Reflections on the existence of the science of criminal law

Author(s):  
I. Mytrofanov

The article states that today the issues of the role (purpose) of criminal law, the structure of criminal law knowledge remain debatable. And at this time, questions arise: whose interests are protected by criminal law, is it able to ensure social justice, including the proportionality of the responsibility of the individual and the state for criminally illegal actions? The purpose of the article is to comprehend the problems of criminal law knowledge about the phenomena that shape the purpose of criminal law as a fair regulator of public relations, aimed primarily at restoring social justice for the victim, suspect (accused), society and the state, the proportionality of punishment and states for criminally illegal acts. The concepts of “crime” and “punishment” are discussed in science. As a result, there is no increase in knowledge, but an increase in its volume due to new definitions of existing criminal law phenomena. It is stated that the science of criminal law has not been able to explain the need for the concept of criminal law, as the role and name of this area is leveled to the framework terminology, which currently contains the categories of crime and punishment. Sometimes it is not even unreasonable to think that criminal law as an independent and meaningful concept does not exist or has not yet appeared. There was a custom to characterize this right as something derived from the main and most important branches of law, the criminal law of the rules of subsidiary and ancillary nature. Scholars do not consider criminal law, for example, as the right to self-defense. Although the right to self-defense is paramount and must first be guaranteed to a person who is almost always left alone with the offender, it is the least represented in law, developed in practice and available to criminal law subjects. Today, for example, there are no clear rules for the necessary protection of property rights or human freedoms. It is concluded that the science of criminal law should develop knowledge that will reveal not only the content of the subject of this branch of law, but will focus it on new properties to determine the illegality of acts and their consequences, exclude the possibility of using its means by legal entities against each other.

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 167-175
Author(s):  
B. A. Molchanov ◽  
M. V. Novikov

The paper discusses formation and development of criminal legislation on the subject and subjective signs of the crime in the countries of medieval Europe within the comparative jurisprudence. The authors note that the level of culture and statehood in any society and its government bodies as a whole depends on the attitude of the society and the state to those who committed unlawful, criminally punishable acts. On the materials of criminal law in the Ancient World and the Middle Ages (Ancient Rome, Ancient Greece, etc.) a strict liability was in law-enforcement practice. New states were formed during the Middle Ages. That led to the need of strengthening their authority of state power and statehood. Consequently, the state got the right to protect the interests of the individual and society, and the right to creation a new criminal legislation and its institutions. The church survived after liquidation of many public and state institutions. On the one hand, it contributed to the preservation of scientific achievements of the Ancient World. On the other hand, the church deprived science of free critical attitude to the issues under study. Philosophy and jurisprudence were based on theology. Criminal-legal institutions could be developed only in the direction, which had been approved by the church. Clearly, the idea of protecting the rights of the individual, strict liability and conditions of sanity could not be widely applied. As soon as the states were originated, strict liability was necessary to stop the blood feud and delegation of the judiciary from the society to the state. The obtained knowledge about the world and deeper understanding of the causality of what is happening facilitated the process. From the political point of view, theology (a Christian doctrine) influenced the criminal law policy in Medieval Time. The legislator regulated a range of subjects of the crime. In X - XI centuries, ancient ideas of strict liability were accepted in Europe. Crimes were divided into willful and not deliberate. The principle of the personal guilty is directly related to the subject of the crime. Murderers, rapists, thieves, swindlers and others were declared criminals. Judicial practice of many times and peoples gives us numerous examples confirming the existence of views on the animal as a subject of crime. Age limits of legal responsibility were defined as the minority, which is different from the social maturity, and sometimes old age, were considered the reason for the undisputed crime blamed of a crime to a subject. People under 14 years old could not be subjected to the death penalty, except when "malice can make up for the lack of age". The authors pay attention to the fact that the interests of healthy individuals guided medieval jurisprudence and medicine. They also regulated peculiarities of the healthy individuals’ legal capacity, presence of dementia and mental illnesses, etc. The mitigation of punishment in some cases when the fault of the subject of the crime was absent, fixing the criminal-legal significance of the motive of the crime, intent and some other subjective features in the legislation were a progress. Studies of the Medieval European States shows that the legislator at that time did not formulate general signs of the subject of the crime and did not know the criminal legal concept of strict liability. However, there was a need to solve the problem. Thus, the paper discusses the essence of the criminal legal significance of the сorpus delicti, its place in the criminal law and law enforcement practiceю. The authors used scientific literature of both foreign and Russian


Author(s):  
Dmitriy I. Frolov

The purpose of this work is to give a brief analysis of the legal status of spiritual Christians Molokans in the Russian Empire, following the dynamics of state legal regulation. The problem of the individual sectarian groups status remains little studied in both domestic and foreign literature, which determines its relevance. We use the following research methods: chronological, problem and analytical. We analyze the norms of administrative and criminal law in force in the 19th - early 20th centuries in the Russian Empire, which regulate the rights and obligations of subjects assigned to the Molokan sect. The analysis showed that the legal impact of the state on the Molokans was repressive and causal throughout most of the studied period. Only the reign of Alexander I was marked by a loyal attitude towards sectarians. After the revolutionary events of 1905, a number of civil and religious freedoms were granted to the Molokans, however, one cannot speak of the religious equality of all subjects during this period. After 1905, specialized acts were passed regulating the procedure for registering communities, holding conventions, organizing religious education, and other areas of public relations.


Author(s):  
Liat Levanon

This article offers a conceptualization of crime and punishment that serves to explain current trends in criminal law doctrine and, at points, recommends their reconsideration. Drawing on Hegel's concept of mutual recognition and on insights developed in fair-play accounts of punishment, the article suggests that crime disrupts the subject-subject relation between the victim and the offender, and that punishment works to restore this relation. To advance this argument, the article first proposes that subjects can only exist in equilibrium of connectedness and separateness whereby they mediate each other's equal personal boundaries. It then analyzes crime as a failure by the offender to mediate the victim's equal boundaries, which creates inequality of boundaries and brings about the collapse of the equilibrium and of the victim's subjectivity. Next, it is suggested that punishment re-equalizes the parties' respective boundaries, thus restoring the disrupted equilibrium and the victim's subjectivity. The article then demonstrates that this conceptualization helps explain current developments in areas such as mens rea and justificatory defenses, and that it further provides theoretical foundations for critical evaluation of well-established doctrines such as self-defense and attempt.


Author(s):  
George Sarmento ◽  
Lean Antônio Ferreira de Araújo

A VULNERABILIDADE DO DIREITO À INTIMIDADE NO ESPAÇO DAS FERRAMENTAS TECNOLÓGICAS: MANDADOS CONSTITUCIONAIS DE PROTEÇÃO DO DIREITO FUNDAMENTAL À INTIMIDADE POR INTERMÉDIO DO DIREITO PENAL  THE VULNERABILITY OF THE RIGHT TO INTIMACY IN THE SPACE OF TECHNOLOGICAL INSTRUMENTS: CONSTITUCIONAL WARRANTS FOR PROTECTION OF THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO INTIMACY THROUGH CRIMINAL LAW  George Sarmento*Lean Araújo**  RESUMO: O direito à intimidade integra o catálogo dos direitos fundamentais de proteção descrito no art. 5º, X, da Carta Constitucional, cuja essência é limitar a ação invasiva do Estado e dos demais indivíduos. No processo evolutivo do Estado é de se destacar a contribuição de Hobbes na formulação do Estado como ente responsável pela preservação dos indivíduos. Este momento instituiu a ruptura do indivíduo como ser que se realiza no outro para o ser empreendedor de seu próprio plano de vida, mas submetidas as ações as regras de condutas. A partir desta concepção absolutista evoluiu-se para a formulação de um Estado com delimitação de tarefas por intermédio de Órgãos autônomos e independentes visando à concretude de direitos de proteção ou defesa, direitos prestacionais e direitos de participação. A existência desse Estado Democrático de Direito e Social, constituído a partir da vontade dos seus indivíduos, exige a proteção dos direitos instituídos, dentre eles, à intimidade, e, para tanto, a própria ordem constitucional fixa mandados constitucionais de criminalização, para excepcionalmente coibir os abusos operados no espaço físico e no espaço das ferramentas tecnológicas, em razão da vulnerabilidade existente. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Direito à Intimidade. Ferramentas Tecnológicas. Vulnerabilidade. Proteção pelo Direito Penal. ABSTRACT: The right to intimacy integrates the catalog of privacy fundamental rights depicted in article 5 section X of the constitutional charter. Its essence is to limit the invasive action of the State and other individuals. Hobbes had an important role in State evolutionary process concerning the formulation of the State as responsible for individuals preservation. This moment established the rupture of the individual as a being that realizes itself on another, to an entrepreneur of its own life plan, but submitted to actions and rules of conduct. This absolutistic conception evolved to the formulation of a State with tasks bounded by autonomous and independent agencies aiming to concretize the protection or defense rights, benefit rights and social participation. The existence of this Democratic State and social rights established by the will of the individuals, demands the protection of the established rights, such as intimacy, and therefore the constitutional order itself provides criminal warrants to exceptionally restrain misconducts operated in the physical and technological  space, due to existing vulnerability. KEYWORDS: Right to Intimacy. Technological Tools. Vulnerability. Protection through Criminal Law. SUMÁRIO: Introdução 1 A Evolução do Estado no Pensamento Político. 2 A Unidade da Constituição. 3 A Classificação dos Direitos Fundamentais. 3.1 Os Direitos Fundamentais de Proteção. 3.2 Os Direitos Fundamentais Prestacionais. 3.3 Os Direitos Fundamentais de Participação. 4 O Agir Moral em Contexto. 5 O Espaço das Ferramentas Tecnológicas como meio de Ofensa ao Direito à Intimidade. 6 Mandados Constitucionais de Criminalização. 7 Alterações da Legislação Penal. Considerações Finais. Referências.* Pós-doutor pela Université Daix-Marseille, França. Doutor em Direito pela Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE). Professor do Mestrado do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito da Universidade Federal de Alagoas (PPGD/UFAL). Promotor de Justiça.** Acadêmico de Direito da Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT). Pesquisador bolsista de Iniciação Científica da Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMT) e do Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPQ).


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (Especial 2) ◽  
pp. 168-174
Author(s):  
Débora Aparecida Mafra Moras ◽  
Danielle Yurie Moura da Silva

t treats the present scientific article of a study about the institutes of state of necessity and selfdefense, foreseen in the Brazilian legal system, in the Brazilian Penal Code, as an exclusionary cause of illegality. And, in this sense, the State that is not able to be present at all times guarantees the victim the right to evade or even defend himself from aggression. However, some situations may characterize an apparent conflict of norms, making it difficult to frame the correct institute in fact. One such case is the dog attack, making the subject a state of necessity and legitimate self- defense essential. The method applied was the legal deductive, based on the interpretation of the legislation, jurisprudence and doctrines. It is conclude that the attack of an irrational animal can be characterized as a state of necessity or self- defense, which will depend on the recognition of human action or not, an analysis that should be carried out in the concrete case


Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 62-70
Author(s):  
A. V. Savinskiy

The paper is devoted to an actual problem of the legal theory and practice, namely: the institution of circumstances excluding criminal nature (criminality) of an act (Chapter 8 of the Russian Criminal Code). As a manifestation of criminal and legal compromise steadily strengthening its position in domestic criminal legislation, this legal phenomenon is intended to encourage citizens to commit actions that contribute to localization or minimization of threats to the interests of the individual, society and the state protected by the law. At the same time, despite seemingly clear legislative enactment, the institution of circumstances precluding the criminal nature of an act evokes hot scientific debates. Among forensic scientists there is no uniform opinion concerning the legal nature of the criminal law institution as a whole and some of the individual types of circumstances constituting the institution under consideration, in particular. The legal literature substantiates the idea of the need to expand the legislative list of such circumstances. Investigators and judges often face difficulties in practical application of the rules enshrined in articles of Chapter 8 of the Criminal Code (especially provisions concerning necessary defense, extreme necessity, reasonable risk). The reasons for theoretical and practical problems related to the circumstances excluding the criminal nature of the act are largely preconditioned by the insufficient research of the institution under consideration in the general theory of law. This fundamental theoretical legal science lacks general legal equivalents of the criminal law concepts “criminality of the act”, “circumstances excluding criminality of the act.” It is proposed to introduce into scientific circulation the general legal equivalent of the concept “criminality of the act” — “delinquency of the act”, representing the set of such features of the offense as public harm, wrongfulness, culpability and punishability. This new legal design will allow us to investigate the phenomenon of circumstances excluding criminality of the act in the light of a general theory of law, to determine the possibility and limits of their subsidiary application in various branches of law. Thus, categories of circumstances excluding criminal, administrative, civil. disciplinary delinquency of acts will acquire the right to exist in differnt legal sciences and relevant branches of law. This, in turn, will contribute to improving the effectiveness of protection of rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of the individual, ensuring the interests of the society and the state.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (15) ◽  
pp. 111-125
Author(s):  
Yuriivna Timofeyeva

The article considers some issues of interpretation of the right to privacy in the practice of the ECtHR and its impact on the criminal law of Ukraine. Numerous violations of the articles of the Convention require systematic response of the state and appropriate changes in both legislation and changes in law enforcement practices. The violations relate in particular to problems of interpretation of the provisions of the Convention. Provisions of Art. 8 of the Convention are related to other provisions of the Convention and the development of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on certain issues. It is noted that the Convention is dynamic, it changes under the influence of society, its provisions change in the process of development and acquire new meanings. In particular, the ECtHR recognizes a violation of Art. 8 (right to respect for private life) in those contexts in which he has not previously recognized. In particular, interpretation of Art. 8 of the Convention in the context of the right to environmental safety in case significant harm to the persons health (cases Dubetska and others v. Ukraine, Grymkivska v. Ukraine), the right to beg in the context of the right to freedom of expression (Lakatush v. Switzerland). It is established that the development of these provisions requires analysis and consideration in the development of a new Criminal Code. At the same time, care must be taken to maintain a balance between freedoms and human rights and the security of society and the state. It is important that the rights enshrined in the Convention remain fundamental and do not go beyond the interests and needs of the individual. In addition, it is also necessary to take into account the national characteristics of the state.


Author(s):  
Rowan Cruft

The first half of Chapter 10 addresses criticisms of the conception of human rights developed in Chapter 9: that it overlooks how human rights law protects collective goods rather than the individual, and that it overlooks the centrality of the state as duty-bearer in human rights law. The author’s response includes noting that state-focused human rights law is only one way in which ‘natural’ human rights are institutionalized: criminal law and non-law policy also play human rights roles. The chapter’s second half argues that human rights not only exist ‘for the right-holder’s sake’ (as in Chapters 7–9) but are also rights whose protection is distinctively ‘everyone’s business’: rights with which any human anywhere can show solidarity by demanding their fulfilment. This does not imply that human rights violations in one state are equally every state’s business. The chapter ends by summarizing Part II (Chapters 7–10) as vindicating the idea of human rights.


2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 69
Author(s):  
Guilherme Pavan Machado ◽  
José Carlos Kraemer Bortoloti

Resumo: A crescente Judicialização chama atenção ao passo que denuncia a inefetividade das políticas públicas, bem como impacta no entendimento do tribunal referente à demanda judicial pleiteada. Indubitavelmente, o direito fundamental à saúde é objeto de um contingente considerável da Judicialização, muito em razão do préstimo deficiente das instituições. Sabe-se que o direito à saúde tem previsão constitucional e infraconstitucional, atribuindo a responsabilidade ao Estado para sua realização por meio de políticas públicas e programas de governo. Contudo, a via administrativa-executiva estatal encontra dificuldades na efetividade desse direito a todos os indivíduos, na verdade não atende satisfatoriamente a população. Diante desse cenário, a alternativa subsidiária torna-se a Judicialização da pretensão, ou seja, o cidadão, objetivando a tutela do seu pleito à saúde busca-o na prestação jurisdicional. Nesse sentido, o presente trabalho tem como objetivo delinear o direito fundamental à saúde no entendimento do Tribunal de Justiça do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul, especificamente nas demandas de pleito de medicamentos. Por meio da pesquisa qualitativa técnica de revisão bibliográfica e do estudo de julgados no TJRS, utilizando do método fenomenológico-hermenêutico, buscar-se-á delinear o entendimento do referido tribunal, em grau de apelação, referente ao fornecimento judicial de fármacos pelo Estado, como forma de compreender quais são as variantes que direcionam o (não) deferimento da pretensão judicial do indivíduo e como o direito à saúde se apresenta neste cenário jurisprudencial.Abstract: The increasing judicialization calls attention to the step that denounces the ineffectiveness of public policies, as well as impacts on the court's understanding regarding the lawsuit filed. Undoubtedly, the fundamental right to health is the subject of a considerable contingent of judicialization, largely because of the inadequate facilities of the institutions. It is known that the right to health has constitutional and infraconstitutional foresight, assigning responsibility to the State for its fulfillment through public policies and government programs. However, the state administrative-administrative route finds difficulties in the effectiveness of this right for all individuals, in fact does not satisfactorily serve the population. In view of this scenario, the alternative alternative becomes the judicialization of the claim, that is, the citizen, aiming to protect his claim to health seeking it in the jurisdictional provision. In this sense, the present work aims to outline the fundamental right to health in the understanding of the Court of Justice of the State of Rio Grande do Sul, specifically in the lawsuits for drug litigation. Through the qualitative technical research of bibliographic review and the study of judgments in the TJRS, using the phenomenological-hermeneutic method, it will be sought to delineate the understanding of said court, in degree of appeal, regarding the judicial supply of drugs by the State, as a way of understanding which are the variants that direct the (non) deferment of the judicial claim of the individual and how the right to health presents itself in this jurisprudential scenario.


Author(s):  
Александр Михайлович Смирнов

В статье актуализируется вопрос замены наименования ст. 37 Уголовного кодекса Российской Федерации «Необходимая оборона» на «Необходимую защиту» как более четкого с точки зрения языка закона и юридически грамотного. Приводятся научно обоснованные аргументы в пользу подобного изменения в российский уголовный закон. Отмечается, что оборона, по своей сути, это военный термин, содержание которого выходит за пределы нормативных границ реализации действий в состоянии самозащиты права, регламентированного в данной статье. О защите правового статуса личности, интересов общества и государства от общественно опасного посягательства говорится в диспозиции данной статьи. Вместе с тем Конституция Российской Федерации предоставляет каждому лицу право на самостоятельную защиту, а не самостоятельную оборону своих прав и свобод в различных сферах жизнедеятельности всеми не запрещенными законом способами (ч. 2, ст. 45). Именно о защите, а не обороне социальных благ и интересов говорится в Европейской конвенции о защите прав человека и основных свобод (ч. 2 ст. 2 Раздел I). С содержательной точки зрения оборона предполагает совершение подготовительных, заблаговременных действий, а также контрнаступление (нападение на противника, его полную ликвидацию), что с законодательной точки зрения выступает превышением нормативных границ необходимой обороны, согласно действующей редакции рассматриваемой уголовно-правовой нормы. Помимо этого в науке уголовного права и ряде других отраслей юридической науки вопросы реализации необходимой обороны рассматриваются в рамках правового института «самозащиты права». The article updates the issue of replacing the name of Art. 37 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation «Necessary Defense» to «Necessary Protection» as the most correct in terms of the language of the law and legally competent. Scientifically grounded arguments are presented in favor of such a change in the Russian criminal law. It is noted that defense, in its essence, is a military term, the content of which goes beyond the normative boundaries of the implementation of actions in the state of self-defense of law, regulated in this article. The disposition of this article speaks about the protection of the legal status of the individual, the interests of society and the state from socially dangerous encroachment. At the same time, the Constitution of the Russian Federation grants each person the right to independent defense, and not independent defense of their rights and freedoms by all in various spheres of life, in ways not prohibited by law (part 2, article 45). It is about the protection, not the defense of social benefits and interests that is said in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Part 2 of Art. 2 Section I). From a substantive point of view, defense involves the commission of preparatory, early actions, as well as a counteroffensive (attack on the enemy, his complete elimination), which from a legislative point of view is an excess of the normative boundaries of necessary defense, in accordance with the current version of the criminal law in question. In addition, in the science of criminal law and a number of other branches of legal science, the implementation of necessary defense is considered within the framework of the legal institution of «self-defense of law».


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document