scholarly journals On the Issues of the Application of Part 6 of Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 79-84
Author(s):  
N. N. Korotkikh
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyzes some of the controversial, in the opinion of the author, recommendations of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 10 of 15.05.2018 «On the practice of the courts applying the provisions of paragraph 6 Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation». Lowering the category of crime always requires clear criteria by which the actions of the defendant could be qualified with a change in the gravity of the crime. Based on examples from judicial practice, the thesis is substantiated that “taking into account the factual circumstances of the case” and “the degree of its public danger” are evaluative e criteria and do not always allow to decide the validity of the application of part 6 article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The discrepancy between some of the recommendations contained in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is shown. It is concluded that it is impossible to exempt a person from criminal liability on the grounds specified in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Problems of Applying Special Grounds for Exemption from Criminal Liability for Kidnapping

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatiana Bersh ◽  
Anna Khristyuk
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Practical Interest ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Mere Presence ◽  
The Russian Federation

Despite the positive attitude towards the presence of compromise norms in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, containing the possibility of exemption from criminal liability for a committed crime, their mere presence seems insufficient. It is important to introduce a mechanism for the functioning of the norms, which will describe in detail all the stages necessary for their application. The article discusses controversial issues of insufficient legislative regulation of exemption from criminal liability on the basis of the application of a note to Art. 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The opinions of scientists concerning the application of special grounds for exemption from criminal liability for kidnapping are generalized, the position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation regarding the understanding of the term “voluntary release of the kidnapped” is considered. A number of controversial issues that have not been taken into account by the legislator, which require mandatory regulation, are cited. The article examines the existing judicial practice of applying the note to Art. 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. A lack of uniformity in the law enforcement activities of the judiciary was revealed. Supplements are proposed to the new resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 24, 2019 No. 58 to increase the effectiveness of the application of the considered grounds for exemption from criminal liability. As a result, a proposal was put forward that is aimed at improving the note to Art. 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The issues raised in the article are of scientific and practical interest.

scholarly journals The Analysis of Key Provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 09.07.2020 No. 18 “On Judicial Practice in Cases of Illegal Crossing of the State Border of the Russian Federation and Crimes Related to Illegal Migration”

2020 ◽  
pp. 076-083
Author(s):  
P. A. Akimenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Illegal Migration ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uniform Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The norms introduced at different times into Russian criminal legislation and enshrined in Articles 322, 3221, 3222 and 3223 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation have a number of legal defects, resulting in a controversial practice that has generated a lot of debate in the scientific community regarding this research issue. There was a need to accumulate and analyze the existing judicial practice, taking into account advanced scientific views. As a result, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation issued a Resolution aimed at regulating criminal liability for violations of migration legislation. After that, the author of the article conducts a detailed analysis of the said judicial act and on this basis draws conclusions about the set of positive and negative aspects contained in it in order to help create a uniform law enforcement practice.

scholarly journals Novels of the Criminal Code on responsibility for abusesin public procurement: background and problems of qualification

2018 ◽  
pp. 34-43
Author(s):  
A. Ya. Asnis
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Service Contract ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Contract Managers

The article deals with the criminological grounds and background of the adoption of the Federal law of April 23, 2018 № 99-FZ, which introduced criminal liability for abuse in the procurement of goods, works and services for state or municipal needs (Art. 2004 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and for bribery of employees of contract service, contract managers, members of the Commission on the implementation of the procurement of persons engaged in the acceptance of the delivered goods, performed works or rendered services, other authorized persons, representing interests of customer in the scope of the relevant procurement (Art. 2005 of the Criminal Code).The author formulates private rules of qualification of the corresponding crimes and differentiation of their structures from structures of adjacent crimes and administrative offenses. The necessity of changing the position of the legislator regarding generic and direct objects of these crimes, the adoption of a special resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to explain the practice of applying the relevant innovations.

scholarly journals ISSUES OF THE QUALIFICATION OF A MURDER FOR THE PURPOSES OF USING VICTIM’S ORGANS OR TISSUES (CLAUSE М PART 2 ARTICLE 105 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 46-51
Author(s):  
Andrey L. Ivanov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Human Organs ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article substantiates the solution of some of the issues of qualification of murder discussed in theory and practice in order to use human organs or tissues, the results of a study of judicial practice, in which clarifications of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on this topic were applied.

scholarly journals Efficiency of practical application of criminal law prohibition in the sphere of economy of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (4) ◽  
pp. 118-123
Author(s):  
Vladimir Tunin ◽  
Natal'ya Radoshnova
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Economic Crime ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Economic Crimes

The article considers the practical effectiveness of the criminal law prohibition in combating economic crime in the Russian Federation. 22nd Chapter of the Criminal code currently includes 58 articles. This is maximum number of articles in relation to other chapters of the criminal code, in the same Chapter of the Criminal code. Accordingly the need for such a number of prohibitions in the economic sphere should be confirmed by judicial practice. However, a completely different picture emerges. Based on the analysis of the statistical reports of the Judicial Department under the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the authors conclude that the enforcement practice in cases of economic crimes is insufficient.The authors express their opinion on the reasons for the ineffectiveness of the practical application of the articles constituting the 22nd Chapter of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation, and suggest ways to address them.

scholarly journals Criminal Misconduct: An Objective Need or a Declared Necessity?

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 142-154
Author(s):  
N. Yu. Skripchenko ◽  
S. V. Anoshchenkova
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The actively defended idea of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the inclusion of an offencse  of criminal misconduct in the criminal legislation was reflected in the revised draft federal law submitted to the  Parliament on October 13, 2020. The purpose of the study is to determine the key changes in the content of the  institutions of criminal misconduct and other measures of a criminal law nature proposed for consolidation in the  Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, to assess the objective need of the reforms initiated by the Supreme  Court of the Russian Federation. The methodological basis is a set of methods of scientific knowledge. General  scientific (analysis and synthesis, dialectics) and specific scientific research methods (system structural, formal legal)  were used. A comparative analysis of draft laws allows us to classify the substantive content of acts constituting a  criminal misconduct as key changes and the modification of other measures of a criminal legal nature. The authors  critically assess the idea underlying the classification of acts as criminal misconduct. By laying in the criteria for  the isolation of acts that are minimal in terms of the degree of danger, not legally significant elements of corpus  delicti, but the types and amount of punishments, the lack of criminal experience, the interests of the business  community, the developers of the draft law violate the system of law, since the proposed approach excludes the  assessment of the public danger of the act based on the significance of the protected by the criminal the law of  public relations. The meaning of the differentiation of criminal liability declared by the initiator of the reforms is  lost with the proposed duplication of other measures applied both to persons who have committed a criminal  misconduct and to those guilty of committing crimes of small or medium gravity, and the proposed conditional  nature of other measures levels the idea of liberalizing the criminal law. The paper focuses on the provisions of  the project that require revision and additional comprehension.

scholarly journals Malfeasances: features of law enforcement.

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-337
Author(s):  
M.P. Pronina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Assessment ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article deals with the problems of law enforcement in the group of malfeasances. Official crimes are most dangerous due to the fact that they undermine the prestige of the authorities and directly violate the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations. In this regard the legislator has established criminal liability for officials who abuse their functional duties. In particular the author studies the problems of qualification arising in the legal assessment of crimes enshrined in Ch. 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, due to the highest level of their blanketness and evaluativeness. Examples of judicial and investigative practice on competition issues of general and special rules are given. Difficulties are revealed in the legal assessment of the actions of officials when determining the signs of abuse of office, enshrined in Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Arguments are presented that are a clear demonstration of the fact that the solution to the identified problems of applying the norms of the criminal law lies in the plane of reducing the level of conflict of laws of criminal legislation. Practical proposals are being made to include amendments to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 09.07.2013 No. 24 “On judicial practice in cases of bribery and other corruption crimes” (clause 12.1) and Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 16.10.2009 No. 19 “On judicial practice in cases of abuse of office and abuse of office” (p. 21.1). The solution of the stated problems in the field of application of the norms of the criminal law consists in the development of a uniform practice of application of the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, reduction of the level of gaps in criminal legislation, the development of methodological and scientific recommendations with the participation of law enforcement officials and scientists, the preparation of draft laws and plenums of the Supreme Court aimed at elimination of gaps and gaps.

Resolution No. 48 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 26, 2019, “On the Practice of the Courts’ Application of Legislation on Liability for Tax Crimes”: An Analysis of the Main Novels

2021 ◽  
pp. 18-24
Author(s):  
Igor O. Tkachev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Current Version ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article provides a critical analysis of a number of provisions of the Resolution No. 48 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 26, 2019, “On the practice of the courts’ application of legislation on liability for tax crimes”. The author notes that the current version of the decree allows considering tax evasion as a formal crime. Thus, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation laid down the preconditions for classifying tax evasion as a continuing crime, which would significantly reduce the number of criminal cases terminated due to the expiration of the statute of limitations for criminal liability. The author also draws attention to the refusal of the Supreme Court to define the category “concealment of funds or other property” for the purposes of applying Art. 199.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It is noted that such a refusal may lead to a broader interpretation by the courts of this criminal law norm.

Legal and Actual Characteristics of the Institute Exemption from Criminal Liability

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 83-92
Author(s):  
V. K. Andrianov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Theory Of Law ◽  
First Time

Analysis of judicial practice shows that the greatest difficulties and errors in the courts and the prosecutors and investigators in the application of exemption from criminal liability, related to the issues of legal facts. It is no coincidence that most of the content of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 27 June 2013 No. 19 is devoted to clarifying questions about legal facts provided for by the norms of Chapter 11 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The purpose of this article is the legal and factual analysis of the release of the institute of criminal responsibility, which is in the general theory of law recognized by specific methodological direction in the explanation of legal phenomena In the article we developed a number of questions of legal conditions and facts with which the criminal law links the exemption from criminal liability: on the concept of the person who committed the crime for the first time; on exemption from criminal liability in the event of the commission of an unfinished crime and a crime of complicity; on the types of legal facts serving as the basis for such consequences; the amount of positive post-criminal behavior required for release; competition between the grounds for exemption from criminal liability; on the role of other social circumstances, when making the appropriate decision, etc.

The Nature of the Institution of Confiscation of Property and its Application

2021 ◽  
pp. 93-104
Author(s):  
Vladimir K. Andrianov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Difficult Problem ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

Legislative reform in respect of forfeiture, having returned it in 2006 in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, but in an altered status – other measures of a criminal-legal nature – after its exclusion in 2003 as a form of punishment, made a confiscation as one of the most difficult problem and controversial in the doctrine of criminal law. This is due not only to the attribution of confiscation of property to the category of other measures of a criminal-legal nature as in itself still insufficiently defined and highly controversial, but also by the inter-sectoral nature of the problem of confiscation, regulated not only by the norms of criminal, but also by criminal procedural legislation, as well as interconnected with measures of civil law – the return of property to the rightful owner, and compensation for any damage. Understanding the complexity of the legal nature of the confiscation of property lead to quite frequent changes in the Chapter 151 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (19 of federal laws on amendments), as well as cause a lot of questions of their use in practical lawyers. This is evidenced by the resolution adopted by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of June 14, 2018 No. 17 «On some issues related to the use of confiscation of property in criminal proceedings». The target of this article is to study the confiscation of property as another measure of a criminal-legal nature by resolving theoretical and applied issues of the application of Chapter 151 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. An important role in the research process was played by work on the problems of other measures of a criminal-legal nature, confiscation of property, as well as published court practice. The methodological basis of the study were the principles of the dialectical method of cognition, as well as general scientific and private scientific methods (sociological, system-structural and formal-logical) methods. In the proposed publication, based on the analysis of special scientific literature and legal positions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, such complex issues as the legal nature of confiscation in terms of its generic and specific characteristics, correlation with criminal punishment and criminal liability are considered, and specific recommendations are given on topical issues of application of the Chapter 151 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document