scholarly journals ILLEGAL USE OF MEDICAL ROBOTS: CRIMINAL LAW ASSESSMENT AND CRIMINOLOGICAL RISKS

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 515-521
Author(s):  
A.A. Shutova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Surgical Care ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Medical Product ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Medical Robot ◽  
Medical Robots ◽  
Positive Side ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of

In the article, the author, on the positive side, assessing the capabilities of robotic medicine, states that today there is no comprehensive study of the safety of medical robots. In this regard, the possibility of risks and threats in the conduct of robotic surgical care cannot be denied. These actions can lead to serious legal consequences for the surgeon, medical institution and manufacturer of the medical robot. The author draws attention to the fact that there is no definition of the concept of "medical robot" in domestic regulatory legal acts. However, the Federal Law of November 21, 2011 No. 323-FZ "On the basics of protecting the health of citizens in the Russian Federation" establishes the concept of "medical product," which is quite capacious and may include the concept of "medical robot."It is necessary to distinguish the concept of "medical robot" as one of the types of medical devices, indicating it in the text of the order of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. The author concludes that it should be understood as a "medical robot," and also attempts to classify the criminological risks arising from its use, depending on the contact of the medical robot with humans. In addition, the publication raises issues of qualifying the actions of attackers who, in the process of illegal access, illegally receive patient data, which forms part of the crime under Art. 137 of the Criminal Code.

ANTI-CORRUPTION POLICY BY LEGAL MEANS

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 129-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Назаренко ◽  
Gennadiy Nazarenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Not Given ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Effective Implementation ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
Official Status

In the article anti-corruption policy is considered in criminal law and in the preventive aspects. The definition of anti-corruption policy by legal means is given. It is shown that the most significant and effective tool in this direction (kind) of policy is the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, the preventive potential of criminal law is not enough. The law does not cover a lot of corruption manifestations, which are involved in the use of any official status, its authority and opportunities. Up to the present time criminal law is not given with the accordance of the Federal Law «On combating corruption» from 25.12..2008 №273-FZ (as amended on 22.12.2014). Criminal law measures applied to corrupt officials, have palliative nature: they are based on the concept of limited use of criminal law and mitigation of punishment. The author makes a reasonable conclusion that more effective implementation of anti-corruption policy requires the adoption of new criminal law which contains the Chapter on corruption crimes, sanctions of which must include imprisonment as punishment as well as confiscation of property or life deprivation of the right to occupy certain positions or to be engaged in certain activities.

Signs characterizing the person occupying the highest position in criminal hierarchy

2020 ◽  
pp. 75-80
Author(s):  
Александр Викторович Сенатов
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Organized Crime ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation

В связи с изменениями, внесенными Федеральным законом Российской Федерации от 01.04.2019 № 46-ФЗ «О внесении изменений в Уголовный кодекс Российской Федерации и Уголовно-процессуальный кодекс Российской Федерации в части противодействия организованной преступности» в уголовном законодательстве появилась ст. 210, предусматривающая уголовную ответственность за занятие высшего положения в преступной иерархии. Данное преступление имеет специальный субъект, обладающий дополнительными признаками, которые должны быть закреплены в законе. Однако в уголовном законодательстве, а также постановлениях Пленума Верховного суда Российской Федерации отсутствует определение данного понятия, а также признаки, в соответствии с которыми необходимо привлечь лицо к уголовной ответственности. В статье проанализированы научные определения «преступная иерархия», «иерархическая лестница уголовно-преступной среды», лицо, занимающее высшее положение в преступной иерархии, а также выделены конкретные признаки, характеризующие специальный субъект, закрепленный ст. 210 УК РФ. Рассматривается опыт борьбы с организованной преступностью в Республике Грузия, а также материалы следственной практики в отношении лица, привлекаемого к уголовной ответственности по признакам состава преступления, предусмотренного ст. 210 УК РФ. Due to the changes made by the Federal law of the Russian Federation of 01.04.2009 No. 46-FZ “On modification of the criminal code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation regarding counteraction of organized crime” to the criminal legislation there was Art. 210 providing criminal liability for occupation of the highest position in criminal hierarchy. This crime has a special subject with additional features that must be enshrined in the law. However, in the criminal legislation, as well as the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme court of the Russian Federation, there is no definition of this concept, as well as signs according to which it is necessary to bring a person to criminal responsibility. The article analyzes the scientific definitions of “criminal hierarchy”, “hierarchical ladder of criminal environment”, the person occupying the highest position in the criminal hierarchy, as well as the specific features, fixed Art. 210 of the Criminal Code. The article also discusses the experience of combating organized crime in the Republic of Georgia, as well as materials of investigative practice in relation to a person brought to criminal responsibility on the grounds of a crime under Art. 210 of the Criminal Code.

scholarly journals The Concept of Complicity in Corruption and Responsibility for It

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-58
Author(s):  
Vladimir Burlakov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Essential Feature ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Normative Basis ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Definition Of

When the concepts «bribery» and «corruption» are used interchangeably it blurs, voluntarily or involuntarily, the borders between these related phenomena. Corruption is a consequence of bribery, but it also has its own distinctive features. The legal definition of corruption, found in the federal law of the Russian Federation, does not include essential qualities of this phenomenon. As a consequence, the Criminal Code norms prescribing liability for bribery still remain the normative basis of liability for corruption. Thus, these two phenomena are counteracted by the same measures of criminological and criminal law prevention, and, as a consequence, such measures lose their relevance and effectiveness, at least against one of the described offences. It is necessary to determine the essential feature of corruption in order to align its public danger with liability measures aimed at fighting it. This essential feature is the self-interested abuse of authority by an official with the purpose of aiding and abetting other persons in committing crimes. On the basis of such an understanding, the author concludes that it is necessary to criminalize corruption. It is suggested that the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be supplemented by an Article «Complicity in Corruption». Complicity in corruption is a complex crime that encompasses the situations when officials take bribes for using their authority to assist another person of persons in committing a crime. The proposed Article should determine liability for two types of complicity in corruption that differ in their degree of public danger: aiding and abetting corruption, when an official receives bribes and uses his authority to provide assistance to another person or people in committing a crime, and corrupt collusion, when an official receives bribes and uses his authority to provide assistance to an organized group or a criminal community in committing crimes on a permanent basis. The author analyzes the advantages of this Article in comparison with the Articles used today for qualifying corruption and shows the difference between the crime of complicity in corruption and similar crimes, specifically, those included in Part 3 of Art. 210 («Participation in a Criminal Community»).

scholarly journals On the harmonization of anti-terrorist legislation norms

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
pp. 86-90
Author(s):  
A. V. SAVINSKY ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Search Activity ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Terrorist Activity ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of

Measures are being taken in Russia to improve anti-terrorist legislation, with special attention paid to increasing the counter-terrorism potential of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, the current anti-terrorism regulations are not without drawbacks. Thus, terrorist activity is interpreted differently in Art. 3 of the Federal Law "On Countering Terrorism" and Art. 205.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which leads to contradictory investigative and judicial practice. The solution is seen in the unification of the definition of terrorist activity and the definition in the wording of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation looks preferable. It is noted that the legal support for the operational penetration of law enforcement agencies into terrorist structures does not meet the requirements, since the norm of Part 4 of Art. 18 of the federal law "On operational-search activity" (contains an operational-search basis for active repentance) remains inoperative due to the lack of its incorporation into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. The article formulates additions to these codified federal laws, which will legitimize the operational-search basis for active repentance.

Criminal-Legal Characteristics of Encroachment on the Health, Personal Integrity, Honor and Dignity of a Representative of the Authorities

2021 ◽  
pp. 96-103
Author(s):  
N. Yu. Borzunova ◽  
O. S. Matorina ◽  
E. P. Letunova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Personal Integrity ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The authors of the article consider the criminal- legal characteristics of crimes against representatives of the authorities, in particular, encroachment with the purpose of causing harm to the health, personal integrity, honor and dignity of a representative of the authorities. The definition of the term “representative of the authorities”is given. The main characteristics of a representative of the government are analyzed. Statistical data on the number of convictions and types of punishments in accordance with the provisions of articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Articles 318, 319) are summarized. Examples of judicial practice are considered. The ways of improving the criminal legislation are proposed.

scholarly journals Theoretical analysis of legislative definition of the regime in correctional institutions: problems and ways to solve them

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-75
Author(s):  
V. E. Juzhanin ◽  
D. V. Gorban'
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Model ◽  
Theoretical Analysis ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Penal System ◽  
Correctional Institutions ◽  
Scientific Thought ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of

The article provides a theoretical analysis of Part 1 of Article 82 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which defines the regime in correctional institutions of the Russian penal system. It is noted that this definition does not correspond to the achievements of modern penitentiary scientific thought about the regime. In particular, it is emphasized that the regime cannot provide conditions for serving a sentence, since it includes these conditions. Also, the regime cannot ensure the protection of convicts, supervision over them and separate maintenance of different categories of convicts, since, on the contrary, the latter are the means of ensuring the regime. According to the authors of the article, the legislator incorrectly uses the phrase regime of detention of convicts, meaning regime of serving a sentence, since they are different legal phenomena. It is noted that the most optimal definition of the regime is presented in the theoretical model of the general part of the new Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, prepared by a group of authors, but the authors also subjected this definition to some adjustments.

scholarly journals Novels of the Criminal Code on responsibility for abusesin public procurement: background and problems of qualification

2018 ◽  
pp. 34-43
Author(s):  
A. Ya. Asnis
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Service Contract ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Contract Managers

The article deals with the criminological grounds and background of the adoption of the Federal law of April 23, 2018 № 99-FZ, which introduced criminal liability for abuse in the procurement of goods, works and services for state or municipal needs (Art. 2004 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and for bribery of employees of contract service, contract managers, members of the Commission on the implementation of the procurement of persons engaged in the acceptance of the delivered goods, performed works or rendered services, other authorized persons, representing interests of customer in the scope of the relevant procurement (Art. 2005 of the Criminal Code).The author formulates private rules of qualification of the corresponding crimes and differentiation of their structures from structures of adjacent crimes and administrative offenses. The necessity of changing the position of the legislator regarding generic and direct objects of these crimes, the adoption of a special resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to explain the practice of applying the relevant innovations.

scholarly journals Problems of the Criminal Law Assessment of Involvement in Prostitution and the Organization of This Activity Through the Use or the Threat of Violence

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 941-950
Author(s):  
Oleg Gribunov ◽  
Gennady Nebratenko ◽  
Evgeny Bezruchko ◽  
Elena Millerova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Sex Industry ◽  
Social Phenomenon ◽  
Multiple Dimensions ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Sexual Services

The authors examine the specific features of criminal law assessment of involvement in prostitution and the organization of this activity through the use or the threat of violence. At the beginning, they stress the urgency of counteracting the social phenomenon of prostitution, analyze the very concept of «prostitution», its debatable and problematic aspects, because it is impossible to offer a correct qualification of criminal actions connected with prostitution (crimes under Art. 240 and 241 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) without determining the boundaries of providing sexual services specifically referring to the term «prostitution». It is concluded that the key problem for determining the scope of sexual actions described by the term «prostitution» is the lack of an official definition of this term in Russian legislation as well as a wide variety of services in the modern sex industry. The authors state that the understanding of prostitution as a historical social phenomenon as a situation when a woman provides sexual services to different men by performing sexual acts with them for previously discussed material compensation is outdated and does not reflect the multiple dimensions of modern prostitution. While researching the issues of qualifying criminal acts connected with prostitution and involving the use or the threat of violence within the framework of this article, the authors have analyzed the work of both Russian and foreign scholars and studied examples of investigation and court practice. They examine the problems of legal assessment of criminal law categories «violence» and «the threat of using violence» regarding publically dangerous actions connected with the involvement in prostitution and the organization of this activity. The authors present the criteria of differentiating between corpus delicti where such actions are criminally punishable and other corpus delicti, as well as the cases that require qualification for multiple crimes. The results of this research allowed the authors to work out and present recommendations on qualifying criminal actions connected with prostitution and involving the use of the threat of violence.

PUNISHMENT FOR SLANDER

2021 ◽  
pp. 50-63
Author(s):  
Tatyana A. Plaksina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Legal Response ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Previous Edition ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Explanatory Memorandum ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
High Share

Federal Law No. 538-FZ of 30 December 2020 substantially tightened the sanctions of the libel article, which previously contained only fines and compulsory labour, by including com-pulsory labour, arrest and imprisonment in most of them. The explanatory memorandum to the bill explained the changes by the need to provide the court with the choice of fair punish-ment, without specifying this provision in detail. As part of the research described in the article, statistics for the Russian Federation for 2013-2020 were taken from the reports of the Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to study the practice of punishment for defamation. The analysis showed that law enforcers used the potential of sanctions of Article 128-1 of the Criminal Code in their previous edition to a very limited extent. This was reflected in the high share of fines among penalties imposed, as well as in insignificant amounts of fines even for qualified and especially qualified types of libel, despite the fact that sanctions provide for high maxi-mum fine limits - from RUB 500,000 in part 1 of Article 128-1 of the Criminal Code to RUB 5 million in part 5. In particular, the share of fine among penalties imposed for simple libel was over 85%, and the average fine was equal in 2018 to RUB 11,500. - 11.5 thousand roubles, in 2019 - 13.7 thousand roubles, in 2020. - 16.3 thousand roubles. In 2018, the average fine for public libel (part 2, article 128-1 of the Criminal Code) was 19,500 rubles; in 2020 - 23,100 rubles. - The sanction allowed for a fine of up to 1 million roubles, while the sanction allowed for a fine of up to 1 million roubles. Moreover, over a quarter of those convicted for especially qualified defamation under part 5 of article 128-1 of the Criminal Code were sentenced to a fine of 5,000 rubles, i.e., one thousand times less than the maximum limit established by the sanction. Only in single cases of slander convictions, the fine exceeded 100 thousand rubles. The establishment of custodial sentences for qualified and especially qualified types of defamation seems excessive: a verbal crime against a person's honour and dignity does not require such a harsh criminal legal response. Moreover, the legislator has designed sanctions with too broad a framework, fraught with the risk of arbitrariness in sentencing and the for-mation of contradictory judicial practice (for example, under part 5 of article 128-1 of the RF Criminal Code, both a fine of 5 thousand rubles, and imprisonment for the period of 5 years can be imposed). The inclusion of arrest in the sanction cannot be considered justified, as this type of punishment has not been introduced yet. The optimum way to improve the sanctions for the part 2 to 5 parts of Article 128-1 of the Criminal Code of the RF would be to enhance them with correctional labour and restriction of freedom. These types of punishments corre-spond to the typical level of public danger of qualified and especially qualified types of slan-der and perpetrators of such deeds. Their inclusion in the sanctions would compensate for the disadvantages of the latter, related to the restrictions enshrined in the law on imposing com-pulsory works and large fines.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document