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

Author(s):  
Elena Shchelkonogova

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.

Author(s):  
V.I. Tikhonov

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-200
Author(s):  
M. P. Рronina ◽  

The article is devoted to one of the current areas of legal science related to the problems of interpretation the norms of General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The interpretation of legal norms is the activity of state bodies, non-governmental organizations and individuals to clarify and explain the meaning of legal norms embedded by the legislator in them and the actual content of the legal provisions (regulations, definitions) contained in them in order to implement them correctly and improve the effectiveness of legal regulation public relations. The interpretation of legal norms is a complex volitional process aimed at establishing the exact meaning of the rule of law. This process consists of two elements: 1) the interpreter (interpreter) clarifies the content of the legal norm for himself; 2) then in order to establish its equal understanding and application it clarifies the meaning of the legal prescription to all interested parties. The first part of this activity – clarification – characterizes the epistemological nature of interpretation aimed at the knowledge of law. Understanding acts as a thought process taking place in the mind of the subject applying the rule of law. The explanation is the second part of a unified process of interpretation the law addressed to other parties to a relationship. It is carried out by the competent authorities and persons in order to eliminate ambiguities in understanding the content of the norm and thus ensure its correct application to the circumstances for which it is aimed. Subjects of interpretation may be public authorities, officials, organizations, enterprises, institutions, individuals. The objects of interpretation are laws and regulations. Legal interpretation is an activity that from a practical point of view is connected with the completion of the regulation of life relations by law. Legal norms as a result of interpretation become ready for implementation, practical implementation. The presented scientific article examines the interpretations given by the highest judicial instance, which showed that in some cases they contain contradictions that violate the legal and technical rules. Examples of the interpretation of criminal court decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation are given, and author’s editions are proposed.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Dvoryanskov ◽  
Elena Antonyan ◽  
Sergey Borovikov ◽  
Natal'ya Bugera ◽  
Aleksandr Grishko ◽  
...  

The textbook is prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, federal laws, international legal acts. The concepts, categories and institutions of the General Part of criminal Law are considered in detail. All changes in the criminal legislation have been taken into account, and the latest scientific, educational and methodological literature on criminal law has been used. The material is presented in an accessible form for effective assimilation of the training course. The publication contains regulatory legal material as of May 1, 2021. Meets the federal state educational standards of higher education of the latest generation in the areas of training 40.03.01 "Jurisprudence", 40.05.01 "Legal support of national security", 40.05.02 "Law enforcement", 40.05.03 "Forensic examination", 40.05.04 "Judicial and prosecutorial activities". For students, cadets, trainees studying in these areas of training, judges, law enforcement officers, as well as for anyone interested in criminal law issues.


Author(s):  
Sergey Kartashov

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.


2021 ◽  
pp. 99-115
Author(s):  
Sergei Gennadevich Losev ◽  
Viktor Ivanovich Morozov

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”.


Author(s):  
Irina Kravchenko

The goal of the article is to define modern trends in criminal law policy in the Russian Federation. More thorough research should be carried out in connection with lively scientific discussions on defining the essence of criminal policy and the lack of a universal understanding of the contents and key trends of developing criminal law policy. The author researched two components of criminal law policy which are currently trending in the research community — humanism and liberalization. The author’s own understanding of these characteristics is presented in the article. The author also studied the clauses of the Concept of criminal law policy of the Russian Federation from the standpoint of their correspondence to humanistic and liberal ideas and carried out an analysis of changes in Russian criminal legislation with the aim of identifying modern trends in criminal law policy. The study is carried out for the period of the latest full five years (2016–2020). It is stated that the number of laws aimed at amending the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and the number of actually introduced amendments are diverse values. Most changes are aimed at amending the Special Part of criminal law and are connected with criminalization. There is a trend for strengthening the protection of economic interests and public security, which has a rather weak correlation with the widely recognized priority for the protection of the individual, civil rights and freedoms. In general, the analyzed period is characterized by tightening of criminal law policy. The key features of criminal law amendments are their inconsistency, lack of a system or a unified direction. The author concludes that, contrary to the expectations of the public, the humanism and liberalization are manifested very moderately at the current stage of criminal policy’s development, they do not constitute its defining characteristics and challenge its progressive character. One of the promising ways of solving the identified problems is increasing and strengthening the role of criminological research in the development of criminal law policy.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 165-176
Author(s):  
V.E. Krukovsky ◽  
I.N. Mosechkin

The article is devoted to the study of forms of non-physical violence stated in the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The main objective is to study the issues of representing the forms of non-physical violence in criminal law, aimed at developing recommendations for improving criminal law to increase its effectiveness. The authors analyzed the provisions of the criminal legislation of Russia and the materials of judicial investigative practice, which made it possible to identify a number of shortcomings. The results led to the conclusion that the most common forms of non-physical violence are: threat, coercion, blackmail, bullying and insult. According to the authors, cheating cannot be related to the variety of violence since the phenomenon itself does not cause moral suffering to the victim, hence, a crime with this attribute is not violent. In addition, the authors conclude that not all forms of non-physical violence are reflected in the criminal law. The authors propose to consolidate the use of hypnosis as a qualifying attribute in some elements of the crime, as this will allow to resolve a number of qualification problems, and will also contribute to the correct particularisation and differentiation of punishments.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (11) ◽  
pp. 72-77
Author(s):  
D.V. TITLOVA ◽  

The article analyzes the content of those innovation norms in the Russian criminal legislation that establish liability for the use of doping drugs in the field of amateur and professional sports. The article provides evidence of the high social and political significance of social relations that have developed in the field of sports. The promotion of a sports lifestyle is one of the conditions for protecting the health of the nation, as a result of which the health safety of persons taking direct part in sports at various levels should be provided with special criminal law means, which implies the allocation of a separate object in the structure of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. On the basis of the results of the study of the anti-doping sphere of criminal law protection, as well as the content of special norms of the criminal law, assumptions are made about the presence of gaps in the content of the current norms on liability for the use of doping drugs and other prohibited drugs (substances). On this basis, the work identifies possible directions for the implementation of further scientific research in the field of health protection of persons taking part in sports competitions at various levels.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 155-163
Author(s):  
PETRUSHENKOV ALEXANDR ◽  

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.


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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document