mercenary motives a minor, the guilty person kills an adult. This action can’t be qualified as finished crime, as the mistake of victim occurs. Nevertheless, object of human life is objectively damaged. So, the crucial necessity to make equal between each other finished crime and crime, committed under influence of mistake of fact, is evident. Differentiating criminal responsibility in situations when damage is desired by the guilty person, the legislator in fact hasn’t bothered to duly differentiate criminal-legal consequences in case of endangering without the desire of such damage. That`s why it is of great importance to regulate by norms criminal actions which are endangering social relations with social dangerous damages, but don’t have the features of criminal aim, motive and desire of guilty person. This step can provide differentiated approach towards socially dangerous behavior, delimiting the estimation of act and consequence. It can concentrate the attention on subjective evaluation of potential consequences by guilty person, notwithstanding the factors, which often exist besides mental estimation of the subject.


2019 ◽  
pp. 136-150
Author(s):  
R. Chorniy

The article is devoted to the investigation of forms and types of guilt in the composition of crimes against the basics of national security of Ukraine. The presence of a number of unresolved issues at the theoretical and legal level on this issue actualizes the need for its scientific elaboration and formulation of proposals to improve the provisions of the law on criminal liability. The purpose of the article is to investigate the problematic issues of forms and types of guilt in crimes against the bases of national security of Ukraine, ways of fixing them in the articles of Section I of the Special part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine and to develop sound proposals for their solution based on the provisions of the doctrine of criminal law. The article presents the existing approaches of doctrinal interpretation by scientists of the provisions on wine, its forms and types, through which the research of this feature in the crimes under Art. Art. 109 - 114-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. It is proved that the most reasonable is the psychological concept of guilt, which promotes the insertion of forms and types of guilt in crimes against the basics of national security with a formal composition, the elucidation of forms of guilt in the warehouses of crimes provided by articles of section I of the Special part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in which the legislator directly does not say that it is one of the preconditions for the proper qualification of the act committed by the person. It is proved that the basis for the conclusion about the intentional form of guilt is based on: 1) a direct indication of it in the norm of the law (Part 1 of Article 110 and Part 1 of Article 111 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 2) indication of the specific purpose or motives of the criminal behavior (Part 1 of Article 109, Note 1, Part 1 and Part 2 of Article 110-2, Article 113, Part 1 of Article 114 and Article 112 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) ; 3) combination of the above mentioned features in one norm (Part 1 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 4) interpretation of terms used in the dispositions of certain articles and / or through the description in the law of the features of the crime (Part 1 of Article 110, Part 2 of Article 109, Part 1 of Article 110, Part 1 of Article 111, Article 112, Article 113, Part 1 of Article 114 and Part 1 of Article 114-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 5) interpretation of terms used in other articles of the Special (espionage as a part of state treason) or articles of the General part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (conspiracy to commit the actions provided for in part 1 of Article 109 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (Article 26 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine), attempted murder state or public figure (Article 112 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) (part 1 of Article 15 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 6) the orientation of socially dangerous acts. The specifics of constructing all these norms testify to the direct intent of the person who committed the respective crime. On this basis it is substantiated that the lack of specification of intent in part 1 of Art. 111 and Part 1 of Art. 110 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine does not contribute to the clarity of the provisions of the Criminal Code in the specified part, and the direct intent in the composition of these crimes is evidenced by: 1) special purpose (Part 1 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code); 2) the terms used in the dispositions of the said articles (“violation of the order… established by the Constitution of Ukraine” (part 1 of Article 110), “transfer of information…, transition to the enemy's side, rendering… assistance in carrying out subversive activities against Ukraine”) ( Part 1 of Article 111); 3) the focus of socially dangerous action. In order to eliminate the ambiguous interpretation of the provisions of Part 1 of Art. 110 and Part 1 of Art. 111 of the Criminal Code it is proposed to amend them accordingly. The forms and type of guilt in the warehouses of crimes with material composition (Part 3 of Article 110, Part 3 and 4 of Article 110-2, Part 2 of Article 114-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) were not clearly reflected in the relevant rules of the law. It is substantiated that the subject's attitude to socially dangerous consequences (deaths of people (h. 3 Art. 110, h. 2 Art. 114-1), other grave consequences (h. 3 Art. 110, h. 4 Art. 110- 2, Part 2 of Article 114-1) Causing considerable property damage (Part 3 of Article 110-2) can be intentional or negligent.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 73-80
Author(s):  
Aleksandr V. Fedorov ◽  

The article is dedicated to the review of the laws of the Republic of Macedonia (the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) on criminal liability of legal entities established in 2004 by introduction of amendments and supplements to the Criminal Code of the Republic of Macedonia. The article analyzes legal resolutions allowing consideration of a legal entity as a criminal liability subject; gives a scope of legal entities which can be brought to criminal liability; focuses on the fact that legal entities in the Republic of Macedonia may not be brought to criminal liability for any acts acknowledged as punishable by the national criminal laws, rather for the acts which are specifically addressed in the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Macedonia or other criminal laws. The author reviews such types of criminal sanctions applicable to legal entities as a fine, legal entity liquidation, forfeiture and sentence publication; notes the circumstances taken into account at punishment imposition and conditions for release from punishment as well as criminal and procedural peculiarities of bringing legal entities to liability including indication of broad discretionary powers of a prosecutor in solution of issues on bringing legal entities to criminal liability.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 194
Author(s):  
Aibar S. NURKHAN

Studying of issues regarding criminal infractions – whether intended or imprudent – plays quite a significant role. Fundamental changes taking part in world economy and politics, globalization processes, as well as internal dynamics of country development, undoubtedly, have impact on national legal framework, including criminal law. Therefore, the main goal of the present paper is the analysis of legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan regarding criminal infractions and the law enforcement practice. To reach this goal authors have used methods of comparison, analysis and data systematization. As a result it has been found that in Kazakhstan there are at average 4,3 registered criminal infractions per a convict. The term of criminal infraction has appeared in the Criminal Code in 2014 to cover offences of small gravity and administrative violations that cannot be referred to the sphere of state administration. Authors have revealed the punishment in the present day Kazakhstan is not a main form of criminal responsibility realization. In the majority of cases linked to criminal infractions the persons committed them are relieved from criminal responsibility at the stage of prejudicial inquiry.


Author(s):  
Natalia Antoniuk

Footnotes to articles of the Criminal Code of Ukraine have a function of making understanding the essence of the features of the body of crime easier. These features are clarified or detailed in the footnotes. Nevertheless, sometimes the legislator awards the footnote with functions it does not comply with. Such an approach of the legislator led to the discussion if the footnote can prescribe the features of the body of crime as the disposition of the norm does. However, the analysis of the footnotes to articles of the Criminal Code allows us to make the conclusion that the mentioned above approach is not executed in full scope by the legislator while constructing the text of the footnote. In some footnotes the legislator clarifies such an important feature of crime as volume of damages, in the others – defines feature of repeated crime. Moreover, sometimes the footnote substitutes the disposition of the article and leads to differentiation of criminal responsibility. This is a rather paradoxical situation when criminality of the action is not directly prescribed in the disposition but takes ground from the supplemental element of the article. We can illustrate the above said using the example of the footnotes to articles 149 and 303 of the Criminal Code in the part of actions encroaching minor victims or victims under the age of 18 years old. For instance, in certain footnotes to these articles the legislator has prescribed that methods of committing these crimes don’t matter. So, methods as the essential features of bodies of mentioned crimes lose their obligatory role, if crimes are committed versus minors or persons under age. We suggest that the differentiation of criminal responsibility must not be done using footnotes. It is necessary to mention an important differentiating role of the footnote to article 45 of the Criminal Code, which envisages list of corruption offences. We suppose that such a key definitions shall be interpreted in certain articles of the Code but not in the footnotes. Optimally – terminological chapter is to be implemented into the Criminal Code. The footnote to the article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code must only detail or clarify the essence of the features of crime, but cannot broaden their essence or volume. The footnote shall not obtain normative character in the meaning of establishing criminality of the action. If the necessity to define some unified notions in the Criminal Code occurs, then it should be defined within the borders of the terminological chapter of the code. Features of the body of crime must be directly prescribed in the disposition of the Special Part of the Criminal Code. It is necessary to remove footnotes-definitions and footnotes-lists to the terminological chapter. At the same time, it is important to remember that the terminological chapter in the General Part of the Code is cross-cutting. So, if the necessity to clarify or to detail something concerning the body of specific crime occurs, the legislator can easily do this with the use of the footnote. Key terms: footnote, differentiation of criminal responsibility, disposition of the article.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (12-3) ◽  
pp. 230-234
Author(s):  
Natalia Martynenko ◽  
Anatoly Maydykov

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.


Author(s):  
R. V. Zakomoldin ◽  

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document