scholarly journals Failure to report a crime (Art. 205.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation): Problems of Interpretation and Law Enforcement

Author(s):  
Ludmila Tarasova

The relevance of the problems of interpretation and enforcement of prosecution for failure to report the person (s) preparing, committing and committing the crimes provided for in the disposition of the norm and not prosecuting for failure to report the acts provided for by Article 205.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, provided there is no information about the person (persons) who committed it, contributes to the effectiveness of countering terrorism. Evaluating the generally positive norm of the Criminal Law provided for in Article 205.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is proposed to change the name to “Failure to report a terrorist crime”, which will eliminate discrepancies with the disposition of the norm; information about a committed or committed crime, listed in the disposition of this provision, fixing in the disposition of criminal liability for failure to report grave and especially grave crimes. It is recommended in the comments to the article to clarify the concepts:“reliable information”, “the source of information” and “the method of obtaining such information”.

Author(s):  
Dmitry Ovchinnikov

Currently, the economic sector of public relations is characterized by exceptional criminality. One of the main phenomena responsible for this is illegal money cashing. Almost every business entity considers it acceptable and even necessary to resort to various criminal schemes for obtaining unaccounted cash and tax evasion. The very type of this crime has actually become a thriving and profitable business, which consists in providing services for withdrawing funds from legal circulation. While the existing judicial and investigative practice in the issue of countering this phenomenon has not yet developed a clear answer about the need for appropriate qualifications. There are about a dozen articles of the criminal law in which law enforcement officers try to find the correct legal assessment, and at present, article 172 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation “Illegal banking activities” deserves special attention.


Author(s):  
Mihail Alaf'ev

Numerous changes in the criminal law associated with the emergence of new norms providing for responsibility for criminal liability inevitably raise the question of the validity of criminalization. Its positive solution is possible only if the new criminal law prohibition is established in accordance with the principles of criminalization, one of which is the relative prevalence of the act. The article is devoted to the assessment of the prevalence of petty bribery in order to determine the correctness of the legislative decision to establish independent criminal liability for this crime (Article 2912 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The main method of research is a statistical method that allows us to establish the prevalence of bribery in the amount not exceeding 10 thousand rubles at the time of the adoption of this legislative decision, and also during the period of validity of article 2912 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the share of the analyzed crime in the structure of bribery and corruption offences. In addition, the author analyzed 120 sentences of courts for petty bribery. As a result of the research, the author concludes that petty bribery is a fairly common offence in the structure of both bribery and corruption crimes, which indicates its public danger and the validity for the criminal prohibition of its commission. It was established that the establishment of a separate norm on liability for petty bribery allowed law enforcement agencies focusing the efforts to counteract bribery in the amount of more than 10 thousand rubles.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
pp. 96-101
Author(s):  
N. YU. SKRIPCHENKO ◽  

The article is devoted to the criminal law means of countering the illegal production and circulation of medicines, medical devices and dietary supplements. The importance of the pharmaceutical industry has increased in the face of the global pandemic of the novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19), and the demand for medicines has led to an increase in the turnover of counterfeit medicines and medical devices. Among the criminal law means that prevent the appearance of counterfeit and substandard medicines on the market, a special place is occupied by criminal repression, the possibilities of which have significantly expanded in recent years. So in 2014, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation was supplemented with three articles providing for liability for the illegal production and circulation of counterfeit, substandard medicines and Сетевой научно-практический журнал частного и публичного права 97 Стратегическая роль фармацевтического производства определяется не только экономической привлекательностью выпускаемого продукта, спрос на который ежегодно растет в связи увеличением численности населения, повышением продолжительности жизни, популяризацией здорового образа жизни, но и его ведущей ролью при реализации мер, направленных на повышение рождаемости, сдерживание заболеваемости и снижение смертности. Ключевое значение фармацевтической отрасли стало заметным в условиях мировой пандемии COVID-19, вызываемой коронавирусом SARS-CoV-2. Слабый рост реальных доходов населения ориентирует потребителя на поиск более бюджетных лекарственных препаратов, снижая требовательность к их качеству. При этом подстегиваемый коронавирусной паникой растущий спрос на лекарственные средства и ослабление государственного контроля за фармрынком в форме разрешения онлайн-продаж безрецептурных препаратов через интернет-аптеки определяют увеличение оборота фальсифицированных лекарственных средств и медицинский изделий. Отмечая расширение нелегального рынка медицинских препаратов, который по масштабам сопоставим с оборотом наркотиков, представители уголовно-правовой науки обращают внимание на то, что в отличие от наркоторговли потребителем некачественного лекарства может стать любой, независимо от социального статуса и уровня доходов1 . При этом повышенная общественная опасность криминального оборота лекарственных препаратов определяется не только экономическими потерями государства, легальных производителей (которые несут и репутационный урон), потребителей, но и реальной угрозой не только здоровью, но и жизни человека (а с учетом масштабов и распространения – населения), поскольку применение подделок может не только стать непосредственной причиной наносимого вреда, но и повлечь нарушение схемы лечения, что особенно критично в случаях использования пациентами жизненно необходимых препаратов2. Среди средств, препятствующих появлению на рынке фальсифицированных и недоброкачественных медикаментов, особое место занимает уголовная репрессия, возможности которой в последние годы заметно увеличились. Так, Федеральным законом от 31.12.2014 № 532-ФЗ «О внесении изменений в отдельные законодательные акты Российской Федерации в части противодействия обороту фальсифицированных, контрафактных, недоброкачественных и незарегистрированных лекарственных средств, медицинских изделий и фальсифицированных биологически активных добавок»3 УК РФ был дополнен тремя статьями, предусматривающими ответственность за незаконное производство лекарственных средств и медицинских изделий (ст. 235.1 УК РФ), обращение фальсифицированных, недоброкачественных и незарегистрированных лекарственных средств, медицинских изделий и оборот фальсифицированных биологически активных добавок (ст. 238.1 УК РФ) и подделку документов на лекарственные средства или медицинские изделия или упаковки лекарственных средств или медицинских изделий (ст. 327.2 УК РФ). До этого момента виновных в производстве недоброкачественных и фальсифицированных лекарств привлекали к ответственности по ст. 238 УК РФ «Производство, хранение, перевозка или сбыт товаров, не отвечающих требованиям безопасности», при этом подавляющее большинство уголовных дел прекращалось по нереабилитирующим основаниям, так как деяния, предусмотренные ч. 1 ст. 238 УК РФ, являются преступлениями небольшой medical devices, forgery of documents for medicines or medical devices (Articles 235.1, 238.1, 327.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The implementation of the new norms in practice posed the questions of not only differentiating the relevant acts from related and competing acts, but also defining the key features of the offenses for law enforcement officials. The article indicates certain provisions that require permission at the legislative level and clarifications of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.


Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (10) ◽  
pp. 159-170
Author(s):  
I. V. Pantyukhina ◽  
L. Yu. Larina

The paper is devoted to a detailed analysis of article 210.1 "Occupation of the highest position in the criminal hierarchy", which was introduced in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation by Federal law No. 46-FZ of 01.04.2019. The authors considered the construction of this norm from the point of view of the elements of the crime and the coordination of these features with the provisions of the General part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. As a result of a systematic study of the norms of the Russian criminal law, comparison with foreign experience (Georgia), and analysis of law enforcement practice, the discrepancy between the new criminal law norm and the provisions of certain institutions of criminal law was revealed. In particular, the content of article 210.1 contradicts certain principles of the criminal law (articles 6, 7 of the Criminal Code), the basis of criminal liability (article 8 of the Criminal Code), the norms of the Institute of preparation for a crime (part 1 of article 30 of the Criminal Code), as well as the goals of criminal punishment (part 2 of article 43 of the Criminal Code). To eliminate the identified shortcomings, the authors propose to include in the disposition of article 210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation an act in the form of using the highest position in the criminal hierarchy. The proposed changes (including an act in the form of "use of the position») make it possible to prosecute persons both permanently and temporarily performing the functions of such persons, to leave outside the scope of its application persons who fully walked away from crime and not in any way affect criminal damage. They will allow you to bring the rule into compliance with the traditional understanding of the offense and those provisions of the General part of the Criminal Code, in which the regulated norms in the current edition are not made consistent.


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-58
Author(s):  
D. V. Golenko

Justification of the study. the creation of a criminal law is a laborious and important process. When constructing articles of the criminal code, the legislator used various techniques and methods of presenting legislative material. One of the types of dispositions of an article is a simple disposition. Its application by the legislator raises questions among practitioners when qualifying crimes, and gives rise to discussions in the theory of criminal law. Methods. The methodological basis of the research was formed by general scientific and special methods of cognition: analysis, induction, systemic, comparative legal, formal legal methods and others. Results. The authors analysis of the simple disposition of the article, which provides for criminal liability for kidnapping, is carried out. The problems arising in the process of designing and applying Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are investigated. As a starting point, the explanations contained in the acts of the highest judicial bodies, judicial statistics were taken. The ways of improving the norms on criminal liability for kidnapping, proposed in the theory of criminal law, have been studied. Recommendations for the legislator and law enforcement officers have been formed. Conclusion. A simple disposition should be applied in exceptional cases when describing crimes of small and medium severity. The signs of a crime described in a simple disposition should be clear to the law enforcement officer due to the established uniform practice of applying the law. The lack of a unified understanding of the signs of a crime that are not described in a simple disposition leads in practice to legal uncertainty. Explaining the application of articles from a simple disposition leads, in fact, to the construction of corpus delicti by the judiciary. However, the design of the corpus delicti is the prerogative of the legislator. Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not meet the criterion of clarity and gives rise to a different understanding in practice of the signs of the objective and subjective aspects of the composition of the abduction of a person. The solution to the emerging problems is to change the simple disposition of Article 126 to a descriptive disposition, including an indication of the signs of the objective and subjective side of the crime. The scientific novelty of the research lies in the fact that the simple disposition of the article for the first-time acts as an independent object of research and analysis on the example of the disposition of Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The authors approach to assessing the applicability of a simple disposition, positive and negative trends in its application by the legislator and the judiciary is proposed.Key words: Simple disposition of an article in a special part of the Criminal law (on the example of kidnapping) Abstract: Justification of the study. the creation of a criminal law is a laborious and important process. When constructing articles of the criminal code, the legislator used various techniques and methods of presenting legislative material. One of the types of dispositions of an article is a simple disposition. Its application by the legislator raises questions among practitioners when qualifying crimes, and gives rise to discussions in the theory of criminal law. Methods. The methodological basis of the research was formed by general scientific and special methods of cognition: analysis, induction, systemic, comparative legal, formal legal methods and others. Results. The authors analysis of the simple disposition of the article, which provides for criminal liability for kidnapping, is carried out. The problems arising in the process of designing and applying Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are investigated. As a starting point, the explanations contained in the acts of the highest judicial bodies, judicial statistics were taken. The ways of improving the norms on criminal liability for kidnapping, proposed in the theory of criminal law, have been studied. Recommendations for the legislator and law enforcement officers have been formed. Conclusion. A simple disposition should be applied in exceptional cases when describing crimes of small and medium severity. The signs of a crime described in a simple disposition should be clear to the law enforcement officer due to the established uniform practice of applying the law. The lack of a unified understanding of the signs of a crime that are not described in a simple disposition leads in practice to legal uncertainty. Explaining the application of articles from a simple disposition leads, in fact, to the construction of corpus delicti by the judiciary. However, the design of the corpus delicti is the prerogative of the legislator. Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not meet the criterion of clarity and gives rise to a different understanding in practice of the signs of the objective and subjective aspects of the composition of the abduction of a person. The solution to the emerging problems is to change the simple disposition of Article 126 to a descriptive disposition, including an indication of the signs of the objective and subjective side of the crime. The scientific novelty of the research lies in the fact that the simple disposition of the article for the first-time acts as an independent object of research and analysis on the example of the disposition of Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The authors approach to assessing the applicability of a simple disposition, positive and negative trends in its application by the legislator and the judiciary is proposed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 31-41
Author(s):  
DANILA ILIN ◽  

The article presents the results of a study of the problems of criminal legal assessment of criminal attacks on the health care system during the COVID-19 pandemic. The social background of such crime and its criminological characteristics are studied. Given the fact that most of criminal law, aimed at preventing crime, reducing the capacity of the state in the fight against novel coronavirus infection treated in depth by the legal and regulatory framework is impeding the spread of the pandemic COVID-19, and analyzed Federal laws, decrees of the President of the Russian Federation, decisions and orders of the Government of the Russian Federation, orders of the Ministry of health of Russia and other state bodies governing the functioning of public authorities, medical institutions and organizations, the rights and obligations of citizens and legal entities, this includes measures for the prevention of this disease in various areas of social life that are additionally regulated during the COVID-19 pandemic. The task of optimizing the criminal law provision of health care during the COVID-19 pandemic is formulated, taking into account the actual situation with the spread of this infection and the practice of countering it. As part of this task, based on a critical analysis of existing approaches in the science of criminal law, we formulate our own concept of crimes that infringe on the health system during the COVID-19 pandemic, characterize the problem, study their legal and social nature, and systematize such crimes. On the basis of the obtained data, a General description of crimes that encroach on the health system during the COVID-19 pandemic is given, their criminal-legal features are considered, theoretical approaches to determining their essence are studied, and the author's position on this issue is formulated. The author's classification of crimes that hinder the provision of health care during the COVID-19 pandemic is given. Groups of such crimes are consistently considered. A General description of their objective and subjective characteristics is given. Proposals for improving the interpretation of the relevant criminal law norms in science and law enforcement practice have been developed, and suggestions for their improvement have been substantiated and formulated. The article is addressed not only to scientists and practitioners of law enforcement agencies, but also to doctors who often work in conditions of a lack of legal knowledge about their rights and obligations, the qualification of certain acts from the point of view of criminal law, the grounds and limits of criminal liability for those that constitute a crime, and algorithms for actions in case of detection of such acts.


Author(s):  
Vаleria A. Terentieva ◽  

The systematic nature of criminal law forms the main features of the industry, namely: normativity, universalism, that is, the absence of casuistry and obligation. The strict consistency of both the entire industry and its individual institutions allows avoiding the redundancy of criminal law regulation, clearly determining the legal status of a person in conflict with the law. However, the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation do not always meet these requirements due to defects in legal technology, and, sometimes, gaps in regulation. In practice, the courts, in an effort to minimize the above defects, sometimes resort to excessive criminal law regulation; as an example, the article gives the ratio of the application of suspended sentence and placement in a special educational institution of a closed type. The article analyzes sentences to minors in which Art. 73 and Part 2 of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation were simultaneously applied in one sentence for the same act. For a comprehensive study, the article analyzed sentences to minors held in special educational institutions of a closed type for the period from 2014 to 2020, criminal statistics posted on the website of the Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, as well as various points of view of leading legal scholars. The research methods of static observation, analysis and synthesis, the system-structural method, as well as a number of factographic methods, were used. The study develops from the general to the specific, i.e., first, systematicity is analyzed as a property of the branch of criminal law and then as a property of a legal institution, namely, the release of minors from criminal liability. Consistency as a property of the institution of exemption from criminal punishment presupposes the impossibility of intersecting elements within one institution. Special attention is paid to the legal nature of suspended sentence as the most common punishment measure for minors, and its effectiveness. Then the cases of the simultaneous application of Art. 73 and Part 2 of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are analyzed. In the course of the study, the author examines the features of suspended sentence and placement in a special educational and educational institution of a closed type, compares these two forms of criminal liability, and highlights the differences. The conclusion is that the simultaneous placement in a special educational institution of a closed type and suspended sentence are a redundancy of criminal law regulation. The article raises the question of the need to improve the Criminal Code in terms of the development of placement in a special educational and educational institution of a closed type as a type of exemption from criminal punishment: the court is to be provided with the opportunity to control the juvenile offender’s correctional process.


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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 172-188
Author(s):  
Marina L. Prokhorova ◽  
◽  
Anastasiya K. Knyaz’kina ◽  
Valentina N. Kufleva

Introduction. The necessity of criminalising acts against the safety of maritime navigation in na- tional legislation is based on the requirement to comply with the international obligations. The relevance of the research is that the implementation of such criminalisation is not always carried out in a timely and adequate manner. Тhe author’s versions of the criminal law can be used by the legislator to further improve the Criminal Code. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The methodological basis of the study was a set of both general scientific and private scientific methods of cognition. In particular these included the analysis, synthesis, comparative, formal and the legal. Special attention was paid to the international legal standards, and the regulation of criminal liability for encroachments against security sea shipping. Results. The article analyses the regulations at the national level governing the crime of acts which infringe upon the safety of navigation at sea and in the river space. This is Art. 211 “Hijacking of an aircraft or water transport or railway rolling stock” and Art. 227 “Piracy” as provided for in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The article considers the provisions corresponding to these from international treaties, and investigates the problems of compliance in implementing norms of the Russian criminal law with the basic contractual provisions. At the same time, international acts are analysed in their latest and current version, taking into account all the changes and additions made to them. Discussion and Conclusion. As a result of the study, the authors come to the conclusion that it is necessary to make alterations to the national criminal legislation to bring it in line with the current international standards due to the absence of provisions in it regarding liability for crimes committed against sea vessels, as well as on board or against fixed platforms located on the continental shelf. At the same time, the authors propose specific additions to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In particular, these are on the inclusion of certain signs of corpus delicti relating to the number of qualifying items, and which also indicate the need to formulate specific criminal law norms providing for liability for crimes against sea vessels, as well as on board or against fixed platforms located on the continental shelf.


Author(s):  
Ekaterina Dmitrievna Sungurova

The goal of this research consists in comparison of the normative legal acts that regulate the questions of criminal liability for illegal implementation of medical and pharmaceutical activity in Belarus, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, and the Russian Federation. The article employs the general scientific methods of cognition: analysis, synthesis, generalization. For identification of differences in the content of the corresponding legal norms, the author applies the comparative legal method, which consists in comparative analysis of the normative legal acts of the post-Soviet states. The research materials contain the norms of criminal law, as well as normative legal acts in the sphere of licensing. The novelty of this work consists in the fact that pursuit of ways to improve the national criminal law, the author assesses the possibilities of reception of certain provisions of the foreign legislation. The article explores the approaches towards systematization of crimes for illegal conduct of medical and pharmaceutical activity in the Criminal Code. The conclusion is made on the three approaches of the legislators towards establishment of origin of the object of crime. Analysis is performed on the current state of the practice of constructing criminal law sanctions of the norms on liability for illegal implementation of medical and pharmaceutical activity. The common feature of the Russian, Belarusian, Armenian, Kazakh, Azerbaijani, and Kyrgyz law consists in imposition of a fine as the basic punishment. The size of penalties are compared. It is proposed to expand the sanction of the Article 235 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with an additional penalty in form of revocation of right to hold a certain post or conduct a particular activity for a certain period of time.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document