CODIFICATION PROBLEMS OF NECESSARY DEFENSE AFFECTING ITS IMPLEMENTATION

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 155-163
Author(s):  
PETRUSHENKOV ALEXANDR ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Educational Institutions ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Teaching Staff ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Activities

Objectives. The goal of scholarly research is to develop proposals for amendments in criminal law General and Special part of Criminal code of the Russian Federation governing self-defense. The scientific article identifies legislative gaps and contradictions that hinder the effective implementation of the necessary defense and require prompt solutions. Methods. The article analyzes such concepts as “self-defense”, “public assault”, “excess of limits of necessary defense”, “violation of the conditions of lawfulness of necessary defense”, “surprise assault”, “rights defending or other persons, interests of the state”. The use of logical and comparative legal methods allowed us to develop proposals for making changes to the criminal law norms that establish the necessary defense. Conclusions. The article shows the conflicts and gaps legislative recognition of self-defense and, in this regard, the complexity of its implementation in the articles of the Special part of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation and practical application. Changes are proposed to the criminal law norms regulating the necessary defense, both in the General and in the Special part of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. Sense. The content of the scientific article can be used by the teaching staff of higher educational institutions when teaching the course “Criminal law”. The results of the work can be useful to persons who carry out legislative activities in the field of criminal law. The leitmotif of the article can be used in the preparation of dissertation research.

scholarly journals AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES CHARACTERIZING SUBJECTIVE SIGNS OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 681-685
Author(s):  
V.I. Tikhonov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Subjective Side

The Institute of mitigating and aggravating circumstances is presented not only in the norms of the General part of the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. The application of these circumstances in the construction of individual elements of a crime allows the legislator to differentiate the orientation of the criminal law influence in relation to a specific crime element or in qualifying the fact of life reality. In law enforcement practice, proving the subjective side of a crime often causes significant problems. At the same time, motivation and achievement of a specific goal of committing a crime can have both a mitigating and an aggravating effect. The subjective side has a significant impact not only on the design of the offenses of the Special Part of the Criminal Law, but also on the process of sentencing through legal regulation of circumstances mitigating or aggravating criminal punishment. In this regard, both general and mandatory features of the subject of the crime also affect the procedure for establishing guilt and determining punishment in accordance with the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Of scientific interest is the study of the influence of the process of legal regulation of mitigating and aggravating circumstances in terms of the impact on this process of subjective signs of criminal behavior.

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.

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.

Public danger of crimes relapse

2020 ◽  
pp. 111-121
Author(s):  
Sergey Kartashov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Public ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Principle Of Justice ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
First Time

We point out that the danger is not the relapse of the crime, but the identity of the criminal, since the punishment for the person who committed the crime for the first time and the criminal who committed the crime again must be different, otherwise it would be contrary to the provision of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “Principle of justice”, which requires taking into account the degree of committed socially dangerous crime and the identity of the perpetrator. It is reflected that since 2012 there has been a revival of “special relapse” in some corpus delicti (Articles 131, 264.1, etc.). In addition, we clarify that, in a certain sense, relapse can also include corpus delicti with administrative prejudice, but their reflection in the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation contradicts the concept of crime (Article 14 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), but directly on administrative prejudice in the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation domestic legislator did not mention anything. We note that in the current legislation it is necessary to return to the use of the term “relapsed criminal”, since it is precisely the number and categories of crimes that indicate the public danger of the identity of the perpetrator. We also denote that the relapse of crimes does not increase the degree of public danger of a particular crime, but testifies to the public danger of the identity of the perpetrator committing a certain act prohibited by criminal law.

scholarly journals System of criminal penalties of Russian federation: legal regulation and sentencing practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 135 ◽  
pp. 04066
Author(s):  
Alexandra Brovkina ◽  
Victor Vezlomtsev ◽  
Svetlana Zakharova ◽  
Olga Shuranova ◽  
Yuri Truntsevsky
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Forced Labor ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Criminal Penalties

The article presents the questions of constructing a system of criminal penalties under the legislation of the Russian Federation, the problems of imposing various types of punishments taking into account the rules for constructing criminal law sanctions. Changes and additions, various types of criminal penalties, including the content of sanctions in the articles, lead to an imbalance in the principles of their construction. The punishment system is currently in need of reform. An analysis of the sanctions of the articles of a special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation revealed inconsistencies with the requirements of legislative equipment in their development, which creates serious difficulties in the appointment of sentences by the courts. Penalties under criminal law sanctions include punishment in the form of punishment, forced labor, imprisonment for a specified period. The legislation does not take into account the nature and degree of threat to crimes committed in the formation of sanctions articles. Criminal law and criminal law protection, and criminal procedural requirements, and punishments. In accordance with the peculiarities of the formation of the punishment system, the creation of criminal sanctions, as well as taking into account the goals of punishment in the domestic criminal law, which allows us to develop recommendations on the preparation of sanctions for articles of the criminal code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals TO THE QUESTION OF DISPOSITIONS OF ARTICLES OF A SPECIAL PART OF RHE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2020 ◽  
pp. 29-34
Author(s):  
Диана Викторовна Голенко
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Discretion ◽  
Structural Element ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

В работе исследуется структурный элемент статьи Особенной части Уголовного кодекса Российской Федерации - диспозиция. Затрагивается вопрос о соотношении диспозиции статьи, диспозиции нормы и состава преступления. Уделено внимание существующим в современной доктрине уголовного права представлениям о диспозиции статьи уголовного закона, ее видах, структуре. Обращено внимание на простые, описательные, бланкетные, ссылочные диспозиции, а также на особенности их использования. Исследуются абстрактный, казуистический приемы изложения нормативного материала. Обозначены преимущества и недостатки применения законодателем тех или иных приемов, а также влияние способа изложения диспозиции на пределы судейского усмотрения при применении статей. В работе обращено внимание на тенденции, характерные для современного законодателя. The article investigates the structural element of the article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - disposition. The question is raised about the ratio of the disposition of the article, the disposition of the norm and the corpus delicti. Attention is paid to the ideas exiting in the modern doctrine of criminal law on the disposition of an article of the criminal law, its types, structure. Attention is drawn to simple, descriptive, blank, reference dispositions, as well as to the features of their use. Abstract, casuistic techniques of presentation of normative material are investigated. The advantages and disadvantages of the use of these or those methods by the legislator, as well as the influence of the method of presentation of the disposition on the limits of judicial discretion when applying the articles are indicated. The article draws attention to the trends characteristic of the modern legislator.

scholarly journals The impact of administrative prejudice upon the content of penal prohibition

2021 ◽  
pp. 99-115
Author(s):  
Sergei Gennadevich Losev ◽  
Viktor Ivanovich Morozov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Record ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Subject ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Impact

The object of this research is the legal relations arising in the context of implementation of the norms of criminal law of the Russian Federation that establish liability for repeated administrative offenses. The subject of this research is the practice of application the criminal law norms of the Soviet and post-Soviet periods that regulate the institution of administrative prejudice, and acts of interpretation of the Russian Constitution, in which the Supreme Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation deals with the problems of the use of separate articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation that contain the norms with administrative prejudice, and parts of interrelation between the institutions of administrative prejudice and recurrence of offenses. The subject of this research is also justification of existence the institution of administrative prejudice in the national criminal law, main flaws in interpretation of the articles that describe the norms of the institution of administrative prejudice in the text of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Taking into consideration all shortcomings in interpretation of the articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the author offers unified definition of the composition with administrative prejudice. It is suggested to reintroduce the concept of recurrent offense in the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, taking into account the fact of administrative liability, outstanding criminal record, or criminal record that has not been expunged. The case if the legislator deems it necessary to take into account not identical, but homogeneous recurrence should be stipulated in the note to the article of the Special Part. The author also offers to include the Article 16.1 into the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the following wording: “The repeated offense is considered an act committed by a person who has previously been subjected to administrative penalty for similar type of offense, unless stipulated otherwise in the corresponding articles of the Special Part of the effective Code”.

scholarly journals On the construction of the purpose of punishment in criminal law

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-53
Author(s):  
S. A. Borovikov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Clear Guideline ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The One

The subject of consideration of this paper is the study of the purposes of punishment enshrined in article 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the similarities and differences in the approaches used to determining the purpose of criminal punishment in the laws of different countries and historical periods, the need for a critical assessment of the existing legislative decision. In the course of a comparative analysis the conclusion is formulated that the current version of the purposes of punishment in criminal law is overly broad, which creates the illusion of its achievement and in some cases the competition of its parts among themselves. So the first of those mentioned in article 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation the purpose of restoring social justice is a quality that should be inherent in punishment. The second of the purposes stated in the law – the correction of the convict – is one of several ways to achieve it. However the very purpose of the punishment is not to correct the convict. The third of these purposes – the prevention of crimes – is most consistent with the purpose of punishment, but it is quite lengthy and requires clarification. In addition it does not contain a clear focus on a person who can or has committed a crime. According to the results of the analysis it is proposed to carry out an adjustment of the purposes of criminal punishment in the law. The purpose of punishment should be one and have a common focus. In this regard it is proposed to define as the purpose of punishment – retention persons from committing crimes. The single and understandable purpose of punishment on the one hand will be a clear guideline in constructing the type and size of both the main and additional punishments in the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part, and on the other will allow the courts to choose the punishment that most corresponds to the intended result.

scholarly journals Aggravating circumstances

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-161
Author(s):  
A. P. Kuznetsov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Preventive Role

In the article on the basis of the latest amendments made to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation circumstances aggravating the punishment are investigated, attention is drawn to some controversial legal and technical decisions in their formulation. The criminal law on the strength of influence of certain circumstances on the chosen punishment is clearly not enough, which does not contribute to enhancing the preventive role of the law, the elimination of subjectivism and discord in practice. Most scientists and practitioners support the idea of specifying, emphasizing that it will be easier to apply the law, circumstances of the case will be visibly linked to the chosen measure of criminal law impact, the importance of references in sentences to data on the case will increase, the preventive role of criminal law will increase, the prerequisites for a uniform understanding will be strengthened and application of the Criminal Code. It was not by chance that in the Soviet period of development of the science of criminal law, a tendency emerged to single out: a) main and b) other mitigating and aggravating circumstances. Consequently it is necessary to take into account the whole range of issues relating to the practical implementation of the idea of legislative specification of the strength of influence of individual circumstances: the circle of circumstances, which it may concern; the extent to which such circumstances influence the punishment (including the expediency of specifying in the law how much the punishment increases or decreases, or what is the upper or lower new limit within which the court selects the punishment taking into account the “main” circumstance). According to Part 2 of Art. 63 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation if the aggravating circumstances are provided for by the relevant article of the Special Part as a sign of a crime, it in itself cannot be re-taken into account when imposing a punishment. In the criminal law doctrine an exhaustive (closed) list of aggravating circumstances has not been approved by scientists, who believe that this method does not take into account changes in the sphere of public life to a certain extent.

On the System of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
pp. 31-40
Author(s):  
Elena Shchelkonogova
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Law System ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article raises the problem of systematic interpretation of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, since fair enforcement of criminal law articles is impossible without understanding their sense intended by the legislator. One of the effective methods for identifying it is systematic interpretation of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code. They are considered as elements of the system, their logical relations with each other and with the articles of the General Part of the Criminal Code are identified. Systematic consideration of the Special Part of the Criminal Code induction and deduction allowed formulating its current definition based on the fundamental difference between the rule of law and the article of the law. Identification of the systemic features of the Special Part helps distinguishing it from structure and classification. The article also pays attention to the problem of determining the various grounds for division of legislative material of the Special Part; the meaning of such concepts as «criminal legislation system» and «criminal law system» is delimited. The question is raised whether it is correct to speak about the system of crimes enshrined in the Special Part of the Criminal Code.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document