Crime prevention through criminal liability of legal entities: problems of theory and law enforcement practice

Author(s):  
Mikhail Dvoretskiy

We investigate the possibility of introducing criminal liability of legal entities in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. We analyze the provisions of regulatory enactment providing for this substantial reform. We consider initiatives and projects proposed by public authorities to amend and supplement domestic legislation. We examine the positions of reputable ex-perts, famous scientists and high-demand practitioners, who express opposite opinions on the initiated correlations and participating in the discussion. We analyze the provisions of the conventions of international organizations pro-viding for the introduction of criminal liability of legal entities in the legisla-tion of member states, due to involvement in corruption crimes, if bribery of foreign officials and corporate corruption were used. The work discusses the provisions of the bill of 2015 finalized by the Investigative Committee of Russia on the introduction of criminal liability for legal entities for the com-mission of crimes contained in the current thirty eight articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, to which Russian, as well as a number of foreign companies and international organizations represented and separate units. We draw conclusions and make suggestions for further improvement of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation.

Author(s):  
Dmitry Ovchinnikov

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.


Author(s):  
Ludmila Tarasova

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”.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 97-107
Author(s):  
Ya. О. Kuchina ◽  

A new article was introduced into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in 2017, which establishes criminal liability for unlawful impact on the critical information infrastructure of the Russian Federation. However, there is still no developed legal practice of applying this article, despite repeated statements of experts about the significant prevalence of crimes that encroach on the security of critical information infrastructure. The author of the article discovered one criminal case instituted on the grounds of a crime prohibited by Art. 2741 of the Criminal Code. The proposed article contains an analysis of the legal issues of this article, including the consideration of the specifics of qualification under Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 of Art. 2741 of the Criminal Code. The concept of critical information infrastructure as an object of crime is considered, suggestions are made about the features of qualification of acts that will minimize law enforcement errors.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 77-82
Author(s):  
V. V. Ustinov ◽  
◽  
P. A. Chetverkin ◽  

Currently, due to the principle of adversarial proceedings, almost every expert's opinion is accompanied by its review by a specialist engaged by one or another party to the process. One of the shortcomings reflected in the reviews is a violation of the procedure for subscribing to the expert's warning of criminal liability for giving a deliberately false conclusion under article 307 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. Failure to comply with this very important procedure may result in the recognition of the expert's opinion as inadmissible evidence. In our opinion, the analysis of judicial practice and procedural rules governing this procedure, as well as the proposed recommendations, will help law enforcement entities in assessing the expert's opinion and its admissibility as evidence in the case.


Author(s):  
Ol'ga Evgen'evna Derevyagina

The subject of this research is the notes to the Article 178 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Article 14.32 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses; foreign antimonopoly legislation on exemption and mitigation of liability for cartels; decisions of the plenums of higher judicial instances of the Russian Federation regarding the grounds and procedure for exemption from liability for cartel agreements; draft of the federal law on introducing amendments to the Article 178 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and antimonopoly practice on cartels. The article aims to examine the grounds for exemption from criminal liability for cartel agreements, including in comparative-legal and interdisciplinary aspects. The novelty of this research consists in establishing extension of the grounds for exemption from liability in the Russian legislation to all cartel participants (unlike foreign legislation, according to which the cartel facilitator is not exempt from liability). This article is firs to provide interpretation to scantily studied questions of the procedure for realization of the conditions of exemption from criminal liability: the instance, when the cartel participant is still able to declare the restriction of competition to law enforcement agencies, and other measures of reparation of the inflicted damage. The author proposes a method for unification of the the grounds for exemption from liability stipulated by the Article 178 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Article 14.32 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses. The acquired results can be applied in the activity of law enforcement agencies.


2021 ◽  
Vol 234 (11) ◽  
pp. 16-24
Author(s):  
SERGEY A. PICHUGIN ◽  

The article is devoted to various aspects of the regulation and execution of punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities. The subject of the article is the norms of the current domestic legislation, data from official statistics of the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia, as well as law enforcement practice on the topic under consideration. The purpose of the article is to analyze the normative regulation and practice of applying punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities. The methodological basis of the research is represented by a set of general and specific scientific methods. The work used methods such as analysis, synthesis, formal legal, statistical. As a result of the study, proposals were formulated to amend the current legislation in terms of improving preventive work with persons sentenced to punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities. Conclusions are made about the essence, features of legal regulation and law enforcement practice of the considered type of punishment in modern conditions, about the need to increase the effectiveness of preventive activities in relation to persons sentenced to punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to engage in activities related to driving a vehicle. Key words: deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities, punishment, penal inspectorates, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, convict, deprivation of the right to engage in activities related to driving.


Author(s):  
Mihail Alaf'ev

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
pp. 96-101
Author(s):  
N. YU. SKRIPCHENKO ◽  

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.


Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (10) ◽  
pp. 159-170
Author(s):  
I. V. Pantyukhina ◽  
L. Yu. Larina

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-58
Author(s):  
D. V. Golenko

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document