scholarly journals Legal Analysis of Fraud in the Banking Sphere

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 80-85
Author(s):  
L.A. Petryakova ◽  

Based on the analysis of the more frequent cases of committing fraud in the banking sector, the features of the criminal-legal characteristics of the offenses provided for by Art. 159.1 and 159.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It was established that Articles 159.1 and 159.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation by virtue of Part 3 of Art. 17 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are special in relation to the general rule providing for liability for fraud in general, and therefore they most fully disclose by the legislator the specific and characteristic features of social relations in the banking sector, which are subject to criminal law protection. Attention is focused on those signs, the definition of which is more difficult in law enforcement. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the direct object of fraud in the banking sector, the disclosure of the content of its objective side, including the method of committing the crime. The subjective signs of fraud in the banking sector are considered. Practical examples of bringing the perpetrators to justice for banking fraud are demonstrated. Based on the results of the study, the author of the work comes to the conclusion that it is necessary to improve legislation in this area, to strengthen the explanatory and law enforcement activities of the relevant subjects of legal relations. In addition, the analysis of judicial practice given by the author in the study emphasizes its controversial nature. In other words, the author supports the theoretical calculations with an analysis of practical features.

Author(s):  
A. A. Kashkarov ◽  
D. A. Poshtaruk

A criminal and legal analysis of the objective and subjective signs, characterizing the connivance to the crime is made in the publication. The study found that connivance in a crime may be characteristic of various criminal law institutions, such as implication in a crime and complicity in a crime. In addition, the presented arguments show that connivance as a criminally punishable act may be associated with non-interference with unlawful activities that do not constitute a crime. The analysis shows that connivance in a crime can have a selfish purpose. It is noted that connivance in a crime is significantly different from other forms of implication in a crime, namely concealment of a crime and failure to report a crime. The subject of connivance in a crime is a person endowed with special powers to prevent, document and register crimes or offences. The article discloses that there is no special penal provision in the current Act of Criminal Responsibility of the Russian Federation that criminalizes it. The exception is the disposition of Art. 290 of the Criminal Code of RF, which contains an indication of connivance as a sign characterizing the objective side of receiving a bribe.


Author(s):  
Natalya Artebyakina ◽  
Tatyana Makarova

The growing complexity of public relations creates a need for the criminalization of some acts and de-criminalization of others. Defamation is one of the offenses affected by this trend. Some time after its de-criminalization, the crime of defamation was brought back to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, there is no actual legal mechanism in Russia that victims of defamation could use to fully protect their rights. The authors point out a trend for acquittals in criminal proceedings initiated after the complaints of private prosecutors when they concern deliberately false information that besmirches the honor and dignity of other people and harms their reputation, when these complaints are filed with the governmental, including the law enforcement, authorities. They present their research of court statistical data regarding cases heard by Justices of the Peace under Part 1, Art. 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation between 2014 and the first half of 2018. The authors have analyzed the practices of Justices of the Peace in Ulyanovsk Region on criminal cases initiated under Part 1, Art. 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. They use the examples of specific criminal cases to prove that judges use clauses of Art. 33 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and Art. 6 of the Federal Law «On the Procedure of Handling Applications of Citizens of the Russian Federation» when deciding cases based on Part 1, Art. 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and protect the right of citizens to appeal to the governmental (including law enforcement) authorities; they point out that an appeal to governmental or local governance cannot be viewed as spreading deliberately false information. In this case, private prosecutors have no opportunity to protect their rights even if it is proven that the information is deliberately false, and they also have to bear additional expenses connected with the recovery of procedural costs. Besides, the research includes a comparative legal analysis of legislation on defamation in a number of foreign countries (the USA, China, the UAE and others) as well as the historical-legal analysis of the development of Russian legislation on liability for defamation.


Author(s):  
Екатерина Алёшина-Алексеева ◽  
Ekaterina Aleshina-Alexeeva

The main criteria of differentiation of the crimes provided by Article 159.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation from Article 176 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are considered in the article. The scientific and theoretical relevance of the subject is covered in the literature. In the present article the author delimited, in her opinion, illegal credit receiving from fraud in the sphere of crediting. The research objective is to formulate specific proposals concerning the solution of the problems of qualification of the crimes provided by Article 159.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation from Article 176 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation connected with their differentiation. The research methods used are: the analysis of theoretical literature and judicial and investigative practice, the comparative and legal analysis (features of the criminal liability regulation according to Article 159.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and 176 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), monitoring of the printed and electronic media material. The author focuses attention that fraud in the sphere of crediting cannot be considered as an economic crime in the sphere of crediting based on the revealed signs. Elimination of the qualification problems is suggested by means of adopting the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation which will contain the main explanations on the studied criminal actions. The practical value of the work consists in the possibility of its use in a law-enforcement activity in qualification of the crimes provided by Articles 159.1 and 176 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and besides, while teaching of the Criminal Law.


Author(s):  
Sergey Kartashov

We consider objective essential elements of offence associated with malicious evasion from satisfaction of accounts payable. We emphasize that at the present time there is a polemic among scientists regarding the di-rect object of this crime and its subject, and there are also evaluative elements that characterize the objective side of this crime. Therefore, based on the analysis of Article 177 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and doctrinal points of view, we conclude that it should highlight the main direct object – economic relations associated with lending and an additional direct object – social relations associated with the sphere of justice. The subject of this crime will be money and securities, but not accounts payable. Thus in relation to the funds, the debtor is indebted in an amount exceeding two million two hundred fifty thousand rubles, while in relation to the securities the debt by the legislator in Article 177 of the Criminal Code is not specified. Regarding the elements of the objective side of the crime composition under consideration, we note that it is characterized as malicious evasion from satisfaction of accounts payable on a large scale or from redemption of securities after the entry into force of the relevant judicial act. Taking into account judicial practice and doctrinal points of view, we conclude that in order to uniformly interpret and apply Article 177 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is necessary to replace the word “maliciousness” with “intentional non-payment”, or give an official interpretation of the category of “maliciousness”, but without emphasizing the practice that follows certain (individual) court sentences. For example, maliciousness can be understood as “deliberate non-payment by a person of a debt, when he can fulfill his financial obligations, after one warning from the bailiff-executor about criminal liability under Article 177 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation”.


Author(s):  
Georgii Moskalev

The subject of this research is the provision on criminal liability for training for the purpose of carrying out terrorist activities. In the course of this research, the author determines the content of the elements of a crime stipulated by the Article 205.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, defines boundaries of this criminal violation, as well as makes recommendations on the improvement of its legal regulation. The article is based on the component legal analysis of the body of crime, stipulated by the Article 205.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, with application of such methods of legal hermeneutics as grammatical and systemic interpretation. It was revealed that de facto, a direct object of crime envisaged by the Article 205.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation differs depending on the type of crime for which the subject is undergoing training; while the objective side of crime consists in training, including self-training of the subject. The article criticizes the legislator’s decision to establishing a minimum age threshold (14 y.o.) for the subject of crime, as well as the method to describe the purpose in disposition of the Article 205.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The author describes the cases when introduction of the Article 205.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation allows double prosecution for the same offence, as well as regulation of a stiffer penalty for preparation, in comparison with the completed substantive crime, which in both cases violates the principle of justice (Article 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).  A proposal is made to exclude the Article 205.3 from the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as introduce a special rule on the boundaries of punishment for preparation of terrorist acts.


Author(s):  
Michail Sagandykov ◽  
Galia Shafikova

The relevance of the study is based, on the one hand, on high public danger of crimes in the sphere of labor relations and, on the other hand, on a very low interest of law enforcement, control and supervision bodies in these crimes. The authors show that modern criminal legislation in the sphere of protecting labor rights has a high potential in comparison with both Soviet and foreign criminal law norms. At the same time, this potential, primarily expressed in Chapter 19 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, remains untapped. Many norms, including Art. 136 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation «Violating the Equality of Rights and Freedoms of Man and Citizen», are virtually never used against discrimination in the labor sphere, although such discrimination is quite common. No such cases have been found in court statistical data, thus it is impossible to provide a comprehensive criminological description of these crimes. The norm of Art. 136 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is seldom used by law enforcers because it is legally ambiguous. In this connection the authors suggest complementing the disposition of Art. 136 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with such factors of discrimination as «age» and «marital status». The latter factor will make it possible to provide extra protection to pregnant women and women with children under three years old against unmotivated refusal of employment and firing. The authors argue that such actions of the employer should constitute an aggregate of crimes and should be punished simultaneously under Art. 136 and 145 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the authors think that it is not appropriate to make the disposition of Art. 136 a blanket one due to vague grounds for discrimination in special legislation, including labor legislation. The obtained results could be used for the improvement of Russian legislation based on theoretical research and the practice of law enforcement.


Author(s):  
Viktor Borkov

The article discusses the urgent, not regulated by the criminal law, problem of qualifying the actions of the person who committed the crime as a result of the provocative actions of law enforcement officials. Attention is drawn to the absence in theory and judicial practice of a consistent scientific and legal justification for the release of persons provoked to a crime from criminal liability. An “encroachment” committed as a result of a “police provocation” is considered taking into account the institutions of complicity, involvement and inducement to commit a crime. The author examines the proposals already made by experts from fixing the provocation of a crime as one of the circumstances excluding criminal liability (Chapter 8 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), to including its arsenal of operationalsearch means to combat crime. According to the constitutional legal understanding of the investigated problem, the assessment of the act of the provoked is influenced by the activities of the persons who incited him to commit a crime, the essence of the disturbed social relations and the nature of the physical, property, organizational or other consequences that have occurred. The question of the criminal legal assessment of the acts of the provoked persons is proposed to be decided differentially, taking into account the reality and the measure of the harm caused by them.


Author(s):  
Rinat Mikhailovich Karimov

In this article Karimov analyzes whether it is necessary to amend available safety measures in relation to judicial authorities of the Russian Federation. The aim of the research is to analyze the current order of weapon issue to judges in the Russian Federation. The object of the research is the social relations rising in the process of implementation of legal provisions about the order of weapon issue to judges in the Russian Federation. The subject of the research is the legal acts that regulate the order of weapon issue to judges in the Russian Federaton. The researcher analyzes kinds of weapons that can be issued to a judge upon his or her written inquiry. The research is based on the comparative legal analysis of previous provisions about the order of weapon issue to judges and legal provisions that have been implemented just lately. The analysis is also based on the use of such research methods as analysis and synthesis, generalisation and logical research method. The author of the article proves the idea that the legal specificiation of the order of weapon issue to judges in the Russian Federation will eliminate possibility of attacking judges or their family members. The author focuses on the gaps in relevant legal regulations and suggests to review and make changes in the current law that regulates the order of weapon issue to judges. 


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document