scholarly journals Features of signs of the crime object provided by article 166 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-198
Author(s):  
Алена Харламова ◽  
Alena Kharlamova ◽  
Юлия Белик ◽  
Yuliya Belik
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Direct Object ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

The article is devoted to the problematic theoretical and practical issues of the content of the signs of the object of the crimes under Art. 166 of the Criminal Code. The authors determined the main direct object, revealed the essence of the right of ownership, use and disposal. Marked social relations that can act as an optional direct object. Particular attention is paid in the article to the subject of the crime. Attempts have been made to establish criteria that are crucial for the recognition of any vehicle as the subject of theft. The content of the terms “automobile” and “other vehicle” is disclosed. The analysis of the conformity of the literal interpretation of the criminal law to the interpretation of the law enforcer is carried out. It is summarized that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation narrows the meaning of the term “other vehicle”, including in it only vehicles for the management of which, in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, is granted a special right. The authors provide a list of such vehicles and formulate a conclusion on the advisability of specifying them as the subject of a crime. The narration of the article is accompanied by examples of decisions of courts of various instances in cases of crimes under Art. 166 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

scholarly journals FEATURES OF QUALIFICATIONS FRAUD IN THE CRIMINAL LEGISLATION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 113-116
Author(s):  
Stanislav V Rozenko ◽  
Ksenia A Murzina
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Serious Crime ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article considers the problems of determining a fraud in the Russian criminal law. The relevance of the topics currently defined by the presence of problems of qualification of fraud resulting from new approaches to the criminalization of theft. The subject is article 159 of the criminal code. Tasks of the article: suggestion when you know the subject of the crime under-ruined article 159 of the criminal code, in accordance with the current changes of the civil legislation of the Russian Federation, people's property, which includes rights of property; to add to article 159 of the criminal code a qualified sign of the Commission of a fraud committed by a group of individuals that alows you to qualify actions of guilty, in the case of lack of proof of their collusion, as a more serious crime than fraud committed by more than one individual; it seems necessary to define in the explanation of the resolution of Plenum of the Supreme Court position on the percenage of the causes of harware damage with the income of the victim or the aggregate income of the family of the victim, taking into account the number of family members.

scholarly journals Sports crimes: issues of systematic approach, criminalization and qualifications

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 02009
Author(s):  
Oleg Alexandrovich Dizer ◽  
Irina Gennadievna Bavsun ◽  
Andrey Viktorovich Zarubin ◽  
Vladimir Nikolaevich Safonov ◽  
Georgy Yurievich Sokolsky
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Specific Object ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The study prerequisites are the fragmentation in the current criminal legislation of criminal law standards protecting the field of sports, as well as the issues of criminalization of acts in sports and the qualification of sports crimes. The study aims to solve the issues of systematization of regulatory provisions, the object of which is social relations in sports, taking into account the characteristics of the generic and specific objects, the degree of encroachment danger. The methods included the dialectical method, abstraction, analysis, synthesis, deduction, formal legal method, method of comparative jurisprudence. The results and novelty of the study reside in the conclusions about the advisability of identifying a separate specific object of criminal law protection (social relations in sports), which would systematize related and close acts not only in professional sports but also at all levels of official sports competitions. In this context, the issues of criminalization and qualifications of causing harm to life and health of an individual in violation of the sport rules, exerting unlawful influence on the result of an official sports competition, actions provided for in Art. 230.1 and 230.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as the synchronization of the subject of the latter with the subject of Art. 234 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Based on the foregoing, the recommendation of isolating a separate chapter in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and issuing a separate Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on crimes in sports is substantiated. Such measures will be able to optimize the criminal law protection of such an important sphere of public life as sports. In addition, this will make it possible to bring the quality of domestic criminal legislation and sports legislation to the international level and significantly increase the prestige of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Efficiency of practical application of criminal law prohibition in the sphere of economy of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (4) ◽  
pp. 118-123
Author(s):  
Vladimir Tunin ◽  
Natal'ya Radoshnova
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Economic Crime ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Economic Crimes

The article considers the practical effectiveness of the criminal law prohibition in combating economic crime in the Russian Federation. 22nd Chapter of the Criminal code currently includes 58 articles. This is maximum number of articles in relation to other chapters of the criminal code, in the same Chapter of the Criminal code. Accordingly the need for such a number of prohibitions in the economic sphere should be confirmed by judicial practice. However, a completely different picture emerges. Based on the analysis of the statistical reports of the Judicial Department under the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the authors conclude that the enforcement practice in cases of economic crimes is insufficient.The authors express their opinion on the reasons for the ineffectiveness of the practical application of the articles constituting the 22nd Chapter of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation, and suggest ways to address them.

scholarly journals Problems of proving guilt in criminal cases in connection with tax evasion

2019 ◽  
pp. 170-176
Author(s):  
V. V. Dubrovin
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The establishment of an intentional form of guilt and its specific type is mandatory for the implementation of the provisions of Art. 8 of the Criminal Code. In criminal proceedings in connection with tax evasion, a direct intent should be established in the act of the accused, otherwise the provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 28, 2006 No. 64 “On the practice of criminal law on liability for tax offenses”. One of the proofs of direct intent in the act of the accused may be the decision of the tax authority to prosecute for the tax offense, made according to the results of tax control measures (in-house or on-site tax audits). In the event that it establishes an imprudent form of the taxpayer’s guilt in committing a tax offense, in proving the guilt of the accused in the course of criminal proceedings there may be an intractable contradiction.

scholarly journals Some Issues of Qualification of the Hijacking of an Aircraft, a Sea-Going Ship, or a Railway Train (Article 211 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 367-376
Author(s):  
Denis Kraev
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Water Transport ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Rolling Stock ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Railway Rolling Stock

The article is devoted to the problems of qualification of hijacking of an aircraft, a sea-going ship, or a railway train, provided for by Art. 211 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Despite the fact that Art. 211 has been present in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation since its adoption, it should be noted that there is a lack of theoretical research on its analysis, as well as the existence in court practice of the difficulties of applying this norm (in addition, Federal Law No. 130 of May 5, 2014 -FZ in Art. 211 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation a new Part 4 was introduced, providing for liability for the combination of hijacking of a ship of air or water transport or railway rolling stock with a terrorist act or other terrorist second activity that, in the absence of specific explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court, has created additional challenges for law-qualification). This determines the relevance of the chosen topic. Analyzing the current legislation, the provisions of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 9, 2008 No. 25 “On judicial practice in cases of crimes related to violation of the rules of the road and the operation of vehicles, as well as their unlawful seizure without the purpose of theft”, scientific positions and court decisions on these issues, the author comes to the following conclusions that seem interesting for theory and practice. Small boats of water transport relate to the subject of hijacking of a ship of air or water transport or railway rolling stock, and the commission of a crime under Part 4 of Art. 211 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and the associated terrorist act, requires qualification in the aggregate of Part 4 of Art. 211 and Art. 205 of the Criminal Code. Military aircraft and boats, submarines, etc.) are also the subject of a crime under Art. 211 of the Criminal Code. The of hijacking of an aircraft, a sea-going ship, or a railway train, as well as the seizure of such a ship or train for the purpose of hijacking, associated with the murder, assault on the life of a law enforcement officer, person conducting justice or preliminary investigation, a state or public figure are qualified in the aggregate of Art. 211 and Art. 105, Art. 277, Art. 295, Art. 317 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. When of hijacking of an aircraft, a sea-going ship, or a railway train, as well as hijacking such a ship or train for the purpose of hijacking, committed with the use of violence dangerous to the life or health of the victim, or with the threat of such violence, in addition to item “c” of Part 2 of Art. 211 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of additional qualification in parts 1, 2 of Art. 111, Art. 112, Art. 115, Art. 117, Art. 119 of the Criminal Code is not required. The of hijacking of an aircraft, a sea-going ship, or a railway train is often fraught with violation of the traffic safety rules and operation of the relevant transport provided for in Art. 263 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: the deed is covered by Art. 211 of the Criminal Code, if the violation specified in Art. 263 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation expressed itself in theft; if not, qualification is possible in the aggregate of art. 211,263 of the Criminal Code.

scholarly journals Criminal Misconduct: An Objective Need or a Declared Necessity?

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 142-154
Author(s):  
N. Yu. Skripchenko ◽  
S. V. Anoshchenkova
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The actively defended idea of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the inclusion of an offencse  of criminal misconduct in the criminal legislation was reflected in the revised draft federal law submitted to the  Parliament on October 13, 2020. The purpose of the study is to determine the key changes in the content of the  institutions of criminal misconduct and other measures of a criminal law nature proposed for consolidation in the  Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, to assess the objective need of the reforms initiated by the Supreme  Court of the Russian Federation. The methodological basis is a set of methods of scientific knowledge. General  scientific (analysis and synthesis, dialectics) and specific scientific research methods (system structural, formal legal)  were used. A comparative analysis of draft laws allows us to classify the substantive content of acts constituting a  criminal misconduct as key changes and the modification of other measures of a criminal legal nature. The authors  critically assess the idea underlying the classification of acts as criminal misconduct. By laying in the criteria for  the isolation of acts that are minimal in terms of the degree of danger, not legally significant elements of corpus  delicti, but the types and amount of punishments, the lack of criminal experience, the interests of the business  community, the developers of the draft law violate the system of law, since the proposed approach excludes the  assessment of the public danger of the act based on the significance of the protected by the criminal the law of  public relations. The meaning of the differentiation of criminal liability declared by the initiator of the reforms is  lost with the proposed duplication of other measures applied both to persons who have committed a criminal  misconduct and to those guilty of committing crimes of small or medium gravity, and the proposed conditional  nature of other measures levels the idea of liberalizing the criminal law. The paper focuses on the provisions of  the project that require revision and additional comprehension.

Occupation of the highest position in the criminal hierarchy: features of criminal law qualifications

2021 ◽  
pp. 500-509
Author(s):  
Ivan V. Pikin ◽  
Ilya A. Tarakanov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Group ◽  
Criminal Organization ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Interpretation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Points Of View

We consider the features of criminal law qualification of occupying the highest position in the criminal hierarchy. We analyze the provisions of Article 210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as the points of view of legal scholars about the specifics of establishing the highest criminal status of a person. As a result of this study, it is concluded that the establishment of the place of a specific subject in the criminal hierarchy is possible in those cases when the person confirms his criminal status or the persons involved as witnesses confirm that this person has a higher position in the criminal hierarchy. We believe that when determining the subject of a given crime, it is necessary to establish such signs as the subject’s opinion regarding this status; the opinion of the persons who were part of this criminal organization regarding the position of this person in it; his possession of “powers” of an administrative nature in relation to members of this criminal group or other persons adhering to “thieves’ concepts”; the opinion of other persons with the highest position in the criminal hierarchy regarding the criminal status of the subject. At the same time, it should be recognized that there is an urgent need for a judicial interpretation of the issues of quali-fication of a crime provided for in Article 210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which necessitates the preparation of an appropriate resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals «Use of office position» when committing fraud: problems of application

2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-104
Author(s):  
Valeria V. Zabrodina ◽  
Anna G. Menshikova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Position Errors ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Official Position ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The authors in the article consider the problems of establishing the qualifying feature use of official position when committing fraud. Based on the analysis of the doctrine of criminal law, clarifications of the highest court, materials of specific judicial practice, a circle of subjects related to persons using their official position is determined, as well as the procedure and mechanism for using official position in fraud. According to the results of the study, it is proposed to include in the current resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation On judicial practice in cases of fraud, misappropriation and embezzlement additional clarifications that reveal the understanding of the content of the sign use of official position. The authors propose to expand the understanding of the subject of official fraud. Such provisions will promote uniformity in law enforcement and helpavoid qualifying fraud using official position errors.

scholarly journals Тhe institute of confiscation of property in Russian criminal law. Lessons of combating proceeds of crime in the assessment of the Supreme Сourt of the Russian Federation

2018 ◽  
pp. 22-30
Author(s):  
Yu. K. Krasnov
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Plenary Session ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

Introduction. May and June 2018 saw intensi­fied discussions in Russia around the issue of confis­cation of property obtained by criminal means. These discussions arose after several initiatives of legisla­tors who advocated the strengthening of the role of this institution of criminal law in the legal practice in Russia and after the Supreme Court of the Rus­sian Federation summarized the experience of the use of confiscation in the practice of Russian courts and formulated some recommendations for the courts in the decision of the plenary session of June the 14th .  Materials and methods. The article uses a number of research methods and techniques to ana­lyze the problem such as analysis that allows isolat­ing the trends in the development of the institution of confiscation; comparison which allows evaluating homogeneous processes at different stages of the in­stitute of confiscation of property acquired by crimi­nal means, and generalization which is necessary to summarize the results of the research.  Research results. The use of the institution of confiscation of property obtained by criminal means in the legal practice of Russia has passed several stages. The modern stage began after the institution was restored in the criminal code of the Russian Fed­eration by the Federal law of July 27, 2006 № 153FZ and section VI of the Criminal Code was supple­mented by Chapter 15.1 “Confiscation of property”. This Chapter contains the legislative definition of the confiscation of property (article 104.1 of the Crimi­nal Code) and an indication of the subject of confis­cation, its types and conditions.  Based on the decisions of the plenums of the Su­preme Court of the Russian Federation the article analyzes the practice of this institution in the activi­ties of Russian courts. 12 years of experience in the application of Chapter 15.1 of the Criminal Code, showed that, despite the repeated explanations of the Supreme Court, which dealt with individual crimes, some of the controversial issues remained unre­solved. In this regard the Plenum of the Supreme Court introduced a number of proposals to improve the legal framework of this institution in the draft Resolution.  On June 14th , 2018 the next plenary Session of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation ad­opted a new detailed resolution on the practice of application of Chapter 15.1 of the Criminal Code and proposed detailed recommendations to improve the application of the institution of confiscation of property obtained by criminal means in the Russian Federation, which are considered and commented on in the article.  Discussion and conclusion. Legal literature discussed the innovations in the Russian legislation related to the institution of confiscation of property obtained by criminal means caused in a very active mode. The views of the authors of articles on this is­sue can be divided into two parts with each havinga lot of supporters. According to the first of them the new place of confiscation of property among the mea­sures of criminal law is justified.  Supporters of the opposite point of view sup­port the exclusion confiscation of property from the system of measures of criminal law as they believe that the legal nature of the confiscation of property belongs to a form of criminal punishment. This is the opinion of the judges. Two-thirds of the judges believe that the confiscation of property should be considered as an additional form of punishment.

scholarly journals Malfeasances: features of law enforcement.

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-337
Author(s):  
M.P. Pronina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Assessment ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article deals with the problems of law enforcement in the group of malfeasances. Official crimes are most dangerous due to the fact that they undermine the prestige of the authorities and directly violate the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations. In this regard the legislator has established criminal liability for officials who abuse their functional duties. In particular the author studies the problems of qualification arising in the legal assessment of crimes enshrined in Ch. 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, due to the highest level of their blanketness and evaluativeness. Examples of judicial and investigative practice on competition issues of general and special rules are given. Difficulties are revealed in the legal assessment of the actions of officials when determining the signs of abuse of office, enshrined in Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Arguments are presented that are a clear demonstration of the fact that the solution to the identified problems of applying the norms of the criminal law lies in the plane of reducing the level of conflict of laws of criminal legislation. Practical proposals are being made to include amendments to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 09.07.2013 No. 24 “On judicial practice in cases of bribery and other corruption crimes” (clause 12.1) and Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 16.10.2009 No. 19 “On judicial practice in cases of abuse of office and abuse of office” (p. 21.1). The solution of the stated problems in the field of application of the norms of the criminal law consists in the development of a uniform practice of application of the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, reduction of the level of gaps in criminal legislation, the development of methodological and scientific recommendations with the participation of law enforcement officials and scientists, the preparation of draft laws and plenums of the Supreme Court aimed at elimination of gaps and gaps.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document