Administrative prejudice in cases of petty theft (the Article 7.27 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses and the Article 158.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation): how the big data of judicial acts reflect humanization and quality of justice

2021 ◽  
pp. 81-124
Author(s):  
Egor Viktorovich Trofimov ◽  
Oleg Gennad'evich Metsker ◽  
David Dokkaevich Paskoshev
Keyword(s):  
Big Data ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Penalty

The subject of this article is the public relations arising in the context of committing petty theft, as well as research means and methods for assessing the optimization of legislation and law enforcement. Due to the specific structure of administrative prejudice, the article presents the methodology and results of the analysis big data of judicial acts in cases of petty theft (the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses and the Article 158.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) for assessing the quality of justice and optimization of legal regulation. The research is founded on the original interdisciplinary methodology, which contains the indicator approach along with the set of legal and computer aided techniques, including intellectual text and data mining, as well as machine learning. It is demonstrated that the judgments of conviction do not have considerable differences in the semantics and logical complexity of decision-making in comparison with the ruling on imposition of administrative penalty; the logic of making decisions on the choice of administrative or criminal penalty for petty theft varies, whereby the choice of administrative penalty is more differentiated. Despite the identity of acts related to administrative prejudice, their regulation by different laws leads to different enforcement results. Administrative-tort regulation is more optimal. Administrative responsibility for petty theft is rather humane for the society overall, although for victims, criminal responsibility appears to be more humane. Having analyzed the array of information, the author extracts certain knowledge on the administrative-tort and criminological characteristics of petty theft alongside peculiarities of court proceeding and imposition of penalties, as well as concludes on applicability of the developed methodology towards analyzing big data of case law on administrative and criminal offenses.

PROBLEMS OF LEGAL REGULATION OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR TRANSPORT SECURITY REQUIREMENTS VIOLATION

2018 ◽  
pp. 58-68
Author(s):  
L.Y. Larina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Individual Characteristics ◽  
Security Requirements ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Legislative Structure ◽  
The Individual

The study of the problems of legislative regulation of criminal responsibility for transport security requirements violation is due to the necessity to ensure it as part of national security. The purpose of the study is to identify the shortcomings of the legislative structure of article 263.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, preventing its effective application in practice, and suggest ways to overcome them. In the research on the basis of comparison of the content of article 263.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with the norms of the Federal Law “On transport security” and Decrees of the government of the Russian Federation analyzed some blank signs of transport security requirements violation. In the study we identify deficiencies of the legislative construction of article 263.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the necessity of its correction, and formulate proposals for changing the individual characteristics and the sanctions of article 263.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In particular we discuss the proposal to change the sanctions of part 1 of article 263.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the inconsistency with the sanction of part 1 of article 118 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In addition, it is proposed to expand the range of subjects of crime under part 2 of article 263.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

The necessary defense and excess of its limits: legislative improvement opportunities

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (3) ◽  
pp. 111-117
Author(s):  
Andrei Nikulenko ◽  
Maksim Smirnov
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The State ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Improvement ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article is devoted to the necessary defense as a circumstance that precludes the criminality of an act in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. The significance and importance of the existence of this norm is proclaimed both in the criminal law and in the Basic law of the state – the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The existence of a rule on necessary defense in the state emphasizes the development of its legal system, allowing citizens to defend their own interests and protect the interests of others, in ways not prohibited by law, thereby preventing exceeding the limits of necessary defense. A number of issues related to the application of the norms provided for in article 37 of the Criminal code of Russia, as well as the norms of the Special part of the Criminal code of Russia, which provide for liability for crimes committed when exceeding the limits of necessary defense, were raised. The study of the relevant norms makes it possible to identify the advantages and disadvantages of legal regulation of circumstances that exclude the criminality of an act, including the shortcomings of judicial and investigative practice. The author criticizes the existing approach and suggests ways to resolve these problems, including by correcting the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated September 27, 2012, № 19 «About application by courts of legislation on necessary defense and causing harm when detaining a person who has committed a crime». Because of the ambiguous and often inconsistent application of norms of the criminal legislation on necessary defense, the authors give the recommendations (in further reconstruction of the relevant provisions of article 37 of the Criminal Code) to use an enumeration approach of presenting the legal formulation of these rules that allow the defender to cause any harm to an attacker. At the same time, it creates the most understandable, for citizens, formulation of the norm that allows lawfully causing harm to public relations protected by criminal law.

scholarly journals Criminal infraction as a mean of differentiating criminal responsibility and punishment

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
pp. 62-67
Author(s):  
E. A. BABAYANTS ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

Discussions caused by the initiative of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the introduction of a new category of offenses – criminal infraction which can occupy an intermediate link between an administrative offense and a criminal offense – do not stop. The article reveals the concept of a criminal infraction, lists its main features, considers the feasibility of introducing this category into domestic criminal legislation. A brief analysis of the legislation of a number of foreign countries is also given, the possibility of applying such experience in Russian conditions is assessed. The conclusion is formulated that it is necessary to recognize as fair the arguments challenging the necessity of adopting the draft law in the form in which it was submitted for consideration by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the fact that in those countries where the category of criminal offense was introduced, a fundamental reform of the criminal legislation was required: a total revision of the norms of the existing criminal legislation or the adoption of a separate Code of criminal infractions (for example, in Kyrgyzstan). Based on this the draft law under consideration appears to be a half-measure, which will lead to the complication of the existing legal regulation. The most correct way to resolve the problem under consideration would be to reduce the number of minor offenses in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

scholarly journals CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR GIVING FALSE EXPERT CONCLUSIONS IN THE FIELD OF PURCHASING GOODS, WORKS, SERVICES

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 84-90
Author(s):  
V.E. Zvarygin ◽  
D.S. Nazarova
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Illegal Activities

Illegal activities in the field of procurement of goods, works and services pose a threat not only to economic, but also to national security. The solution to this situation is possible only with an integrated approach, consisting not only in improving the efficiency of the regulatory authorities, but also in optimizing the current legislation. Article 107 of the Federal Law dated 05.04.2013 “On the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, work, services for the provision of state and municipal needs” provides the criminal liability of persons guilty of violating the laws of the Russian Federation and other regulatory legal acts on contract system in the field of procurement. However, until recently, the onset of criminal liability remained only “on paper”. The turning point in the criminal law regulation of relations in the field of public procurement was the year 2018, when federal laws were adopted that introduced amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation by criminalizing illegal acts in this sphere of public relations. One of the controversial articles by the structure of the criminal law elements is Article 200.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which established criminal liability for giving a knowingly false expert opinion in the field of procurement of goods, works and services.

scholarly journals RULES ON INCHOATE CRIME IN THE CRIMINAL LEGISLATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS

2016 ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Василий Некрасов ◽  
Vasiliy Nekrasov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Tools And Techniques

The article analyzes the issues of differentiation of responsibility and norm design technique on inchoate crime in the criminal legislation of the Republic of Belarus. The author examines the legislative definition of preparation for a crime, attempted crime and voluntary renunciation of criminal purpose. As a result of the study the author has found out the main methods and means of legislative technique, used by the Belarusian legislator. These are abstract and casuistic methods, the terminology of the criminal law and several others. Comparison of legal regulation of norms on unfinished crime in the Criminal code of the Republic of Belarus and the Criminal code of the Russian Federation has allowed to identify gaps made by the legislators of both countries in application of specific tools and techniques of legislative drafting. Court practice of the Republic of Belarus in cases of preparation for a crime and attempted crime also was analyzed in present article. The author has evidentiated the means of differentiation of the responsibility for committing inchoate crime, used by the Belarusian legislator. The definitions “inchoate crime” and “stage of the crime” were also analyzed in present study. As a conclusion the author has made the recommendations for improving the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus on regulation of criminal responsibility for an inchoate crime.

TO THE QUESTION OF THE RELATION OF MAN TO ANIMALS IN MODERN RUSSIA: THE CRIMINAL, LEGAL AND MORAL ASPECT

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 128-132
Author(s):  
MIKHAIL KOLTSOV ◽  
◽  
ELENA POPOVA
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Existing Problems ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Logical Method ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Cruelty To Animals

This article examines the existing problems that arise in the case of applying the provisions of the current version of article 245 of the criminal code of the Russian Federation. Based on the analysis of the theory and judicial practice of this sphere of public relations, the authors reveal the conditions for criminal responsibility for the criminal offense provided for in this article. In addition, the article contains comparative characteristics of Russian and foreign legislation in terms of liability for cruelty to animals. The following methods were used in the article: logical method of cognition, comparative legal method of research, as well as formal legal method, which allowed to reveal the essence and signs of cruelty to animals, the method of interpretation of legal norms. The use of these methods allowed us to understand the institutions of criminal law and determine the main directions of development. The authors suggest possible ways to solve problems that arise in the process of proving the fact of criminal infringement under article 245 of the criminal code of the Russian Federation, and reveal ways to eliminate gaps in legislation.

Trends of the Development of Criminal Law at the Modern Stage

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (11) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Алла Гравина ◽  
Alla Gravina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Main Stream ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyses the modern criminal law, factors having negative effect on its development according with social, political and economic needs in the Russian Federation. Humanism is the main stream determining these trends. The author treats exercise of the principle of humanism in General and Special parts of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The work provides criminal statistics of the recent years. It pays particular attention to the reasons disturbing stability of law, leading to excess of legal regulation and excess of repressiveness of criminal law. It is impossible to predict the trends of criminal law without taking into account the political, social, economic development of the society, which determine the criminal policy of the country. The stability of law is also determined by them. The main methods of criminal policy are criminalization, decriminalization, penalization and depenalization. The article considers influence of criminalization and decriminalization on criminal law. The main trends in the development of criminal law is the further differentiation of criminal responsibility and expanding the list of forms of punishment not connected with isolation of guilty person from a society; introduction of less severe punishment. Some forms of differentiation of criminal liability such as — returning of administrative prejudice to criminal law, transfer of certain types of punishment to the category of other measures of criminal law applicable to the exemption from criminal liability; forecasting of introduction some new types of offences to the Criminal Code as well as support of the preparation of the Concept of modernization of criminal law.

scholarly journals A New Kind of Exemption from Criminal Responsibility: the Theoretical, Legislative and Enforcement Aspects

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 158-166
Author(s):  
N A Egorova
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Difference

Questions about the place of norms about exemption from criminal responsibility with the appointment of a judicial fine in the system of criminal law institutions, the difference of judicial fine from other criminal law measures, the grounds for exemption from criminal responsibility under article 76.2 of the Criminal code, and the appointment of a judicial fine are considered. It is stated that the basis of a judicial fine may only be established by court fact of the crime of a certain category, therefore it is difficult to explain the appointment of this measure to a person suspected of committing a crime; the purpose of restoring social justice when releasing from criminal responsibility with the appointment of a judicial fine is not achieved. A critical analysis of the resolution of Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation from June 27, 2013 No. 19 «About application by courts of the legislation regulating the grounds and procedure of exemption from criminal responsibility» (new edition) in the explanation concerning the mentioned exemption from criminal responsibility is done. It is concluded that the appearance of the considered norms in the Russian criminal law reflects not only the search of more flexible methods of criminal law impact and new criminal law measures, but also about the failure of the state and society in solving the problem of crime prevention. Legal regulation of judicial fine in the future should be more detailed, the scope of application of article 76.2 of the Criminal code is narrower, and the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation should pay more attention to the interpretation of article 76.2, 104.4 and 104.5 of the Criminal code.

Cybercrimes against Property and Problems of Qualification and Correspondence of Actions Prohibited by Art. 272, 273 and 159.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (on the Example of a Particular Judicial Decision)

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 82-93
Author(s):  
Y. O. Kuchina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Digital Development ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of

The interest in digital development and the specifics of its legal regulation does not practically affect the problems of applying the provisions of Chapter 28 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the qualifications of acts falling under the definition of «cybercrimes against property» and Art. 272 and Art. 273 in particular. Analyzing a judicial decision, the author on a practical example reveals the main qualification problems that currently exist in the judicial practice. The author states that the outdated and overly detailed definition «computer information» which is given in the note to Art. 272 of the Criminal Code, leads to the fact that the rules of law, in which this term is included, are applied erroneously. Considering how the perception of the meaning of dispositions of Art. 272, 273 and 159.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, in cases of committing a crime in a virtual dimension, the author reveals the interdependence of the technical component of the subject of the crime and the place of its commission with the legal regulation of protected public relations and their external perception by the law enforcer. The article offers recommendations on the maximum elimination of possible errors in qualifications and shows on specific examples which particular signs and elements in the mechanism of a specific act affect the formation of erroneous law enforcement practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document