scholarly journals To the issue of the concept of general principles of imposition of sentence

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 114-118
Author(s):  
Kostyantyn Marysyuk
Keyword(s):  
General Principle ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
General Rules ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
Points Of View

An attempt is made to investigate scientific approaches to the concept of general principles of sentencing. Although the general principles of sentencing are directly provided for in the Criminal Code of Ukraine in the article with the appropriate title, there are still some differences as to which provisions of this article apply to them. There are several points of view on this. According to the first - the general principles of sentencing are contained only in Part 1 of Art. 65 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which provides for five separate general principles: 1) sentencing within the limits established by the sanctions of the article (sanctions of part of the article) of the Special Part of the Criminal Code, which provides for liability for a criminal offense, except as provided in part two 53 of the Criminal Code; 2) sentencing in accordance with the provisions of the General Part of the Criminal Code; 3) imposition of punishment taking into account the severity of the criminal offense; 4) sentencing, taking into account the identity of the perpetrator; 5) sentencing, taking into account mitigating and aggravating circumstances. According to the second point of view, the general principles of sentencing are contained only in Part 1 of Art. 65 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which provides for three general principles, ie the imposition of punishment taking into account the severity of the criminal offense, the perpetrator and mitigating and aggravating circumstances, is considered one general principle. It is concluded that the general principles of sentencing should be understood as a holistic system of general rules, which together must be guided by the court in each case of choosing the type and measure of punishment for a person guilty of a criminal offense.

SYSTEM OF THE GENERAL PART OF THE CRIMINAL CODEOF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2020 ◽  
pp. 62-70
Author(s):  
E. V. Shchelkonogova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Systematic Approach ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Historical Aspect ◽  
Meaningful Relationship ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article examines the General part of the Criminal Code. It is considered from the point of view of a systematic approach, questions are raised about the meaningful relationship between the norms of the General Part and the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The historical aspect of the formation of the current structure of the Code is given, and the question of whether the General and Special parts of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are identical parts or not. The sections of the General Part are analyzed in order to identify their functional load and significance for law enforcement.

INSTITUTIONS OF MULTIPLE CRIMES AND ADMINISTRATIVE PREJUDICE IN CONTEMPORARY RUSSIAN CRIMINAL LAW

2021 ◽  
pp. 43-47
Author(s):  
O. Yu. Savelyeva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Other ◽  
Correct Interpretation ◽  
Administrative Legislation ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
Points Of View

Despite the legislator is step by step expanding the number of bodies of a crime with the sign of administrative prejudice, up to the present, the General part of the RF Criminal Code does not define administrative prejudice. It leads to the fact that the Special part of the RF Criminal Code formulates the administrative prejudice features in the bodies of crimes in different ways. In particular, only some of the bodies of crimes contain the duplicity feature as an administrative prejudice element. Within this investigation, the author considers as well the other criminal law institution – multiple crimes. It is caused by the fact that collaterally with the administrative prejudice, the liability for persons previously convicted for identical and (or) similar actions starts to be introduced. It speaks for both the reappearance of liability for special recidivism and the introduction of the criminal law category not covered by this concept. To identify the problems related to the structure of bodies of crimes with indicated signs and specify the ways for their solution, the author carried out the interdisciplinary comparison of norms of criminal and administrative legislation, analyzed doctrinal points of view, explained the position of the executor of law represented by the supreme judicial authorities, and investigated a draft law on the amendments in the RF Criminal Code. As a result of the study, the author concludes that the Special part of the RF Criminal Code formulates the administrative prejudice signs in the bodies of crimes in different ways. It complicates the correct interpretation of specified criminal law norms. Moreover, the author considers incorrect the structure of part 1 of Art. 284.1 of the RF Criminal Code, which contains both the sign of administrative prejudice and the sign of conviction for identical action. The position of the RF Government expressed in draft law No. 536-8 on the amendments in Art. 116.1 of the RF Criminal Code calls for comments as well.

scholarly journals SYSTEM OF THE GENERAL PART OF THE CRIMINAL CODEOF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-70
Author(s):  
E. V. Shchelkonogova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Systematic Approach ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Historical Aspect ◽  
Meaningful Relationship ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article examines the General part of the Criminal Code. It is considered from the point of view of a systematic approach, questions are raised about the meaningful relationship between the norms of the General Part and the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The historical aspect of the formation of the current structure of the Code is given, and the question of whether the General and Special parts of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are identical parts or not. The sections of the General Part are analyzed in order to identify their functional load and significance for law enforcement.

scholarly journals Criminal-legal description of penalties imposed for criminal offenses

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 356-361
Author(s):  
Iryna Shylo
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Psychotropic Substances ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Right

The criminal-legal characteristic of the punishment provided for criminal offenses is given. It is determined what punishments can be applied by the court as the main and additional. The size of the main punishments in the form of fines, community service, correctional labor, arrest, restriction of liberty, deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities, service restrictions for servicemen, detention in a disciplinary battalion were analyzed. Taking into account the provisions of the Law on Criminal Liability, the general principles of sentencing by a court in case of a criminal offense are established, which are: sentencing within the limits established in the sanction of the article (sanctions of part of the article) of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine; except as provided in Part 2 of Art. 53 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine; sentencing in accordance with the provisions of the General Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine; sentencing for a criminal offense, taking into account the identity of the perpetrator and mitigating and aggravating circumstances. The statistical data of the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine on registered criminal offenses and the results of their pre-trial investigation for July-November 2020, which showed that a total of registered criminal offenses in July 63 902, August 17 070, September 8 976, October 9 902, November 6 803 The largest number are criminal offenses against life and health of a person; against property; in the field of trafficking in narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, their analogues or precursors and other criminal offenses against public health; against the authority of public authorities, local governments, associations of citizens and criminal offenses against journalists.

SYSTEM OF THE GENERAL PART OF THE CRIMINAL CODEOF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2020 ◽  
pp. 62-70
Author(s):  
E. V. Shchelkonogova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Systematic Approach ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Historical Aspect ◽  
Meaningful Relationship ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article examines the General part of the Criminal Code. It is considered from the point of view of a systematic approach, questions are raised about the meaningful relationship between the norms of the General Part and the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The historical aspect of the formation of the current structure of the Code is given, and the question of whether the General and Special parts of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are identical parts or not. The sections of the General Part are analyzed in order to identify their functional load and significance for law enforcement.

scholarly journals MEASURES OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO PROHIBITIONS IN THE FIELD OF TRAFFIC SAFETY AND VEHICLE OPERATION: SOME ASPECTS OF REGULATORY CERTAINTY AND PRACTICE OF USE

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 59-68
Author(s):  
A. Iashchenko
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Traffic Safety ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Primary Role ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Vehicle Operation ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
Criminal Justice Response

The article is devoted to the research of measures of criminal justice response to prohibitions in the field of traffic safety and vehicle operation. It is noted that the primary role in state response to violation of criminal justice prohibitions in the field of traffic safety and vehicle operation is given to punishment, but no less important role is paid to other alternative to prohibition measures of criminal justice nature based on the concussion (special confiscation) or the encouragement (exemption from criminal responsibility or serving a sentence). It is concluded that the normative regulations of threats of application of certain punitive measures of criminal justice nature in sanctions of the articles of this section of the Special part in which the legislator defines the threat of application of various types of punishment for committing the crimes stipulated in crimes’ dispositions, needs specification from the point of view of the system interconnection, along with the provisions of the General Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, whereas the practice of application of special confiscation its further distribution and development, considering the proposed recommendations of its delimitation with the so called criminal procedural confiscation as means of criminal procedural concussion. In particular, it is noted that such clarification may be implemented either by enforcing additional penalties specified in the sanctions of Part 1, 2, 3 of Article 286, part 1 of Article 287 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, to the common list of types of punishments, with their separate meaningful definition in the corresponding articles of the section X of the General part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, or by covering normative definition in sanctions of the specified articles of section XI of the Special part of threats of application of such additional types of punishments according to the existing parts of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In this regard the sanctions of Article 286 and 287 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine propose to make appropriate changes. As for the practice of applying special confiscation for committing crimes in the field of traffic safety and vehicle operation, it is recommended that the question of its implementation should be based on the fact that the subject of special confiscation may be defined in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Art. 96-2 of the Criminal Code - items 6, 6-1 part 9 of Art. 100 of the Criminal Procedure Code, paragraph 2, part 1 of Art. 96-2 of the Criminal Code - item 2 part 9 of Art. 100 of the CPC, paragraph 3, part 1 of Art. 96-2 of the Criminal Code - item 5 part 9 of Art. 100 of the CPC, paragraph 4, part 1 of Art. 96-2 of the Criminal Code - item 1 part 9 of Art. 100 of the CPC items of the material world that possess a certain property value, and are usually considered as physical evidence in criminal proceedings initiated on the fact of committing certain crimes in the field of traffic safety and vehicle operation.

scholarly journals Guilt in compositions of crimes against bases of national safety of Ukraine: problem questions of theory and fixing in a law on criminal responsibility

2019 ◽  
pp. 136-150
Author(s):  
R. Chorniy
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Direct Indication ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Law ◽  
Transfer Of Information

The article is devoted to the investigation of forms and types of guilt in the composition of crimes against the basics of national security of Ukraine. The presence of a number of unresolved issues at the theoretical and legal level on this issue actualizes the need for its scientific elaboration and formulation of proposals to improve the provisions of the law on criminal liability. The purpose of the article is to investigate the problematic issues of forms and types of guilt in crimes against the bases of national security of Ukraine, ways of fixing them in the articles of Section I of the Special part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine and to develop sound proposals for their solution based on the provisions of the doctrine of criminal law. The article presents the existing approaches of doctrinal interpretation by scientists of the provisions on wine, its forms and types, through which the research of this feature in the crimes under Art. Art. 109 - 114-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. It is proved that the most reasonable is the psychological concept of guilt, which promotes the insertion of forms and types of guilt in crimes against the basics of national security with a formal composition, the elucidation of forms of guilt in the warehouses of crimes provided by articles of section I of the Special part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in which the legislator directly does not say that it is one of the preconditions for the proper qualification of the act committed by the person. It is proved that the basis for the conclusion about the intentional form of guilt is based on: 1) a direct indication of it in the norm of the law (Part 1 of Article 110 and Part 1 of Article 111 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 2) indication of the specific purpose or motives of the criminal behavior (Part 1 of Article 109, Note 1, Part 1 and Part 2 of Article 110-2, Article 113, Part 1 of Article 114 and Article 112 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) ; 3) combination of the above mentioned features in one norm (Part 1 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 4) interpretation of terms used in the dispositions of certain articles and / or through the description in the law of the features of the crime (Part 1 of Article 110, Part 2 of Article 109, Part 1 of Article 110, Part 1 of Article 111, Article 112, Article 113, Part 1 of Article 114 and Part 1 of Article 114-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 5) interpretation of terms used in other articles of the Special (espionage as a part of state treason) or articles of the General part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (conspiracy to commit the actions provided for in part 1 of Article 109 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (Article 26 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine), attempted murder state or public figure (Article 112 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) (part 1 of Article 15 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine); 6) the orientation of socially dangerous acts. The specifics of constructing all these norms testify to the direct intent of the person who committed the respective crime. On this basis it is substantiated that the lack of specification of intent in part 1 of Art. 111 and Part 1 of Art. 110 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine does not contribute to the clarity of the provisions of the Criminal Code in the specified part, and the direct intent in the composition of these crimes is evidenced by: 1) special purpose (Part 1 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code); 2) the terms used in the dispositions of the said articles (“violation of the order… established by the Constitution of Ukraine” (part 1 of Article 110), “transfer of information…, transition to the enemy's side, rendering… assistance in carrying out subversive activities against Ukraine”) ( Part 1 of Article 111); 3) the focus of socially dangerous action. In order to eliminate the ambiguous interpretation of the provisions of Part 1 of Art. 110 and Part 1 of Art. 111 of the Criminal Code it is proposed to amend them accordingly. The forms and type of guilt in the warehouses of crimes with material composition (Part 3 of Article 110, Part 3 and 4 of Article 110-2, Part 2 of Article 114-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) were not clearly reflected in the relevant rules of the law. It is substantiated that the subject's attitude to socially dangerous consequences (deaths of people (h. 3 Art. 110, h. 2 Art. 114-1), other grave consequences (h. 3 Art. 110, h. 4 Art. 110- 2, Part 2 of Article 114-1) Causing considerable property damage (Part 3 of Article 110-2) can be intentional or negligent.

Criminal Law and Procedure

Japanese Law ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 450-466
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Oda
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
Basic Concepts ◽  
The Law ◽  
Terrorist Acts

The primary statute of criminal law in Japan is the Criminal Code of 1907. There are various separate laws which provide for specific crimes, generally denoted as ‘special criminal laws’. Some offences were added by way of such special laws in the recent years including the law against terrorist acts of 2019. The The Criminal Code is divided into the General Part and the Special Part. The former lays down the general principles and basic concepts of criminal law such as intention, negligence, attempt, accomplice, etc. The latter lists specific offences. Constitution guarantees the rights of defendants and suspects. Criminal procedure has become much more transparent, and better protection is given to suspects.

Provisional and Protective Measures

2021 ◽  
pp. 219-239
Author(s):  
European Law
Keyword(s):  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
General Rules ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Regulatory Measures ◽  
General Part ◽  
Asset Preservation

This chapter focuses on provisional and protective measures, which are important both in domestic and cross-border litigation to secure effective enforcement or to otherwise preserve rights and prevent (further) harm prior to the commencement of proceedings or pending final judgment. Part X of the European Rules of Civil Procedure consists of three Parts: a General Part (Section 1), which includes rules that apply to all types of measures, unless otherwise provided; a Special Part (Section 2), which includes rules on Asset Preservation, Regulatory Measures, Evidence Preservation, and Interim Payments; and a Cross-Border Part (Section 3), which primarily refers to existing legislation. Section 3 further provides a minimal number of general rules as it is not intended to provide a set of rules on the complex and multifaceted issue of cross-border provisional and protective measures. Principle 8 of the ALI/UNIDROIT Principles was the starting point for the development of Rules concerning provisional and protective measures. This Principle includes three basic rules: on function and proportionality (8.1); ex parte measures; (8.2); and compensation and security (8.3).

scholarly journals ON THE LEGISLATIVE CONSTRUCTION OF TERRORIST CRIMES IN THE SPECIAL PART OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION (ON THE EXAMPLE OF ARTICLES 205–205.6 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 46-52
Author(s):  
D. V. Golenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article discusses current trends characteristic of the Russian criminal law and the practice of its application in the fi eld of combating terrorism. The acts provided for in Chapter 24 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Articles 205205.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) are analyzed in detail from the point of view of the location of the legislative material, as well as the structures of the elements of the crimes. Special attention is paid to the structure of Articles 205205.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (dispositions, sanctions, notes). The types of structures of terrorist crimes at the time of completion are considered. The article analyzes the current practice of applying this Articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as offi cially published judicial statistics. The study allowed us to identify existing contradictions within the criminal law and formulate some recommendations for improving legislation in the field of combating terrorism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document