scholarly journals Judicial protection of the rights of the victim (bank-creditor) after the conclusion of the agreement of assignment of the right (requirements) in the conditions of the intentional bankruptcy of the debtor.

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 150-159
Author(s):  
Yuri Truntsevsky
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Creditor Bank ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Civil Contract

The subject of analysis in the paper is Russian insolvency legislation? As well as rules ofRussian Criminal Code about insolvency crimes.The purpose of the article is to analyze methods of the judicial protection of the rights ofthe victim (creditor-bank) after the conclusion of the contract of cession of rights (claims)in the context of deliberate bankruptcy of the debtor.The methodology of research includes: analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, survey,and statistical method.The results, scope of application. Intentional bankruptcy (Art. 196 of the Russian CriminalCode) violates the legitimate property interests of creditors. In particular, the Bank has theright to appeal to law enforcement agencies with a statement about criminal acts committedagainst the Bank that caused damage to the Bank. The creditor has the right to applyfor recognition as an injured person. Such a creditor is harmed by a crime. In the event thatthe Bank deliberately bankruptcy of the debtor harmed, and there is a causal relationshipbetween such actions and the socially dangerous consequences that have occurred, then,as follows from Part 1 of Art. 44 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, this circumstance is aprerequisite for the recognition of the Bank as a civil plaintiff. Such a bank has the right todeclare in the criminal case a civil claim for damages to the bank. The purpose of this articleis to provide judicial protection of the rights of the victim (creditor bank) after concludingthe contract of assignment of the right (claims) in the circumstances of the debtor's deliberatebankruptcy. The research methods are: analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction,questioning and statistical method. The conclusion is drawn that the assignment of claimsunder a civil law contract is not grounds for refusing to recognize the Bank as a victim anda civil plaintiff in a criminal case under Art. 196 of the Criminal Code.Conclusions. The assignment of claims under civil contract is not a ground for refusingrecognition the Bank as the victim and civil plaintiff in a criminal case under Arti. 196 of theCriminal Code.

scholarly journals SUATU KAJIAN YURIDIS TERHADAP PENGGUNAAN ALAT BUKTI ELEKTRONIK DALAM KEJAHATAN CYBER DALAM SISTEM PENEGAKAN HUKUM

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 11-25
Author(s):  
Ni Made Trisna Dewi,Reido Lardiza Fahrial
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Law ◽  
Witness Statements ◽  
And Function

Abuse in the electronic transaction because it is formed from an electronic process, so the object changes, the goods become electronic data and the evidence is electronic.  Referring to the provisions of positive law in Indonesia, there are several laws and regulations that have set about electronic evidence as legal evidence before the court but there is still debate between the usefulness and function of the electronic evidence itself, from that background in  The following problems can be formulated, How do law enforcement from investigations, prosecutions to criminal case decisions in cybercrimes and How is the use of electronic evidence in criminal case investigations in cybercrimes This research uses normative research methods that are moving from the existence of norm conflicts between the Criminal Procedure Code and  ITE Law Number 19 Year 2016 in the use of evidence.  The law enforcement process of the investigator, the prosecution until the court's decision cannot run in accordance with the provisions of ITE Law Number 19 of 2016, because in interpreting the use of electronic evidence still refers to Article 184 paragraph (1) KUHAP of the Criminal Procedure Code stated that the evidence used  Legitimate are: witness statements, expert statements, letters, instructions and statements of the accused so that the application of the ITE Law cannot be applied effectively The conclusion of this research is that law enforcement using electronic evidence in cyber crime cannot stand alone because the application of the Act  - ITE Law Number 19 Year 2016 still refers to the Criminal Code so that the evidence that is clear before the trial still refers to article 184 paragraph (1) KUHAP of the Criminal Procedure Code and the strength of proof of electronic evidence depends on the law enforcement agencies interpreting it because all electronic evidence is classified into  in evidence in the form of objects as  so there is a need for confidence from the legal apparatus in order to determine the position and truth of the electronic evidence.   Penyalahgunaan didalam transaksi elektronik tersebut karena terbentuk dari suatu proses elektronik, sehingga objeknya pun berubah, barang menjadi data elektronik dan alat buktinya pun bersifat elektronik. Mengacu pada ketentuan hukum positif di Indonesia, ada beberapa peraturan perundang-undangan yang telah mengatur mengenai alat bukti elektronik sebagai alat bukti yang sah di muka pengadilan tetapi tetap masih ada perdebatan antara kegunaan dan fungsi dari alat bukti elektronik itu sendiri, dari latar belakang tersebut di atas dapat dirumuskan masalah sebagai berikut, Bagaimana penegakkan hukum dari penyidikan, penuntutan sampai putusan perkara pidana dalam kejahatan cyber dan Bagaimanakah penggunaan bukti elektronik dalam pemeriksaan perkara pidana dalam kejahatan cyber Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian normatif yakni beranjak dari adanya konflik norma antara KUHAP dengan Undang-undang ITE Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 dalam penggunaan alat bukti. Proses penegakkan hukum dari penyidik, penuntutan sampai pada putusan pengadilan tidak dapat berjalan sesuai dengan ketentuan Undang-undang ITE Nomor 19 Tahun 2016, karena dalam melakukan penafsiran terhadap penggunaan alat bukti Elektronik masih mengacu pada Pasal 184 ayat (1) KUHAP disebutkan bahwa alat bukti yang sah adalah: keterangan saksi, keterangan ahli, surat, petunjuk dan keterangan terdakwa. sehingga penerapan Undang-undang ITE tidak dapat diterapkan secara efektiv. Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah penegakan hukum dengan menggunakan alat bukti elektronik dalam kejahatan cyber tidak bisa berdiri sendiri karena penerapan Undang-Undang ITE Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 tetap merujuk kepada KUHP sehingga alat bukti yang sah di muka persidangan tetap mengacu pada pasal 184 ayat (1) KUHAP dan Kekuatan pembuktian alat bukti elektronik tersebut tergantung dari aparat hukum dalam menafsirkannya karena semua alat bukti elektronik tersebut digolongkan ke dalam alat bukti berupa benda sebagai petunjuk sehingga diperlukan juga keyakinan dari aparat hukum agar bisa menentukan posisi dan kebenaran dari alat bukti elektronik tersebut.

scholarly journals Powers of the prosecutor during pretrial proceedings to protect the rights of victims of crimes

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 89-93
Author(s):  
Lilia R. Komarova ◽  
Mikhail V. Kolesov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

The article substantiates the need to change the criminal procedural legislation that regulates the powers of the prosecutor and the status of the victim and gives the prosecutor the right to initiate a criminal case. The proposed changes in the procedural powers of the prosecutor are also considered through the prism of organizing the activities of law enforcement agencies and the impact of statistical reporting indicators on their activities. The experience of prosecutorial and investigative practices and the opinion of distinguished domestic legal scholars are analyzed. The changes proposed by the authors could have a significant positive impact on the work of preliminary investigation bodies and reduce the number of violations committed during preliminary investigation stages. In addition, bringing the status of the prosecutor and the preliminary investigation bodies into a logical procedural position could eliminate unnecessary and inherently harmful corporate competition.

scholarly journals On exemption from criminal liability for unlawful restriction of competition (the Article 178 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Ol'ga Evgen'evna Derevyagina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

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.

scholarly journals Deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities: regulatory issues and law enforcement practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 234 (11) ◽  
pp. 16-24
Author(s):  
SERGEY A. PICHUGIN ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

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.

scholarly journals Interpretation of certain aspects of criminal restriction of competition

2021 ◽  
pp. 48-58
Author(s):  
Ol'ga Evgen'evna Derevyagina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Tax Legislation ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The subject of this research is the norms of antimonopoly legislation aimed at prevention and suppression of cartels, the norms of tax legislation that define the income and establish special tax regime for professional income, the norms of the Chapter 22 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the draft federal law on amendments to the Article 178 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and practical implementation of the Article 178 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The goal of this research is to examine the concept of income derived by the cartel; establish whether self-employed citizens can be the subject of an offence under this category, and clarify the criminal responsibility of the parties to the cartel agreement. The novelty consists in the fact that this article is first to examine the question of attributing the individuals conducting business activity under the special “Professional Income Tax” regime (self-employed citizens) to economic entities (i.e., parties to the cartel agreement). The effective legislation indicates that self-employed citizens do not belong to this group, as they are not state registered. A substantiation is made that a conscious neglect or an indifference to such socially dangerous consequence as income unfeasible: the cartel agreement is aimed at derivation of sizeable income. A consciously indifferent attitude is possible only towards such socially dangerous consequence as infliction of considerable damage. The field of application of acquired results is the activity of law enforcement agencies.

scholarly journals Deviant behavior of employees of internal affairs bodies: experience of dialectical assessment

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-163
Author(s):  
Sergey Milyukov ◽  
Andrey Nikulenko
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Police Officers ◽  
Deviant Behavior ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Law Enforcement Officers ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
The Right

In modern Russia, the problem of countering socially dangerous manifestations acts as a national project that proclaims the right of citizens to safe living conditions. Much attention is paid to the ability of law enforcement officers to resist criminal expansion legally, to be able to protect themselves and others by means of legal use of force against persons who commit socially dangerous encroachments. Guided by the concept of deviance, the authors made an attempt to analyze the problem of lawful behavior by law enforcement officers, primarily police officers. The researchers came to a reasonable conclusion about the need to adjust the current state of affairs. The legislation and the practice of its application cannot satisfy the interests of representatives of law enforcement agencies engaged in official activities for the protection of public order and ensuring of public safety. Imperfect legislation is the main reason of deviant behavior of police officers who are in permanent stress situations. Their abundance also provokes deviant behavior of police officers, which sometimes manifests itself in extreme brutality towards lawbreakers. From our point of view, the current norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, primarily the norms of Chapter 8, are not clear enough. Moreover, their legislative wording is far from being perfect and gives the opportunity to shift the blame for causing harm to persons who do it in circumstances that exclude the criminality of the act. The proposed careful adjustment of the norms of criminal legislation will significantly increase the effectiveness of their practical implementation, instill confidence in the consciousness of police officers about the importance and possibility of offensive legitimate steps to influence crime, as well as to increase their legal protection.

INTERACTION OF INVESTIGATORS AND PROSECUTORS IN NEW LEGAL REALITIES

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 147-153
Author(s):  
A. V. Grinenko
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
New Form ◽  
The Right

Determination of the investigator and the prosecutor procedural status is formulated in the article. Powers of the prosecutor in relation to the investigator are described. The author notes main objectives of the prosecutor activity. Changes of criminal procedure legislation which affect functions of the prosecutor and the investigator are studied. The problem of procedural independence of the investigator is considered. Main questions which the prosecutor has the right to address to the investigator are analyzed. It is offered that investigators should be a part of unified department but should closely interact with other law enforcement agencies. Rights of supervision of decisions legality, investigator actions (inaction) don’t limit procedural independence of the investigator. It is offered to give to the prosecutor an opportunity to give to the investigator written instructions on the direction of investigation and procedural actions production. At the same time the investigator has to have the right not to agree with these instructions and to report about it to the head of investigative body and also to the higher prosecutor. Introduction expediency of a new form of public prosecutor's reaction - introduction of cautions about inadmissibility of law violation to the investigator is proved. Such caution doesn't influence procedural independence of the investigator and just notifies him that when the prosecutor receives criminal case with indictment, contents will have certain claims. At the legislative level it is expediently to differentiate the prosecutor's powers on consideration and permission of complaints depending on the form (inquiry or preliminary investigation) in which preliminary investigation on criminal case is conducted.

scholarly journals KAJIAN HUKUM KEWENANGAN PENYELIDIKAN ANTARA KEPOLISIAN, KPK DALAM PEMBERANTASAN PIDANA KORUPSI DARI KELEMBAGAAN NEGARA

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sumiaty Adelina Hutabarat
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
National Police ◽  
The Relationship

<p>There are two law enforcement agencies combating corruption, namely the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and the Police, having the same authority, but in implementing authority there are differences, for example in the application of laws that govern the two institutions.The problem that becomes the study of this research is how the problem of the existence of the KPK as an institution to eradicate corruption has the authority regulated in RI Law No. 30 of 2002 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission, whose authority lies with the Police regulated in RI Law No. 2 of 2002 concerning the National Police of the Republic of Indonesia which refers to the Criminal Code The results of the study showed that the resolution of the dispute between the Police and the Corruption Eradication Commission in the investigation of corruption was carried out by coordinating the Corruption Eradication Commission and the Police in Corruption Criminal Investigations. Law number 30 of 2002 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission regulates the relationship between the performance of the KPK and the Police regarding investigations, investigations and prosecutions.Settlement of authority disputes between the Police and the KPK should be the authority of the Supreme Court, due to judicial review under the Supreme Court Law. The right to test the law is the application of a balanced and balanced government. The Corruption Eradication Commission was formed by the Law 30/2002 whereas the Indonesian Police was formed by the 1945 Constitution, article 30 paragraph 4.</p><p><strong>Keywords : <em>Authority, investigation, KPK</em></strong></p><p><strong> </strong></p>

Criteria for distinguishing vandalism from a minor act

2021 ◽  
pp. 486-499
Author(s):  
Yuri D. Nalimov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Law Enforcement Officers ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Points Of View ◽  
The Right ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Dialectical Analysis

When qualifying vandalism, law enforcement officers often experience difficulties in distinguishing a criminal act from a minor one, which formally contains signs of a crime, but does not pose a public danger. Due to the evaluation of the signs of both vandalism and the insignificance of the act, there is a high probability of qualification errors in which insignificant acts are recognized as criminal, or on the contrary, the actions of persons who committed vandalism are recognized as unapproachable. To date, there is no single doctrinal opinion defining the criteria of insignificance, a similar situation is observed in judicial and investigative practice. For these reasons, the topic is relevant and requires a comprehensive analysis. The purpose of the study is to consider the points of view of researchers of interest to the science of criminal law and law enforcement officers. The tasks are to establish rules for the qualification of criminal and insignificant vandalism, which contribute to the adoption of the right decision by law enforcement subjects, to make scientifically based proposals for the application of Article 14, Part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, in relation to acts that formally fall under the signs of a crime under Article 214 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. During the research, the following methods are used: dialectical, analysis, synthesis and sociological. As a result of the analysis, the most common mistakes made by the law enforcement officer are identified, the points of view of scientists on the qualification of vandalism are considered. Signs of insignificance were also investigated, taking into account practical and doctrinal positions. As conclusions, the signs of insignificance are proposed, which are subject to establishment by law enforcement agencies, in order to correctly qualify vandal actions.

scholarly journals Features of the qualification of the act related to the risk as a circumstance that excludes the criminal illegality of the act in the medical field

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 221-228
Author(s):  
Anton Baida ◽  
Mariya Pylypenko ◽  
Viktoriya Makitrenko
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Life Situation ◽  
Medical Field ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Common Features ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Single Approach

The authors explored the concept of "risk", the peculiarities of its interpretation. It has been determined that risk-taking is not new to the science of criminal law, but there is still no single approach to interpreting the above term. A special article of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which regulates this issue, contains only the general characteristics of such an act, and the features and criteria for its application are left to the discretion of law enforcement agencies. Given the particular circumstances of each case, they must conclude as to whether the actions of the person contained an urgent need to act risky, whether it was possible to achieve the same goal in a less risky or non-risky way was impossible. The authors also emphasize that in order for an act to be qualified as being committed in conditions of justified risk, it is necessary that a specific life situation testifies to it, and the person acts only to achieve a socially useful goal. It should be noted that in such a situation, the goal set by the subject could not be achieved in any other way, avoiding the risk, and the actions of the person must be commensurate with the danger in which the interests protected by law. In addition, the authors consider the relationship between the concepts of "extreme necessity" and "action associated with risk", highlight their common features and analyze the differences. Thus, in case of extreme necessity, a person does not have the opportunity to choose another behavior other than one that harms law enforcement interests. Failure to perform a risk act will not necessarily cause harm at all. In addition, the risk can be considered justified if there is an opportunity rather than an obligation to achieve a socially useful goal.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document