scholarly journals ОСОБЕННОСТИ ИНТЕРПРЕТАЦИИ СВОБОДЫ В КОДЕКСЕ КАК ЯДЕРНОМ ЖАНРЕ ДИСКУРСА ПРАВОВОГО ДОКУМЕНТА

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariya Nazemtseva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Discourse ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Document ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Russian Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Russian Linguistic ◽  
World Image ◽  
Selection Of

Введение. Проведен анализ репрезентации концепта свобода в кодексе как ядерном жанре дискурса правового документа. Цель – выявить специфику реализации концепта свобода, заданную модусно-диктумной организацией правового дискурса и спецификой кодекса как его ядерного жанра. Материал и методы. Материалом исследования являются кодексы РФ, а именно Семейный, Трудовой, Жилищный, Гражданский и Уголовный. Выборка материала обусловлена ядерным статусом кодекса в правовом тексте. Являясь одним из основных документов правового дискурса, кодекс наряду с Конституцией РФ отражает основы права. Свобода как ключевой концепт русской культуры по-особому репрезентируется в правовом дискурсе. Методология представлена дискурс- и концепт-анализом: дискурсивные и жанровые особенности определяются с позиции кодекса в жанровой системе правового дискурса, свобода анализируется через сравнение данного концепта в системе русской языковой картины мира в целом (на материале уже проведенных исследований) с правовым дискурсом в частности. Результаты и обсуждение. Обнаружено, что концепт свобода, в отличие от его обыденного представления в русской языковой картине мира, имеет особую небинарную специфику и трансформируется с помощью закона. В обыденном сознании существует оппозиция свобода (воля) / несвобода, в кодексе свобода реализуется посредством разрешительного (то, что можно делать в рамках закона), запретительного модуса (то, что уголовно наказуемо и предписано через несвободу, т. е. арест), а также модуса долженствования (то, что по закону должно быть совершено). Кроме того, свобода в кодексах определяется их тематической сферой: существует свобода семейных, трудовых, жилищных, гражданских и др. отношений. В оппозиции находится то, что делать запрещено и гарантирует несвободу (представлено Уголовным кодексом). Заключение. Свобода в дискурсе правового документа – официально зафиксированная возможность человека действовать в рамках закона. Кодекс как ядерный жанр правового дискурса осуществляет преобразование концепта посредством его модусно-диктумной модификации. В результате определяющим средством для реализации концепта свобода является закон, а также основные концепты каждого выбранного кодекса – семья, труд, жилище, гражданин, наказание.Introduction. The research explored representation of the concept freedom in the Сode as a nuclear genre of legal document discourse. Aim and objectives of the article are to identify the specifics of implementation of the concept freedom, defined by modus-dictum organization of legal discourse and the specifics of the Code as its nuclear genre. Material and methods. The research material consists of the Codes of the Russian Federation, which are Family, Labour, Housing, Civil, and Criminal Сodes. The selection of material is determined in accordance with the nuclear status of this genre in legal text. Being one of the main documents of legal discourse, the Code as well as the Constitution of the Russian Federation, reflects the foundations of Russian law. Freedom, as a key concept of Russian culture, is specifically represented in legal discourse. The methodology includes discourse and concept analysis: we observe discursive and genre features from the position of the Code in genre system of legal discourse. Freedom is analyzed through comparing this concept in the system of Russian linguistic world-image on the whole (based on material from studies already conducted) with legal discourse in particular. Results and discussion. We found that the concept freedom, in contrast to its common representation in Russian linguistic world-image, has a particular non-binary specificity and is transformed through the law. In everyday language, there is an opposition freedom (will)/unfreedom, and in the Code freedom is realized through a permissive (what can be done within the framework of the law), prohibitive modus (what is criminally punishable and prescribed through unfreedom, i.e. arrest), and a modus of obligation (what is required to be done by law). In addition, freedom in the Codes is influenced by their thematic sphere: there are freedom of family, labour, housing, and civil relationships. In opposition is what is prohibited to do and guarantees unfreedom (represented by the Criminal Code). Conclusion. Freedom in the legal document discourse is an officially recorded ability of a person to operate within the confines of the law. The Code as a nuclear genre of legal discourse transforms the concept through its modus-dictum modification. As a result, pivotal for the implementation of the concept freedom is the law, as well as the basic concepts of each selected Code – family, labour, housing, citizen, and punishment.

scholarly journals The Development of the Russian Legal System after the “Accession” of the Republic of Crimea to the Russian Federation

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 175-197
Author(s):  
Natalia Cwicinskaja
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Legal Regulations ◽  
Federal Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Russian Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

On March 18 2014, the Republic of Crimea became a federal subject of the Russian Federation and the Ukrainian legal system was changed to the Russian system. The transition period was set to end on January 1 2015. This transition period was characterized by the fact that the law was created on a day-to-day basis, and as the residents of Crimea were unfamiliar with Russian law they found themselves in a legal vacuum. Laws were adopted in an urgent manner to ensure that the unification was as smooth as possible. In practice it became apparent that the allocated time was not sufficient, and the transition period was extended in some areas. The Article presents a review of the accession procedure and the legal regulations established in the Republic of Crimea during the transition period, and identifies some issues which have arisen.

scholarly journals The latest practice of urban planning regulation in the context of the "Far Eastern hectare program"

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 3-6
Author(s):  
Eduard N. Sokol-Nomokonov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Urban Planning ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Town Planning ◽  
Federal Legislation ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Far Eastern ◽  
Selection Of

The article examines the features of the application of federal legislation in terms of limiting its action in certain regions of the Russian Federation. The practice of land and town planning regulation under such restrictions is analyzed. Proposals are given for further improvement of the law in terms of creating special conditions for the selection of land plots in the conditions of the "Far Eastern hectare program".

scholarly journals Leniency programmesfor cartel: mature reforms

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

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

scholarly journals Some Aspects of Prevention and Investigation of Damage to the Railway Telecommunications Facilities

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 358-365
Author(s):  
Igor Ozerov ◽  
Olga Katayeva ◽  
Denis Rudov ◽  
Elena Cherkasova ◽  
Anastasia Volchenko ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Customs Union ◽  
Telecommunications Infrastructure ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

The authors study the issues of preventing the damage to the railway telecommunications infrastructure by analyzing the current criminal procedure legislation, criminal legislation and criminalistics views on the methods and means of counteracting crimes under Art. 215.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. They present the algorithm of actions of the law enforcement employees and the specialists servicing the railway facilities when such offences take place. The authors analyze the procedural investigative activities regarding the employees of the organizations that service the railway infrastructure. The investigation of crimes under Art. 215.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation requires expert knowledge in the sphere of servicing railway transport. The authors specifically examine some evidence acquired during the preliminary investigation and the methodology of some investigative actions (interrogation of witnesses, representatives of the aggrieved party, inspection of the crime scene). They analyze the procedure of evaluating the damage inflicted on sophisticated telecommunication facilities. They also single out a number of special characteristics of the investigative methodology for crimes under Art. 215.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation when specialists in servicing complex telecommunications facilities are called to give testimony. It is noted that countries bordering on the Russian Federation and members of the Customs Union are gradually harmonizing their criminal and criminal procedure legislation with the legislation of the Russian Federation. The paper states that today the Russian Federation has sufficient legislative base to form a system of preventing crimes against railway telecommunications infrastructure. In conclusion the authors present a number of measures to counteract crimes under Art. 215.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, offer their brief description and the recommendations for using them. They stress the necessity of cooperation between the owners of the railway facilities, the law enforcement bodies and the mass media.

scholarly journals The Perpetrator of the Crime in Complicity and without Complicity: A Universal Role in the Diversity of Legal Constructions

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 107-122
Author(s):  
D. M. Molchanov
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Main Element ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Sense

A comprehensive study of the perpetrator’s role leads to the following conclusions: “perpetrator of the crime” is a universal term used to describe an act that constitutes an objective element of the crime committed both in complicity and without complicity. Four alternatives to the actions of the perpetrator exist: executor who performed the objective element alone, an accomplice who performed the objective element with other accomplices, an indirect perpetrator, an indirect accomplice. Other ways to qualify person’s act as a perpetrator are based not on the law, but on the recommendations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation that de facto acquired the status of the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (joint participation in the organized group, joint participation in a crime with “technical distribution of roles”). The main element of the act of the perpetrator includes the fulfillment of the objective element described in the disposition of the article of the Special Part. The content of the objective element of a particular crime does not depend on the existence of complicity, hence the term “perpetrator” is applicable to any crime and has a universal value. It is impractical to describe in the law the same acts in different terms. “Technical distribution of roles” is a doctrinal term. Its content is disclosed in some resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the RF. Extensive interpretation of the term “perpetrator” in crimes with “technical distribution of roles” is a forced measure on the part of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, since the term “the group of persons in conspiracy” is interpreted restrictively. This interpretation complicates the application of the criminal law and does not allow us to adequately assess the greater risk of crimes committed in complicity. The term “technical distribution of roles” does not have a universal (acknowledged) interpretation in jurisprudence, which also makes it difficult to apply the law. Joint participation in a legal sense in crimes committed by an organized group is a construct that is not based on law applied to crimes with a special subject, which contradicts part 4, Art. 34 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Application of the Principle of Increased Tolerance of Public Persons to Criticism Addressed to Them in the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
pp. 29-34
Author(s):  
E. V. Loos
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Russian Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Official Status

The article discusses the legal and philosophical aspects of the application in the Russian Federation of the principle of increased tolerance of public persons to criticism addressed to them established by the European Court of Human Rights. The author believes that the principle in question contradicts Article 19 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation that guarantees equality of human and civil rights and freedoms regardless of property and official status, membership in public associations, as well as other circumstances. The author has questioned the appropriateness of the introduction of the principle of increased tolerance in Russian law enforcement practice, since it does not contribute to the realization of the “spirit of the law,” while leading to unnecessary accumulation of the law. It is noted that the question of the balance between the right to freedom of expression and opinion and the right to protection of the honour and dignity of the person in the process of criticism of public persons and their activities cannot be settled exhaustively in the legislation as it affects the sphere of morality.

scholarly journals The Content of Recovering and Compensating the Harm Caused by the Crime under the Legislation of the Russian Federation and Germany

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 136-145
Author(s):  
Ya. M. Ploshkina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
German Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Legal Institution ◽  
Narrow Sense ◽  
Injured Person ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Russian Law ◽  
The Law

The paper examines the concept of recovery of harm caused by the crime under Russian law in comparison with the concept of compensation for harm under German law. The results of the comparative legal study represent characteristics of the legal regulation and disclosure of the content of recovery and compensation for harm caused by a crime under the legislation of the Russian Federation and Germany, as well as the problems related to restrictions associated with compensation of harm in a narrow sense and recovery of harm under German Law. In Germany, the law provides for the legal institution of compensation of harm to the injured person by the person who committed a criminal act, which envisages its comprehensive legal regulation in specific provisions of criminal and criminal procedure laws. Legal regulation of recovery of harm in the Russian Federation is still unsettled due to the fact that recovery of harm is a mandatory element of various legal institutions (for example, termination of the criminal case due to active repentance, reconciliation of the parties, imposition of a judicial fine or circumstances mitigating the sentence, etc.). To determine the content of the harm caused by the crime, it is necessary to refer not only to the text of the law, but also to the legal acts of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation with due regard to the article defining the contents of recovery of harm caused by the crime. Under German law, compensation for the injured person by a person who committed a criminal act is used in two senses: narrow and broad ones, including recovery. The paper presents the criteria that allow us to limit these forms of response to the crime committed, as well as the content of compensation for harm in a broad sense.

scholarly journals The Concept of Freedom of Enterprise Through the Prism of Criminal Law Characteristics of Fraud

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-299
Author(s):  
Yekaterina Yakimova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Negative Results ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Entrepreneurial Activities

The research of issues connected with the analysis of business risks is relevant because of the problem of qualifying the actions of entrepreneurs under the fraud-related Articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Besides, the development of technologies increases the number of frauds in the digital environment, which makes it necessary to determine key features of fraudulent actions connected with the changes in the economic organization of the society connected with the digital transformation of some branches of the world economy in general and Russian economy in particular, of the social sphere, and of the specifics of public administration of some areas of life. The responsiveness of lawmakers manifested in amending a group of Articles in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation regarding the legal characteristics of fraud, shows that there are some problems in the legislative regulation of this sphere. The author believes that they are caused by an attempt to assess the degree of freedom of enterprise and the degree of involvement of each side of legal relations in the risk of investment. The analysis of legislation, the law enforcement practice, statistical data give reason to believe that most of the problems of legislative understanding of fraud in entrepreneurship are not connected with contradictions in the legal regulation, but rather with the drawbacks of the law enforcement practice, the prevalence of repressive methodology in classifying the actions of entrepreneurs and the inner conviction of the law enforcement employees that entrepreneurs intentionally strive to obtain negative results in any, and primarily entrepreneurial, activities. The author argues that further improvement of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation will not yield any tangible results, which testifies to a considerable transformation of the fraud-related Articles in the last 15 years. Changes in the practice of enforcement of the criminal law’s articles regarding fraud are only possible after the principles of such work are worked out by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, who at present pays much attention to this issue, although some clauses of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation require further analysis and improvement.

scholarly journals On the construction of the purpose of punishment in criminal law

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-53
Author(s):  
S. A. Borovikov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Clear Guideline ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The One

The subject of consideration of this paper is the study of the purposes of punishment enshrined in article 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the similarities and differences in the approaches used to determining the purpose of criminal punishment in the laws of different countries and historical periods, the need for a critical assessment of the existing legislative decision. In the course of a comparative analysis the conclusion is formulated that the current version of the purposes of punishment in criminal law is overly broad, which creates the illusion of its achievement and in some cases the competition of its parts among themselves. So the first of those mentioned in article 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation the purpose of restoring social justice is a quality that should be inherent in punishment. The second of the purposes stated in the law – the correction of the convict – is one of several ways to achieve it. However the very purpose of the punishment is not to correct the convict. The third of these purposes – the prevention of crimes – is most consistent with the purpose of punishment, but it is quite lengthy and requires clarification. In addition it does not contain a clear focus on a person who can or has committed a crime. According to the results of the analysis it is proposed to carry out an adjustment of the purposes of criminal punishment in the law. The purpose of punishment should be one and have a common focus. In this regard it is proposed to define as the purpose of punishment – retention persons from committing crimes. The single and understandable purpose of punishment on the one hand will be a clear guideline in constructing the type and size of both the main and additional punishments in the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part, and on the other will allow the courts to choose the punishment that most corresponds to the intended result.

scholarly journals Aggravating circumstances

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-161
Author(s):  
A. P. Kuznetsov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Preventive Role

In the article on the basis of the latest amendments made to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation circumstances aggravating the punishment are investigated, attention is drawn to some controversial legal and technical decisions in their formulation. The criminal law on the strength of influence of certain circumstances on the chosen punishment is clearly not enough, which does not contribute to enhancing the preventive role of the law, the elimination of subjectivism and discord in practice. Most scientists and practitioners support the idea of specifying, emphasizing that it will be easier to apply the law, circumstances of the case will be visibly linked to the chosen measure of criminal law impact, the importance of references in sentences to data on the case will increase, the preventive role of criminal law will increase, the prerequisites for a uniform understanding will be strengthened and application of the Criminal Code. It was not by chance that in the Soviet period of development of the science of criminal law, a tendency emerged to single out: a) main and b) other mitigating and aggravating circumstances. Consequently it is necessary to take into account the whole range of issues relating to the practical implementation of the idea of legislative specification of the strength of influence of individual circumstances: the circle of circumstances, which it may concern; the extent to which such circumstances influence the punishment (including the expediency of specifying in the law how much the punishment increases or decreases, or what is the upper or lower new limit within which the court selects the punishment taking into account the “main” circumstance). According to Part 2 of Art. 63 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation if the aggravating circumstances are provided for by the relevant article of the Special Part as a sign of a crime, it in itself cannot be re-taken into account when imposing a punishment. In the criminal law doctrine an exhaustive (closed) list of aggravating circumstances has not been approved by scientists, who believe that this method does not take into account changes in the sphere of public life to a certain extent.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document