scholarly journals Modern strategies for countering special organized forms of extremist activity

Author(s):  
Yuriy Magnutov

Almost twenty years of operation of the Federal Law no. 114-FZ of July 25, 2002 “On Countering Extremist Activities” provide grounds for demonstrating the currently formed strategy of countering organized forms of extremist activity, presented in the development of the process of criminalization and criminal-legal adaptation of the acts enshrined in Articles 2821 and 2822 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The reproductive potential embedded in them made it possible to improve the mechanisms for combating the spread of extremist communities and extremist organizations. At the same time, the continuing growth of protest sentiments, an increase in the number and an increase in the level of organization of extremist communities and extremist organizations require the continuation of modernization of the course of criminal policy in this area. This is possible both by eliminating existing intra-industry conflicts and by deeper differentiation of responsibility.

Author(s):  
A. Ya. Asnis

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.


Author(s):  
R.K. Shautaeva ◽  
O.A. Petryanina

The relevance of the direction chosen for research is multifactorial. First, there is a steady increase in attacks on property by deception or abuse of trust. Second, the emergence of new forms of fraudulent activities requiring a symmetrical response from government agencies. Third, the offensive, not always error-free development of criminal policy in the form of the creation of new legal and technical mechanisms to counter the considered type of criminal deviant behavior of selfish orientation. All this prompted us to identify and consider the most significant methodological problems in the area taken for research in the form of their demonstration, as well as proposals for directions for their solution. The first criminal law flaw in the state strategy in the fight against fraud is the fallacy in the systematization of the crimes reflected in Art. 159-159of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The substitution of the significance of public relations protected by the norms included in these articles caused the imbalance in the Special Part of the Criminal Code. RF. The second methodological problem is the imbalance in the cost criteria of Art. 159-159of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which form the basis for their criminalization and differentiation. The third problem is the fact that there are separate elements of fraud with their fixation in separate articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, depending on the areas of encroachment. In the article, on the basis of the conducted critical analysis and the presented argumentation, directions for resolving the noted methodological problems, theoretical, applied and legislative format, are proposed.


Author(s):  
Tatyana A. Plaksina ◽  

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 86-98
Author(s):  
E. V. Peysikova ◽  
◽  
Yu. I. Antonov ◽  

The article is devoted to the analysis of judicial practice in cases of the thefts provided by item «g» of part 3 of article 158 and articles 1593 and 1596 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The article notes the challenges in applying these rules in practice; demonstrates their restrictive features with regards to the doctrine of Criminal law. The article is written for the purpose of uniform application of these norms in practice after entry into force of the Federal Law of 23 April 2018, № 111-FZ.


2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 129-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Назаренко ◽  
Gennadiy Nazarenko

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.


2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. L. Sidorenko

The paper discusses the future development of the cryptocurrency in the Russian Federation. At present, it can be defined as a new financial instrument based on distributed registry technology (Blokchein). It is the lack of server storage and a single issuer, the relative anonymity (pseudonymity) and mobility calculations allow us to consider financial cryptocurrency to be a technology of the future. Evaluation of the prospects for the development of the regulatory and protective law of the Russian Federation, the author begins with an assessment of the world's leading strategies for regulating the virtual currency: permissive, prohibitive and observant. The author argues the problem of searching for the optimal model of the cryptocurrency legalization, considering it to be a kind of a computer program: means of exchange, a monetary symbol, a cashless cash, an electronic money and a security, a commodity, other property, property right, etc. Particular attention is paid to the critical analysis of the draft federal law on the declaration of a crypto currency by a surrogate and the introduction of a new composition in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - article 187.1 "Turnover of money surrogates" with the establishment of responsibility in the form of a fine of up to 500 thousand rubles or imprisonment for up to four Years for production, purchase for sale, as well as the sale of money surrogates. As one of the developers of the draft law on legalization of the cryptocurrency in the Russian Federation, the author of this paper identifies the most important aspects that need in legal control. They are identification of exchange sites and the user, verification of transactions based on documents, data and information (validation), determination of the beneficial owner, Relations and monitoring of transactions with the cryptocurrency in accordance with the risk profile.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 324-330
Author(s):  
V.V. Popov ◽  
◽  
S.M. Smolev ◽  

The presented study is devoted to the issues of disclosing the content of the goals of criminal punishment, analyzing the possibilities of their actual achievement in the practical implementation of criminal punishment, determining the political and legal significance of the goals of criminal punishment indicated in the criminal legislation. The purpose of punishment as a definition of criminal legislation was formed relatively recently, despite the fact that theories of criminal punishment and the purposes of its application began to form long before our era. These doctrinal teachings, in essence, boil down to defining two diametrically opposed goals of criminal punishment: retribution and prevention. The state, on the other hand, determines the priority of one or another goal of the punishment assigned for the commission of a crime. The criminal policy of Russia as a whole is focused on mitigating the criminal law impact on the offender. One of the manifestations of this direction is the officially declared humanization of the current criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. However, over the course of several years, the announced “humanization of criminal legislation” has followed the path of amending and supplementing the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: introducing additional opportunities for exemption from criminal liability and punishment, reducing the limits of punishments specified in the sanctions of articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and including in the system of criminal punishments of types of measures that do not imply isolation from society. At the same time the goals of criminal punishment are not legally revised, although the need for such a decision has already matured. Based on consideration of the opinions expressed in the scientific literature regarding the essence of those listed in Part 2 of Art. 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the goals of punishment are determined that each of them is subject to reasonable criticism in view of the abstract description or the impossibility of achieving in the process of law enforcement (criminal and penal) activities. This circumstance gives rise to the need to revise the content of the goals of criminal punishment and to determine one priority goal that meets the needs of modern Russian criminal policy. According to the results of the study the conclusion is substantiated that the only purpose of criminal punishment can be considered to ensure proportionality between the severity of the punishment imposed and the social danger (harmfulness) of the crime committed. This approach to determining the purpose of criminal punishment is fully consistent with the trends of modern criminal policy in Russia, since it does not allow the use of measures, the severity of which, in terms of the amount of deprivation and legal restrictions, clearly exceeds the social danger of the committed act. In addition, it is proportionality, not prevention, that underlies justice – one of the fundamental principles of criminal law.


Author(s):  
Nikolay Letelkin ◽  
Dmitry Neganov

The article examines the situationality of modern lawmaking in the field of criminal law in the context of the adoption of the federal law of 1.04.2020 No. 100-FZ «On Amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Articles 31 and 151 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation», adopted by the State The Duma of the Russian Federation in connection with the pandemics of the Corona Virus Disеаsе 2019 (COVID-19).


Author(s):  
M.A. Gabdullina

The Constitution of the Russian Federation protects the right to work for remuneration not below the statutory minimum wage. Non-payment of wages is one of the most serious violations of worker's rights. In this regard, the current legislation provides for different types of employer liability for violating these provisions: civil, administrative and criminal. The Federal law “On amendments to article 145.1 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation” dated 23.12.2010 No. 382-FZ tightened criminal liability for non-payment of wages. Thus, in particular, this law introduced criminal liability for partial non-payment of wages, while the former wording of article 145.1 of the Criminal code established liability only for its complete failure. In practice, this norm has not previously been brought to criminal liability for partial non-payment of wages. The paper deals with the issues of powers of the Prosecutor at the stage of reception, registration and resolution of reports on crimes provided for by article 145.1 of the criminal code. The problematic issues arising from the investigative authorities in conducting procedural checks on the specified categories of messages are analyzed. Suggestions on the improvement of criminal-procedural legislation are made.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document