COMPETITION OF CRIMINAL LAW PROVISIONS, WHICH FORESEE CERTAIN TYPES OF EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL RESPONSBILITY

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 73-79
Author(s):  
Vira Navrotska ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Literature ◽  
Special Part

Proper delineation of different types of exemption from criminal liability, the solution of competition between the legal norms foreseen such exemption are important in practice. However, law enforcers, within closing criminal proceedings (termination of criminal prosecution) and releasing from criminal liability, do not even think about the existence of such competition and about the need to choose a legal norm that is more advantageous for the accused. Sometimes the competition of criminal law norms in legal literature is reduced only to the competition of these rules within the qualification of an act prohibited by the Criminal Code of Ukraine. This article is devoted to the analysis of credibility of this statement, possibility of competition within the procedure of releasing from criminal liability, as well as to the mode of action under such competition. The impossibility of competition between certain types of exemption from criminal responsibility has been criticized. It is noted that it�s impossible to give universal recommendations for determining the most �profitable� norm on the basis of which the exemption from criminal responsibility is permissible. However, the following conditions have to be taken into consideration: 1) whether the possibility of bringing a person to criminal responsibility in the future will remain; 2) whether it is obligatory for the court to make a decision on exemption from criminal responsibility; 3) which offences and persons who committed them the norm is settled for; 4) what (more or less strict) conditions for exemption from criminal responsibility are settled, when other conditions are equal. It is proved that the differentiation mechanism of types of exemption from criminal responsibility after effective repentance and after reconciliation with the victim should be as follows: if there is a victim (in the procedural sense) the proceedings should not be closed under Art. 45 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. There is a special institution - the closure of criminal proceedings after reconciliation of the perpetrator with the victim (Article 46 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) for exemption from criminal responsibility in such cases. The exemption from criminal responsibility after effective repentance is expedient to apply if the encroachment harms the public interest. It is substantiated that a special rule, regarding one fixed in Article 45 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, is foreseen by Part 4 of Article 311 of this Code - because it foresees the conditions of exemption from criminal responsibility of a person who has committed a specific criminal offense. The unambiguity and categoricalness of the statement, under which in Article 45 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine is not foreseen a general type of exemption from criminal responsibility regarding the special ones foreseen by the Special Part, is criticized; it is proved that at least one such exception exists;

scholarly journals Criminal Liability for Knowingly Unlawful Sentence, Decision or Other Judicial Act

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 93-102
Author(s):  
Pavel Metelsky ◽  
Nadezhda Verchenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
The Public ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Considerable Complexity

Introduction. The publication is devoted to the corpus delicti, provided for by Art. 305 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which, being, in fact, a special type of official abuse, stands out as the direct object of a criminal assault and a special subject, since it can be committed exclusively by professional judges. The main features of the objective and subjective parties, qualifying signs of the offense are revealed, some problems that arise when applying this criminal law are outlined. Purpose. The goal is to analyze the design features of the crime and issues that arise when applying this rule. Methodology. The method of a formal legal analysis of the norms of the criminal law and theoretical provisions on problems directly related to the application of this rule was used. Results. The public danger of a criminal act that undermines the very foundations of justice is obvious, in connection with which it stands out as an independent crime by all the Russian Criminal Codes, starting in 1922, the history of criminal responsibility for its commission can be traced in our country in general since the 16th century. The current criminal law prohibition is characterized by considerable complexity, due to both the blanket nature of the disposition of the norm itself and the presence of discrepancies in the understanding of the signs embodied in it. Conclusion. The implementation of criminal liability for this crime involves the establishment of not only circumstances directly related to the corpus delicti that lie in the criminal law field. The subject of an infringement, a judicial act, must be subjected to procedural review without fail, after which, subject to the consent of the Higher Qualification Collegium of Judges of the Russian Federation, in fact, and the mechanism of criminal prosecution is “launched”. That is, a truly “multi-way” combination of actions is necessary, carried out in several stages, and the problem itself to some extent becomes interdisciplinary, going beyond only criminal law.

Influence of the ideas of Ivan Yakovlevich Foynitsky on the formation of criminal responsibility for kidnapping in modern Russia

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (12-3) ◽  
pp. 230-234
Author(s):  
Natalia Martynenko ◽  
Anatoly Maydykov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Modern Concept ◽  
Russian Scientist ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyzes the ideas of the Russian scientist in the field of criminal law Ivan Yakovlevich Foinitsky (1847-1913) on the establishment of criminal liability for kidnapping. The influence of I.Y. Foinitsky's ideas on the modern concept of criminal law protection of a person from abduction is shown. It is concluded that the norm on responsibility for the abduction of a person existing in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, its location in the structure of the norms of the Special Part, in many respects includes the provisions laid down by I.Y Foinitsky.

ON THE FORMAL ASPECT OF REGULATION OF THE CRIMINAL LEGAL IMPACT IN RESPECT OF MILITARY PERSONNEL IN THE RF CRIMINAL CODE

2021 ◽  
pp. 5-11
Author(s):  
R. V. Zakomoldin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Military Personnel ◽  
Military Service ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The paper analyzes special norms and provisions of the RF Criminal Code reflecting the specifics of criminal law impact towards such a particular subject as military personnel. The author studies the nature, meaning, and varieties of special criminal law norms. The paper highlights the diversity of such norms and their presence in General and Special parts of the criminal law. In this respect, the author explains that these norms have a dual purpose: they are applied both instead of general norms and along with them, supplementing and specifying them. The author emphasizes the certainty, necessity, and reasonability of special norms and provisions in criminal law. The study pays special attention to military criminal legislation as a special criminal legal institution and a set of special rules and provisions that allows differentiating and individualizing criminal responsibility and criminal punishment of servicemen, taking into account the specifics of their legal status and the tasks they perform in the conditions of military service. The author considers special norms and provisions of the General Part of the RF Criminal Code regulating particular military types of criminal punishment and the procedure for their imposition (Articles 44, 48, 51, 54, 55), as well as the norms and provisions of the Special Part of the RF Criminal Code on crimes against military service (Articles 331–352). Besides, the study identifies close interrelation and interdependence of special norms and provisions of the criminal law with the criminal procedure and criminal executive legislation because they are the elements of a single mechanism of criminal law impact on military personnel, and only their combination ensures the effectiveness of such impact. Based on the analysis, the author formulates the conclusions and proposals to introduce amendments and additions to the RF Criminal Code concerning military criminal legislation. First of all, the author proposes highlighting the section “Criminal liability of military personnel” and the chapter “Features of criminal liability and punishment of military personnel” in the General part of the RF Criminal Code and abandoning the provision of part 3 of Art. 331 in the Special part.

THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL ASPECTS OF APPLYING THE PRINCIPLE OF NON BIS IN IDEM IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS RIGHT UKRAINE

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petro Olishchuk ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
European Court

The article analyzes the principle of non bis in idem in the context of the criminal legislation of Ukraine, as well as the identification of cases of violations of this principle by law enforcement bodies during the qualification of criminal offences and during the issue of judicial decisions. It is noted that criminal law is a branch of law that is connected with the establishment of a ban on committing a certain act under the threat of the application by the state of measures of coercion of a criminal nature. The establishment of such a ban and the determination of measures of criminal-legal coercion, as a consequence, for its violation, is potentially related to the restriction of human rights. Obviously, the restriction of these rights cannot be arbitrary and chaotic, but must be subject to certain rules, ideas, which reflect the general development of society. These include the principles of criminal law, in particular the principle of criminal law, enshrined in art. Article 61 of the Constitution of Ukraine states: “No one can be brought to legal responsibility twice for the same type of offence”. According to Article 2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, “no one may be brought to criminal responsibility for the same criminal offence more than once”. The article highlights the characteristic features of the investigated principle. It is stated that its role is extremely important for the internal construction of the field of law, as well as the correct normalisation and law enforcement. There are cases of violations of this principle by law enforcement bodies during the qualification of criminal offences and during the issue of judicial decisions, on examples of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights and Ukrainian judicial proceedings. The European Court of Human Rights’s case-law on the application of Article 4 of the Convention is inconsistent and, in some cases, even contradictory. The principle of non bis in idem in the resolution of the question of the inadmissibility of double incrimination ensures the observance of the rights of the person during the implementation of criminal prosecution, as well as ensures the completeness of criminal legal qualification, the individualization of criminal responsibility and punishment.

LEGAL CONTENT OF CATEGORY“PREPARATION FOR PERFORMANCE OF AN INTENTIONAL CRIME”

2020 ◽  
pp. 39-45
Author(s):  
V. F. Lapshin ◽  
E. H. Nadiseva
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Principle Of Legality

The implementation of criminal liability for an unfinished crime, interrupted at the stage of preparation, is not consistent with the basic criminal law requirements, since the act committed at the stage of preparation, clearly does not contain any signs of a crime or its composition. At the same time, the imposition of punishment is carried out in accordance with the sanction of the norms of the Special part of the criminal code, which indicates the existence of an act not actually committed by the convicted person. This allows us to raise questions about the legality and necessity of bringing a person to criminal responsibility for an act recognized as preparation for the Commission of an intentional crime. The analysis of provisions of the current criminal legislation, sources of scientific literature, and also materials of judicial practice on criminal cases about incrimination of preparatory actions, allowed to draw a conclusion according to which attraction of the person to responsibility for Commission of the act characterized as preparation for Commission of crime, contradicts the principle of legality and justice. In this regard, it is proposed to change the current criminal legislation, eliminating the rules on the preparation of the Institute of unfinished crime.

scholarly journals The criminal responsibility for defamation of knowingly innocent

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (44) ◽  
pp. 241-251
Author(s):  
Vira Navrotska ◽  
Oksana Bronevytska ◽  
Galyna Yaremko ◽  
Roman Maksymovych ◽  
Vita Matolych
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Innocent Person ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Self Disclosure ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
The Right

The scientific article analyzes the acute discussion in law enforcement practice and procedural science of the problem of the possibility of criminal prosecution of a suspect, accused of defaming a knowingly innocent person in the commission of a crime. The theoretical basis of the article are scientific works on criminal law and criminal procedural law (both domestic researchers and foreign experts). A set of general scientific, special scientific and philosophical methods of scientific knowledge has been used while preparing the scientific article, in particular dialectical, historical, comparative, dogmatic (formal-logical), system-structural analysis, modeling. It is substantiated in the article that the behavior of the suspect, accused, which is manifested in slandering of a knowingly innocent person, does not constitute the right to freedom from self-disclosure. It is also proved that both freedom from self-disclosure and the right to defense in criminal proceedings must have certain limits, in particular, it is rights and interests of other subjects protected by criminal law. We stated that the suspect or accused should be liable for misleading the court and pre-trial investigation bodies even if such deception was used to protect against the suspicion (or accusation), to avoid criminal liability.

scholarly journals Consequences of failure to pay a court fine

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 639-650
Author(s):  
Nina Yu. Skripchenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legislative Regulation

The article discusses issues that arose during enforcement of the new grounds for exemption from criminal responsibility, enshrined in 2016, in connection with a court fine (Article 76.2 of the Criminal Code). Despite the criticism of its legislative regulation, demand for a new way of ceasing criminal prosecution began to appear in connection with the non-payment of a fine. Having determined the voluntary execution of a court fine, the legislator did not settle the issue of the further execution of the fine in cases where there are valid reasons for non-payment. After analyzing the existing proposals to solve this problem, the author confirms that the elimination of the gap would be facilitated by the legislative obligation of the bailiff to establish the circumstances by which the judicial penalty is not paid, as well as the addition of the list of decisions made by the bailiff to suspend enforcement proceeding. Analysis of judicial practice showed that Art. 76.2 of the Criminal Code began to be applied in cases where the court has justification for implementing less onerous grounds for the defendant to be exempt from criminal liability. Legislative duplication of the conditions under which criminal prosecution can be terminated for various reasons calls into question the wide alternative of the latter, as well as the embodiment of the idea of humanizing criminal law, which is the basis for securing a new ground for exemption from criminal liability. The article substantiates the proposal to supplement the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court dated June 27, 2013 with a provision allowing the release of a person from criminal responsibility with a judicial fine in cases where the court has no basis for suspending criminal prosecution for unconditional types of exemption from criminal liability. The author draws attention to the gap in the legislation, part 3 of Article 78 of the Criminal Code, which is related to the renewal of the statute of limitations for criminal liability when an individual avoids paying a court fine.

scholarly journals Social Conditionality of Criminal Liability for a Crime Under Art. 226-1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 356-366
Author(s):  
Elena Kalashnikova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
The State ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article is devoted to theoretical justification for the introduction of criminal prohibitions on criminal assault in the illicit movement of goods, specified in article 226-1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; the principles and bases of criminalization of smuggling in connection with her increased public danger. The analysis of the main components of social conditionality of criminal responsibility allows us to establish the validity of the introduction of new or existing criminal law norms. The article considers the public danger of smuggling (art. 226-1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), as an obligatory sign of a crime, revealing its social nature and social conditionality of the criminal liability under article 226-1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, depending on the extent and nature of public danger of the given kind of crimes. The social assessment of an act as a crime is based on its social danger, which is legally established in a normative legal act (Federal law) adopted in accordance with the established procedure and included in the criminal code of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the fact that the public danger of smuggling is a threat to the foreign economic security of Russia. At the same time, there is a public danger of illegal movement across the customs border of the EEU (the customs border of the Customs Union within the framework of the EEU) of items specified in art. 226-1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is primarily concerned with causing harm to market economic relations developing in the EEU area, which forms a single customs territory, as well as causing material damage to the state in the form of unpaid customs payments, death or damage to particularly valuable wild animals and aquatic biological resources as contraband items. Smuggling as a negative social phenomenon includes the organization of activities related to violation of the customs and border regime. In the context of globalization and the development of market relations, smuggling is still the most common and most dangerous of customs crimes. Accordingly, the existence of a criminal law ban on its Commission remains socially conditioned, since it is a deterrent that allows the state to respond adequately to these types of criminal behavior.

scholarly journals Criminal responsibility for public appeals to committing crimes against national safety in foreign legislation

2021 ◽  
pp. 403-410
Author(s):  
Vladyslav Kubalskyi
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Foreign Experience ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article is devoted to research of positions of foreign legislation, that envisage criminal responsibility for public appeals to committing crimes against national safety. Attention is accented on the problems of improving of legislation of Ukraine in this sphere. The suggestions of the Ukrainian scientists, related to improving of norms of Division І Special part of the Criminal code of Ukraine, that regulate responsibility for public appeals to committing crime against bases of national safety, are analyzed. The purpose of the article is to identify the main ways to improve the criminal legislation of Ukraine, which provides for liability for public appeals to commit crimes against national security, based on doctrinal approaches of domestic scholars and foreign experience of criminal liability for such crimes. In modern conditions, the problem of improving criminal law for public appeals to commit crimes against the foundations of national security of Ukraine, criminal liability for which is provided for in Part 2 of Art. 109 and Part 1 of Art. 110 of the Criminal code of Ukraine. Research on these issues without an analysis of foreign experience in this sphere seems to be extremely limited. It is proposed to supplement the Criminal сode of Ukraine with the article «Public appeals to actions aimed at harming the foundations of national security of Ukraine». The expediency of combining crimes, the responsibility for which is provided by Part 2 of Art. 109, part 1 of Art. 110, part 1 of Art. 2582, art. 295, art. 436, part 2 of Art. 442 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in one criminological group under the general name «public calls to commit crimes against national security».

LEGAL CONTENT OF CATEGORY“PREPARATION FOR PERFORMANCE OF AN INTENTIONAL CRIME”

2020 ◽  
pp. 39-45
Author(s):  
V. F. Lapshin ◽  
E. H. Nadiseva
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Principle Of Legality

The implementation of criminal liability for an unfinished crime, interrupted at the stage of preparation, is not consistent with the basic criminal law requirements, since the act committed at the stage of preparation, clearly does not contain any signs of a crime or its composition. At the same time, the imposition of punishment is carried out in accordance with the sanction of the norms of the Special part of the criminal code, which indicates the existence of an act not actually committed by the convicted person. This allows us to raise questions about the legality and necessity of bringing a person to criminal responsibility for an act recognized as preparation for the Commission of an intentional crime. The analysis of provisions of the current criminal legislation, sources of scientific literature, and also materials of judicial practice on criminal cases about incrimination of preparatory actions, allowed to draw a conclusion according to which attraction of the person to responsibility for Commission of the act characterized as preparation for Commission of crime, contradicts the principle of legality and justice. In this regard, it is proposed to change the current criminal legislation, eliminating the rules on the preparation of the Institute of unfinished crime.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document