scholarly journals System of offences associated with securities fraud in the Russian Federation (Part 2)

2021 ◽  
pp. 13-21
Author(s):  
Elina Leonidovna Sidorenko ◽  
Ekaterina Aleksandrovna Khalizeva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Securities Fraud ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
System Operator ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
State Registration

This article is a sequence of research conducted by the authors on the topic of offences related to digital securities fraud (Part 2). It completes the design of the system of such offences, determining the “subsystem” that considers the economic nature of the Central Securities Depository. For this purpose, analysis is conducted on the articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation that form the system of offences related associated with the fraud of non-digital securities (Articles 185-186) from the perspective of their applicability to digital securities and peculiarities of such application. The research is based on the systemic approach, comparative-legal method, logical techniques of analysis and synthesis of information, as well as the method of deduction. The authors conclude on applicability of the Articles 185, 185.1, 185.2 and 185.4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to unlawful acts related to digital securities, taking into account the specificity of their legal regulation, namely the absence of necessity of state registration of stocks in the form of digital financial assets, the registration of rights to central securities depository by the information system operator that issued them, etc. Summarizing the results of this research with the results acquired in the Part I, the authors form the system of offences associated with the digital securities fraud, which includes the aforementioned elements, as well as the elements stipulated in the Article 187.1 “Organization of illegal trafficking of digital Rights” of the Draft Federal Law “On Amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation”. The Russian legal science unfortunately does not give due attention to examination of this problem, and such system is developed for the first time. The authors anchor hopes that the system of offenses they have designed would be effectively used in the law enforcement practice in the context of classification of unlawful action associated with central securities depository.

scholarly journals Affiliation of legal entities: reality and prospects

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (3) ◽  
pp. 83-88
Author(s):  
Сергей Тычинин ◽  
Sergey Tychinin ◽  
Олег Скопенко ◽  
Oleg Skopenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Legal Entities

The relevance of the study of the problem of affiliation of legal entities is determined by the lack of a coherent legal mechanism to ensure the resolution of conflicts of interest between dependent persons. As of today, Russian legislation as a whole does not contain clear provisions regarding the concept of the affiliation of legal entities. Certain laws contain only separate independent concepts, for example, the concept of “affiliation” is used in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation; in the Federal Law «On Competition» - the concept of «group of persons»; in the Tax Code of the Russian Federation - the concept of «interdependent persons». Therefore, the study of the problem of settling relations with affiliates deserves special attention. The objectives of this study are the systematization and analytical study of the legal regulation of the institution of the affiliation of legal entities. In the course of the study, the authors used the following methods: analysis and synthesis, modeling, comparison, analysis of the regulatory framework, synthesis, formal legal method The article examines the issues of legal regulation of the affiliation of a legal entity. The definition of the concept of “affiliation” is given, criteria and signs of affiliation of a legal entity are defined, various scientific approaches to the definition of this category are given, problems of correlation with economic and other types of relations between affiliates are explored. In the course of the study, the authors came to the conclusion that the institution of affiliation in its present form undoubtedly needs to be reformed. It is necessary to develop a unified law, reflecting all the nuances of the concept of “affiliation” and the features of the transactions with affiliated persons.

scholarly journals Maintenance of unity and territorial integrity of Russia: some constitutional legal problems

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-103
Author(s):  
Svyatoslav V. Ivanov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The State ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The People ◽  
Legal Space ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
State Registration

The subject. The article is devoted to the analysis of public authorities’ activities in order to strengthen unity of domestic legal space and the people of Russia with regard to constitutional legal support of the state unity and territorial integrity of the Russian Federation.The purpose of the article is to make a critical analysis of implementing a system that consists of constitutional legal rules and procedures of regulatory impact on the unity of domestic legal space and the people of Russia with the aim of increasing the effectiveness of their implementation.The methodological basis of the study includes general-scientific methods (analysis and syn-thesis, system-structural approach) as well as academic methods (formal-legal method, method of interpretation of legal acts).Results, scope. Consistent constitutional legal support of the state unity and territorial integrity of the Russian Federation requires elimination of defects and gaps in legal regulation and improvement of law enforcement practice. In particular, it is necessary to eliminate the practice of denial of a state registration of political parties on insignificant formal grounds in order to implement guarantees of the unity of the people of Russia.Conclusions. The consistent strengthening of the unity of domestic legal space and the people of the Russian Federation is of paramount importance to the constitutional and legal support of its state unity and territorial integrity. It is necessary to eliminate a number of legal defects and to make law enforcement practice more effective in order to implement these constitutional values.

scholarly journals Points at Issue With the Definition of Forgery (the Case Study of Article 326 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Evgeniy Mikhailovich Trubin ◽  
Stanislav Igorevich Golubev
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Single Point ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Analysis System ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
State Registration

The object of the research is the definition of forgery as it is used by the legislation, in particular, in Article 326 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The authors see the following problems: no legal definition, no single point of view in the doctrine of criminal law and incoordinations with other terms used in law. The wording 'forgery or counterfeiting state registration sign' used in Article 326 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation makes the situation even more complicated. Thus, the subject of this research is different doctrinal interpretations of the term 'forgery' and judicial practice. The methodological framework of the research covers such methods as analysis and synthesis, comparative law analysis, system-structured and formal law approaches, theoretical prognistic method and interpretation of legal provisions. The novelty of the research is caused by the fact that the author offer their own definition of the term 'forgery' and concludes that forgery and forgery documents/items are compatible and intersecting terms. The authors also conclude what criteria of truth and authenticity can be used to describe items/documents as forgery-counterfeiting, forgery but not counterfeiting and counterfeiting but not forgery. They also make recommendations on what amendments should be made in the applicable law. 

scholarly journals Vandalism as delinquent behavior: Russian and Brazilian experience

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 05013
Author(s):  
Olga Vladimirovna Kruzhkova ◽  
Irina Vladimirovna Vorobyova ◽  
Anastasiya Plotskaya
Keyword(s):  
Federal Republic ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Delinquent Behavior ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
High Concentration ◽  
Legal Representation ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Russian Federation

The study of vandalism is a topical scientific problem. Except for the scientific interest, wide expansion of destructive activity towards the material environment of a modern city suggests study of legal regulation of vandalism. The goal of the article is to find the national specific character of legal representation and regulation of vandal activity of citizens from Russia and Brazil that has been chosen for a comparative analysis due to the high concentration of vandal damages in Brazilian cities. To achieve this goal, we carried out an analysis of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, The Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences and the Criminal Code of the Federal Republic of Brazil, Law 9.605, Law 12.408, Law 2.848 of the Federal Republic of Brazil, etc. The use of the comparative-legal method contributed to the identification of the qualification of vandalism signs as delinquent behavior. We conduct an analysis of the scientific literature describing the basics of understanding vandal behavior and its legal regulation. Also the statistical data of recent years on the law enforcement practice in relation to vandalism were analyzed. The cultural specificity of vandal activity in Russia and Brazil has distinct features in the legal regulation of this type of delinquent behavior. Brazilian experience in decriminalizing graffiti shows that this approach enables the reduction of the load on the judiciary system. In Russia and Brazil, they actively discuss the declaring of graffiti and illegal street art as a form of art that will result in the transformation of legal norms of regulation of the citizens’ vandal activity in a while. The scientific novelty lies in the comparison of norms of Russian and Brazilian legislation referred to vandalism to find out ways of its efficient prevention.

scholarly journals CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES OF SUBSUMPTION OF MALFEASANCE

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 64-69
Author(s):  
Evgeny Evgenyevich Zabuga
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Russian Federation

The subject. The article deals with subsumption of malfeasance, judicial characterization of such white-collar crimes.The purpose of the paper is to answer the question of admissibility of qualification of ho-mogeneous actions of a person according to two separate art. 285 and 286 of the Criminal Сode of the Russian Federation.The methodological basis of the research includes general-scientific methods (analysis and synthesis, system-structural approach) as well as academic methods (formal-legal method, method of interpretation of normative legal and judicial acts).Results and scope of application. Within the meaning of paragraph 15 of the Resolution of Plenum of Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, it is absolutely clear that legal actions of an official, which were not caused by official necessity, must be qualified under art. 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.Not only legally, but even from the point of view of ordinary logic, the qualification of ho-mogeneous actions by different criminal law norms is unacceptable.Due to the fact that art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is not a crime of corruption by its characteristics, art. 285 of the Сriminal Сode of the Russian Federation cannot be regarded as a special case of abuse of power.Conclusions. This is unacceptable to qualify the homogeneous actions of a person according to two separate articles – art. 285 and 286 – of the Criminal Сode of the Russian Federation. It is necessary to add the Resolution of Plenum of Russian Supreme Court from October 16, 2009, No. 19 by the provisions more specifically delimiting qualification of malfeasance crimes according to art. 285 and 286 of the Criminal Сode of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals COMPETENCE OF LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENTS: DEBATABLE ISSUES

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 117-128
Author(s):  
Yury Blagov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Material Resources ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
History Of ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Russian Federation

Subject. The article is devoted to the discussion issues of competence of local self-government.The purpose of this paper is to show that the federal government passes such laws in order to build a single “power vertical” from a rural settlement to a constituent entity of the Russian Federation and above, since from his point of view it is easier to carry out public administration.The methodology. The author uses a dialectical method, a method of analysis and synthesis, a formal legal method, a comparative legal method.Results, scope of application. The competence of local self-government bodies consists of two parts: compulsory competence and optional competence. The compulsory competence includes issues of local importance of municipalities and certain transferred state powers. The optional competence of local self-government bodies includes the rights of local self-government bodies to resolve issues not related to issues of local importance of municipalities and other issues not within the competence of local government bodies and not excluded from their competence by federal and regional legislatures. Certain transferred state powers should not prevail over the powers related to the solution of issues of local importance and determine the functional purpose of local self-government bodies as such. It can be assumed that by their nature they should be related to the immediate interests of the local population.The rights of local self-government bodies to resolve issues not related to issues of local importance of municipalities are neither issues of local significance nor transferred by separate state powers. The meaning of their consolidation in Federal Law No. 131-FZ is to transfer to the local self-government authorities of powers which the state authorities cannot perform, but without the transfer of the corresponding material resources and financial resources that local governments should seek independently. The author offers his own solutions of this problem.The author criticizes the institution of redistribution of powers, since this institution contradicts the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the European Charter of Local Self-Government and comes to the conclusion that the issues of local importance of different types of municipalities overlap, as well as duplicate part of the powers of state authorities of the subjects of the Russian FederationConclusion. The new attempt to build a single vertical of power, which has been repeatedly undertaken in the history of Russia, is doomed to failure with all the ensuing consequences, especially acute during the economic crisis.

scholarly journals Reforming legislation in prevention of neglect and juvenile delinquency

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 03005
Author(s):  
Elena Nikolayevna Ryabova ◽  
Leonid Ivanovich Savinov ◽  
Dmitrii Vladimirovich Bondarenko ◽  
Tatyana Vladimirovna Cherkasova
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Delinquency ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Scientific Cognition ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article represents the results of the analysis of modern legal regulation of the system for prevention of neglect and juvenile delinquency in the Russian Federation and activity of commissions for juvenile affairs and juvenile rights protection as the main authority of that system. Relevance and immediacy of changes and reforming of legislation in the prevention of neglect and juvenile delinquency and areas of such activity are associated with the needs of the modern informational society. The authors analyze regulatory legal acts governing the activity of commissions for juvenile affairs and juvenile rights protection, proposals of executive authorities of constituents of the Russian Federation in the practicability of developing a concept of federal law on prevention of neglect and juvenile delinquency and rights’ protection and they characterize primary trends in the activity of this authority in order to define further perspectives of activity within the system of prevention of neglect and juvenile delinquency in Russia. Methodological support of the research are such methods of scientific cognition as analysis and synthesis, comparative-legal, formally legal, analysis of documents, legal modeling, survey, which allowed for a comprehensive approach to the research of this problem. The result of the research was reasoned conclusions on the practicability of reforming authorities and legal relations in the system of prevention of neglect and juvenile delinquency. Models are given for the modernization of commissions for juvenile affairs and juvenile rights protection. The results ensure conceptual basis and trends in the development of proposals for improvement of legal regulatory regulation of social relations in the prevention of asocial behavior and juvenile delinquency.

THE PROBLEMS OF LEGAL REGULATION OF THE USE OF METAL DETECTORS FOR PURPOSES NOT RELATED TO THE SEARCH FOR AND REMOVAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL OBJECTS FROM PLACES OF OCCURRENCE

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 92-109
Author(s):  
Anatoly N. PANFILOV
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Illegal Activities ◽  
Metal Detectors ◽  
Archaeological Objects

The scale of illegal archaeological activity in modern Russia is a cause for alarm among scientists, interested specialists and citizens. This problem is exacerbated by the mass enthusiasm of the population of the country by searching for antique metal objects using metal detectors and other special technical search tools. The Federal Law of July 23, 2013 No. 245-ФЗ On Amending Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation Regarding the Suppression of Illegal Activities in the Field of Archeology was sent to solve the problem. However, these steps did not produce any tangible results. The evolving judicial practice in administrative and criminal cases (Article 7.15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, Article 243.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) raises many questions among specialists in the field of law. The article examines the problems of legal regulation of the use in the Russian Federation of special technical means of search for purposes not related to the search and seizure of archaeological objects. The author, relying on wide empirical material, identifies circumstances that impede metalworking, justifies the need for further streamlining of these social relations by adjusting national legislation. The study is interdisciplinary in nature, as the studied problem is at the junction of several branches of law: civil, administrative and criminal. The research methodology is determined by the specifics of the problem being studied and includes a set of methods of scientific knowledge. General scientific (analysis, synthesis, generalization, historical) and private scientific (historical-legal, comparative-legal, formal-legal) research methods are applied.

ADMINISTRATIVE COERCION: PROBLEMS OF THEORY, LEGISLATION AND PRACTICE

2021 ◽  
pp. 93-108
Author(s):  
Sergey A. Starostin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Coercive Measures ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Legal Coercion ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
The Russian Federation

The paper deals with the mechanism of administrative coercion. The peculiarity of the article content is a system analysis of the problems of theoretical, normative-legal and empirical (law-enforcement) aspects. The author defines the essence of administrative coercion, based on the modern system of legislative regulation and practice of its application, which has developed since March 2020. The article explores various aspects of administrative coercion. It is pointed out that the knowledge of administrative-legal coercion is impossible without its consideration in interre-lation with such categories as freedom, expediency, administrative responsibility.On the basis of the analysis of some coercive measures, applied in the conditions of pandemic, their legal assessment is given. Attention is drawn to the fact that in conditions of pandemic the measures of constraint which, according to their developers, fully conform to the require-ments of the Federal law "About protection of the population and territories against emergen-cies of natural and technogenic character" were and are often taken. It is not so! This Federal Law defines the general organizational and legal norms in the field of population and territory protection from emergencies, its effect covers the relations arising in the process of activity of state authorities of the Russian Federation and subjects of the Russian Federation, local authorities, as well as organizations and population in the field of population and territory protection from emergencies. In the context of the epidemic, the debate about the balance between voluntary submission and coercion in the form of fear of responsibility has intensified. Under conditions of uncer-tainty and unpredictability of the situation, the reality of risks, the legal regulation should be oriented towards protecting the population, excluding compromises and exceptions, blanket norms. But always possible in such conditions situations when the state in order to protect citizens, applies coercive measures not based on the law, when they are forced to be estab-lished by the executive authorities. The author of article used following methods: system analysis, dialectical, logical, com-parative-legal, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction. As a result of the study conclusions were drawn that doctrine and practice convincingly prove that measures of administrative coercion should be formalized as much as possible. When the need arises to apply them, there is no time to discuss what measures, when, to what extent to apply. It is necessary to apply what is already there. When the situation returns to normal, the applied measures should be analysed and both the substantive norms and even more carefully the procedural norms should be improved. Provisions on executive authorities should include a mandatory section on "coercive measures applied by these authorities, grounds and procedure for their application".

Public hearings as an institution of deliberative democracy in major Russian and American cities

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-83
Author(s):  
Andrey Fursov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Regulations ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Hearings ◽  
The Russian Federation

Currently, public hearings are one of the most widespread forms of deliberative municipal democracy in Russia. This high level of demand, combined with critique of legal regulations and the practices for bringing this system to reality – justified, in the meantime, by its development (for example, by the Agency for Strategic Initiatives and the Public Chambers of the Russian Federation) of proposals for the correction of corresponding elements of the legal code – make both the study of Russian experiences in this sphere and comparative studies of legal regulations and practical usage of public hearings in Russia and abroad extremely relevant. This article is an attempt to make a contribution to this field of scientific study. If the appearance of public hearings in Russia as an institution of Russian municipal law is connected with the passing of the Federal Law of 6 October 2003 No.131-FZ, “On the general organisational principles of local government in the Russian Federation,” then in the United States, this institution has existed since the beginning of the 20th century, with mass adoption beginning in the 1960s. In this time, the United States has accumulated significant practical experience in the use of public hearings and their legal formulation. Both countries are large federal states, with their own regional specifics and diversity, the presence of three levels of public authority and different principles of federalism, which cause differences in the legal regulation of municipal public hearings. For this reason, this article undertakes a comparative legal analysis of Russian and American experiences of legal regulation and practical use of public hearings, on the example of several major municipalities – the cities of Novosibirsk, Nizhny Novgorod, Voronezh and New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. A comparison of laws influencing the public hearing processes in these cities is advisable, given the colossal growth in the role of city centers in the industrial and post-industrial eras. Cities in particular are the primary centers for economic growth, the spread of innovations, progressive public policy and the living environment for the majority of both Russian and American citizens. The cities under research are one of the largest municipalities in the two countries by population, and on such a scale, the problem of involving residents in solving local issues is especially acute. In this context, improving traditional institutions of public participation is a timely challenge for the legislator, and the experiences of these cities are worth describing. The unique Russian context for legal regulations of public hearings involves the combination of overarching federal law and specific municipal decrees that regulate the hearing process. There are usually two municipal acts regulating public hearings on general issues of the city district (charter, budget, etc.) and separately on urban planning. In the United States, the primary regulation of public hearings is assigned to the state and municipality level, with a whole series of corresponding laws and statutes; meanwhile, methodological recommendations play a specific role in the organisation of hearings, which are issued by the state department of a given state. It is proposed that regulating the corresponding relationships at the federal subject level will permit a combination of the best practices of legal administration with local nuances, thereby reinforcing the guarantee of the realization of civil rights to self-government. There are other features in the process of organizing and conducting public hearings in the United States, which, as shown in the article, can be perceived by Russian lawmakers as well in order to create an updated construct of public discussions at the local level.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document