PROBLEMS OF A CRIMINAL-LEGAL NATURE ARISING IN THE INVESTIGATION OF CRIMES RELATED TO THE ILLEGAL WITHDRAWAL OF CAPITAL ABROAD (ARTICLE 193 AND ARTICLE 193.1 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-151
Author(s):  
Roman S. POZDISHEV ◽  
Dmitriy V. Nazarychev
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Exchange Transactions

The article is devoted to the peculiarities of the criminal-legal characteristics of crimes related to the illegal withdrawal of capital abroad, in particular to the ratio of crimes under Art. 193 and Art. 193.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The problem is considered in the context of the investigative practice of the internal affairs bodies of the Russian Federation for 2019-2020, which reveals many difficulties associated with the qualification of currency crimes and the differentiation of a single ongoing crime from a set of crimes. This circumstance determines the relevance of the study. Scientific novelty is expressed in the conclusions reached by the team of authors as a result of the analysis of a significant volume of procedural documents in the category of criminal cases under consideration, including decisions to refuse to initiate a criminal case, decisions to terminate a criminal case, indictments, sentences, which are characterized by the scale on a territorial basis and cover more than 40 regions of Russia. Among the most significant results of the study, one should point out the author’s conclusion about the absence of a unified approach to classifying currency crimes as continuing in legal science and practice, as well as criteria that make it possible to distinguish between the totality of currency crimes and continued currency crime. In order to implement a systematic approach and the subsequent clarity of the stated results, the ratio of evasion from fulfilling obligations to repatriate funds and performing foreign exchange transactions to transfer funds to non-residents’ accounts using forged documents was carried out by highlighting individual elements of these crimes and comparing them with each other, as a result which revealed the distinctive features of the objective side, the subjective side and the subject of the considered type of crime. The research methodology is presented by dialectical, formal-logical, systemic, sociological, functional, comparative-legal and formal-legal methods.

To the Matter of Procedural and Legal Problems of Detaining a Person on Suspicion of Committing a Crime

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.V. Bolshakov ◽  
◽  
I.D. Nazarov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Moment

The subject of the research within the framework of the article is the criminal procedure institute for the detention of a person on suspicion of committing a crime. The legal nature of this institution is analyzed, and comments are given on the normative legal acts and judicial practice regulating the issues of detention. The theoretical basis of the research is based on the publications of the last two decades on this problem, in particular, reflecting the discussion of the process scientists S. A. Shafer, S. B. Rossinsky and A. A. Tarasov, the subject of which was the issue of the legal nature of a suspect detention in a criminal case. In the paper, the authors ask the following questions: What is the detention of a person on suspicion of committing a crime in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation? From what moment does the detained person acquire the status of a suspect? Is it possible to detain a person before initiating a criminal case? The study concludes that a person acquires the actual status of a suspect from the moment of direct detention, that is, before documenting this status and, as a result, before initiating a criminal case. Amendments to the articles of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation are proposed, and the authors` versions of the definitions of the concepts «detention of a suspect», «the moment of actual detention» and «pre-trial proceedings» are given.

COUNTERING MATCH-FIXING: COMPARISON OF CRIMINAL LAW AND SPORTS LAW REGULATION ON THE EXAMPLE OF THE RUSSIAN ICE HOCKEY FEDERATION

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Евгения Германовна Ветрова ◽  
Илья Александрович Васильев
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Ice Hockey ◽  
Sports Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Subjective Side

В статье проводится сравнение положений ст. 184 УК РФ (Оказание противоправного влияния на результат официального спортивного соревнования) и соответствующих статей Дисциплинарного Регламента Федерации Хоккея России. Автор произвел сравнение составов анализируемых правонарушений: объекта, субъекта, объективной стороны и субъективной стороны и указал их сходства и отличия. The article compares the provisions of Article 184 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Illegal influence on the result of an official sports competition) and the corresponding articles of the Disciplinary Regulations of the Russian Ice Hockey Federation. The author compared the components of the analyzed offenses: the object, the subject, the objective side and the subjective side, and indicated their similarities and differences.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL AND LEGAL STUDY OF CONNIVANCE IN CRIME AS A SIGN CHARACTERIZING CONFLUENCE OF SEVERAL PERSONS IN ONE CRIME

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (72) (2) ◽  
pp. 236-241
Author(s):  
A. A. Kashkarov ◽  
D. A. Poshtaruk
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Legal Study ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Made In

A criminal and legal analysis of the objective and subjective signs, characterizing the connivance to the crime is made in the publication. The study found that connivance in a crime may be characteristic of various criminal law institutions, such as implication in a crime and complicity in a crime. In addition, the presented arguments show that connivance as a criminally punishable act may be associated with non-interference with unlawful activities that do not constitute a crime. The analysis shows that connivance in a crime can have a selfish purpose. It is noted that connivance in a crime is significantly different from other forms of implication in a crime, namely concealment of a crime and failure to report a crime. The subject of connivance in a crime is a person endowed with special powers to prevent, document and register crimes or offences. The article discloses that there is no special penal provision in the current Act of Criminal Responsibility of the Russian Federation that criminalizes it. The exception is the disposition of Art. 290 of the Criminal Code of RF, which contains an indication of connivance as a sign characterizing the objective side of receiving a bribe.

scholarly journals Topical Problems of Criminal Prosecution for Illegal Banking Transactions

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 962-970
Author(s):  
Diana Alekseeva ◽  
Irina Mikheeva ◽  
Tatyana Suspitsyna
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Bank Employees ◽  
Uniform Assessment ◽  
Unambiguous Interpretation

In recent years there has been an increase in the number of crimes under Art. 172 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation («Illegal banking»), whose subjects, among other things, act as intermediaries for their clients and are not one of the sides in a contract with the bank. Such practice is not indisputable, because innocent people could be prosecuted if there is a mistake in the qualification of actions. The authors of the article assess the actions of physical persons providing the services of intermediaries for the bank clients who open accounts, make payments, conduct encashment and different cash operations. Specifically, the authors note that different actions of the bank and the client connected with banking transactions are designated in law in the same way, which leads to controversial situations, including the qualification of such actions as crimes. The authors determine the legal nature of banking as an aggregate of systemic banking operations and conclude that the actions of physical persons — intermediaries who are not bank employees or managers or other persons authorized by the clients of the bank — do not correspond to the characteristics of a crime under Art. 172 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. They stress that the current edition of Art. 172 of the CC of the RF does not allow for an unambiguous interpretation of the subject of the analyzed corpus delicti; the authors also present data from court practice that testify that it does not have a uniform assessment. The position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on this issue raises questions. The authors support the legal approach according to which Art. 172 of the CC of the RF refers to a special subject (head or other employee of a credit organization). They also point out that the disposition of the norm, in the part that includes subjective characteristics, makes it possible to prosecute a person for both intentional and negligent actions, which is not very well-grounded; the authors support the position that a person can only be prosecuted for illegal entrepreneurship if the intention is determined.

scholarly journals Judicial fine: problems of substantive basis and law enforcement practice

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 154-163
Author(s):  
Alexandra V. Boyarskaya
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Complex Analysis ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Compensation For Damage ◽  
The One

The subject of the article is the grounds for exemption from criminal liability with the appointment of a judicial fine are being considered.The purpose of the article is to reveal the systemic links between Art. 76.2 and 75-76 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation as well as prospects of judicial fine in criminal law.The methodology of research includes methods of complex analysis, synthesis, as well as formal-logical, comparative legal and formal-legal methods.Results, scope of application. The author analyzes the practice of applying Art. 76.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on criminal cases concerning crimes with a formal composition, when the defendants did not make any compensation for damage or other reparation for damage caused by the criminal act.The author notes that the institution of release from criminal liability with the appointment of a judicial fine is controversial. On the one hand, it has positive aspects, as it directly and unambiguously aims at compensation for damage or other smoothing of the harm caused by the crime. Сriminal legislation of the Russian Federation should more actively provide for the interests of the victim.However, fine also has a number of shortcomings related to the contradictory nature of his normative definition. The institution in question does not have its own substantive legal basis, it is applied to the same range of cases as the grounds for exemption from criminal liability provided for in Art. 75, 76 and partially Art. 76.1 of the Criminal Code. Consequently, its appearance can make a system of measures that stimulate positive postcriminal behavior only more contradictory.The introduction of this institution can contribute to an increase in manifestations of corruption. Judicial fine is appointed only by the court, but the court to exercise its functions in this case does not have the ability to verify the truthfulness of the information on the participation of the accused in the committed crime. So, there is a risk of applying this institution to persons who should be brought to criminal responsibility.This institution is available primarily for wealthy suspects (accused persons) who are capable to reimburse the damage caused by crime immediately and, in addition, within the time limits established by the court to pay a judicial fine.Conclusions. The author comes to the conclusion that the exemption from criminal liability with the appointment of a judicial fine is a truncated form of active repentance.

Features of the criminal evaluation of objective signs of timber smuggling (Art. 226.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (4) ◽  
pp. 62-72
Author(s):  
Arbi Akiev ◽  
Daria Fisenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Modus Operandi ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Structure ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Enforcement Activity

In the article the authors examine certain problems of qualification of smuggling of timber being one of the types of strategically important goods and resources for the Russian Federation. These problems are stipulated by the specific of the legislative structure, as well as by the difficulties of interpreting this corpus delicti. Within the frame of the research it was established that that most difficulties in law enforcement activity arise in the course of criminal-legal assessment of the objective signs of timber smuggling and, mostly, of the subject of the corpus delicti under consideration and modus operandi of the crime due to the specifics of timber being the object of smuggling. In order to solve problems stated in the article, the authors analyze such ob-jective signs of corpus delicti provided for by Art. 2261 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as a subject and an objective side on the basis of materials of of-ficial statistics, judicial practice and criminal law doctrine. As a result of the conducted analysis the authors’ recommendations on the qualification of timber smuggling are formulated. Thus, the authors clearly identified the established in the current customs legislation a list of types of timber related to the subject of the crime provided for by Art. 2261 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; the most common modus operandi of timber smuggling in judicial practice are explained; the moment of completion of the criminal encroachment under analysis is clarified, and the amount of damage necessary to qualify the timber smuggling under Art. 2261 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are defined.

scholarly journals Peculiarities of Criminal Liability for Manufacture, Storage, Transportation or Sale of Counterfeit Money or Securities: Domestic and Foreign Experience

2020 ◽  
pp. 048-059
Author(s):  
S. V. Kartashov ◽  
◽  
E. Yu. Kuzmenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Objective Side

Emphasis is placed on the social conditionality of criminal liability for the manufacture, storage, transportation or sale of counterfeit money or securities. Attention is drawn to the features of the signs of elements (objective and subjective sides) of the corpus delicti, which form the act we are analyzing under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and a number of foreign Criminal Code in countries belonging to the Romano-Germanic (Germany, Denmark and Switzerland) and post-socialist legal families (Republic of Kyrgyzstan, Republic of Kazakhstan, Republic of Belarus, Turkmenistan, Republic of Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Republic of Latvia). The goal is to analyze the general and distinctive features that characterize the act in question through the prism of comparative legal research. The study concluded that there are differences in the technical and legal design of norms. Special attention is paid to the fact that in the current Russian criminal law, unlike the laws of some foreign countries, there are no such signs of the objective side of a crime as sending counterfeit money; import of counterfeit money from abroad; purchase of clichés, specialized paper, etc. for the production of items of corpus delicti. It is concluded that, according to judicial practice, these actions are qualified under Art. 186 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, but at the same time, the domestic legislator needs to analyze the feasibility of reflecting in it such alternative qualifying signs of the objective side of this crime as: importing from abroad and sending counterfeit money or securities.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL-LEGAL FEATURES OF THE QUALIFICATION OF VIOLATIONS OF THE RULES OF OPERATION OF MEANS OF STORAGE, PROCESSING OR TRANSMISSION OF COMPUTER INFORMATION AND INFORMATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS (ARTICLE 274 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 489-496
Author(s):  
S.A. Styazhkina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Telecommunications Networks ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Points Of View ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Subjective Side

The article deals with the issues of qualification of violations of the rules of operation of means of storage, processing or transmission of computer information and information and telecommunications networks (Article 274 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The objective and subjective features of this corpus delicti are revealed. Special attention is paid to the problem of determining the subject of violation of the rules of operation of means of storage, processing or transmission of computer information and information and telecommunications networks. The question of the objective side of the Article 274 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is considered, in particular, the rules of means of storage, processing and transmission of computer information are defined, as which the rules should be considered, both contained in regulatory legal acts and in local documents of organizations, enterprises, institutions. The author analyzes the signs of the subjective side of the violation of the rules of operation of means of storage, processing or transmission of computer information and information and telecommunications networks, which cause a lot of controversy in the scientific literature. Different points of view regarding the subject of the crime, which can be a physical sane person who has reached the age of 16, are also considered.

scholarly journals PUBLIC INCITEMENT TO TERRORIST ACTIVITY, PUBLIC JUSTIFICATION OF TERRORISM OR ADVOCACY OF TERRORISM: PECULIARITIES OF THE SUBJECT AND THE OBJECTIVE SIDE OF THE CRIME

2020 ◽  
pp. 3-8
Author(s):  
I.A. Anisimova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Side Information ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Public Justification ◽  
Terrorist Activity ◽  
Scientific Principles ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Objective Side

The article is devoted to the problems of the criminal liability for crimes covered by article 205.2 of theCriminal Code of the Russian Federation. Based on the analysis of legislation and scientific principles theauthor gives a refined description of the most controversial elements of crimes covered by article 205.2 of theCriminal Code of the Russian Federation. They are a subject and an objective side. Information containingincitement to terrorist activity, justifying or promoting terrorism is considered as the subject of crimes under article 205.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The article offers recommendationsfor interpretation of the signs of the subject and the objective side of the crime under article 205.2 of theCriminal Code of the Russian Federation and qualification of these crimes.

scholarly journals Going through training for the purpose of carrying out terrorist activity

2020 ◽  
pp. 89-103
Author(s):  
Georgii Moskalev
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Body ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Minimum Age ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Objective Side

The subject of this research is the provision on criminal liability for training for the purpose of carrying out terrorist activities. In the course of this research, the author determines the content of the elements of a crime stipulated by the Article 205.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, defines boundaries of this criminal violation, as well as makes recommendations on the improvement of its legal regulation. The article is based on the component legal analysis of the body of crime, stipulated by the Article 205.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, with application of such methods of legal hermeneutics as grammatical and systemic interpretation. It was revealed that de facto, a direct object of crime envisaged by the Article 205.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation differs depending on the type of crime for which the subject is undergoing training; while the objective side of crime consists in training, including self-training of the subject. The article criticizes the legislator’s decision to establishing a minimum age threshold (14 y.o.) for the subject of crime, as well as the method to describe the purpose in disposition of the Article 205.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The author describes the cases when introduction of the Article 205.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation allows double prosecution for the same offence, as well as regulation of a stiffer penalty for preparation, in comparison with the completed substantive crime, which in both cases violates the principle of justice (Article 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).  A proposal is made to exclude the Article 205.3 from the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as introduce a special rule on the boundaries of punishment for preparation of terrorist acts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document