PARADOXES OF CRIMINAL POLICY AND LEGAL TECHNIQUE IN THE FIELD OF COUNTERING CRIMES ENCROACHING ON SEXUAL IMMUNITY AND SEXUAL FREEDOM OF THE PERSON

Author(s):  
Дмитрий Александрович Неганов ◽  
Кристина Александровна Насреддинова

В статье представлено авторское видение наиболее значимых парадоксов современной уголовной политики и юридической техники в сфере противодействия преступлениям, посягающим на половую неприкосновенность и половую свободу личности. Фактическое уничтожение сформированных ранее моральных и культурных ценностей привело к существенному снижению уровня нравственности в современном обществе. Это подтверждается ростом посягательств на выделенные нами объекты уголовно-правовой охраны. Реакция законодателя на происходящее повлекла за собой существенное, концептуальное видоизменение уголовного законодательства в этой области. Кардинально изменена уголовно-правовая концепция, ранее сформированная как в восемнадцатой, так и в двадцать пятой главах Уголовного кодекса России, что породило возникновение ряда существенных парадоксов во взятом для исследования секторе правового регулирования. К основным из них можно отнести коллизионность примечания к ст. 131 УК РФ, пробельность положений ст. 134 УК РФ в части ненаказуемости иных действий сексуальной направленности, проблемы в формировании санкционной политики, а также вопросы конкуренции смежных деяний. В статье не только предпринята попытка их демонстрации, но и представлены пути разрешения. The article presents the author's vision of the most significant paradoxes of modern criminal policy and legal technique in the field of combating crimes that infringe on sexual integrity and sexual freedom of the individual. The actual destruction of the previously formed moral and cultural values, entailed a significant decrease in the level of morality among the population of Russia. This is confirmed both by a significant increase in encroachments on the objects of criminal law protection that we have identified, and on public morality. The legislator's reaction to what is happening has led to a significant, conceptual modification of the criminal legislation in this area. The criminal law concept, previously formed both in the eighteenth and twenty-fifth chapters of the Criminal Code of Russia, has been radically changed, which has given rise to a number of significant paradoxes in the area taken for research. The main ones include the conflict of laws of the note to Art. 131 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the blankness of the provisions of Art. 134 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with regard to the impunity of other sexual acts, problems in the formation of sanctions policy, as well as issues of competition of related acts. The article not only attempts to demonstrate them, but also ways to resolve them.

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 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):  
E. V. Blagov

The article considers the reason, adequate cause, justifying exemption from criminal responsibility. In the criminal law literature there are numerous decisions on this issue, but their main body alone can not explain why a person is exempted from criminal responsibility. The author concludes that the basis for such liberation must be sought in the personality of the culprit. Under current criminal legislation, justifying the exemption from criminal responsibility can only be elimination or significant reduction in the public danger of the person who committed the crime. In the future, it is necessary to formulate the relevant provisions of the criminal law so that the basis for this exemption is only elimination of the public danger caused by the individual. Accordingly, Art. 76. 2 and part 1 of Art. 90 are subject to exclusion from the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and, on the contrary, inclusion in the chapter on the exemption from criminal responsibility of the relevant provisions of Art. 80.1 and part 1 of Art. 81 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.


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.


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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-153
Author(s):  
E. L. Sidorenko

The subject of the research is the specifics of the criminal law protection of reproductive health in the Russian legislation. The topic was chosen due to the increasing dynamics of crimes related to limitation on the reproductive rights of women and men and unauthorized manipulation of the human genome. Despite the growing need for providing a regulatory framework for this kind of relationships, the system of their criminal law protection is only beginning to take shape, therefore, a necessity arises to revise traditional approaches to the protection of the individual. Therefore, the purpose of the paper was to understand the system of criminal law protection of reproductive health in terms of its compliance with trends of medical practices and dynamics of socially significant diseases based on both traditional principles of scientific analysis and the results of applying sociological methods of data processing, which made it possible to identify the most significant directions of the Russian criminal policy development. Moreover, the critical analysis method was used in the research that showed the inconsistency of the system of criminal law prevention of criminal abortions, contamination with socially significant diseases and illegal use of the human genome. Based on the research findings, an author’s model of criminal prevention of attacks on reproductive health has been built and its systemic assessment is given. It is concluded that the legislator is inconsistent in assessing the attributes of an unlawful abortion; the accounting of contamination with certain socially significant diseases is inadequate; the laws prohibiting the use of the human genome need to be included into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The conclusions formulated in the paper have practical importance and can be taken into account by the legislator in the reform of the current criminal legislation.


Author(s):  
E.R. Gafurova

This article examines the features of the Russian criminal law norm that provides for liability for the murder of a newborn child by a mother. We analyzed the data of the Judicial Department on the statistics of convicts for 2016 and 2019 under Article 106 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in relation to the indicators of other privileged elements of murder, indicating the latency of this type of crime. The article also examines some features of the legislative structure of Article 106 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, accompanied by examples of judicial practice. The article examines the criminal law norms providing for responsibility for infanticide, the legislation of Italy, Austria, Switzerland, Holland and Denmark, and highlights the distinctive features of Article 106 of the Russian criminal legislation. The article presents proposals for possible improvement of the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on responsibility for the murder of a newborn child by a mother, confirmed by the indicators of a sociological study.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vadim Zamaraev

The article considers and analyzes some gaps in the legislative interpretation of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It examines the objective aspect of the crime, and also presents the problems of prosecuting for mediation in bribery according to the specifics of the qualification of this socially dangerous act. The author substantiates the grounds and limits of criminal liability for mediation in bribery, taking into account the act of committing various forms of this crime. On the basis of a comprehensive analysis of criminal legislation and scientific works of not only Russian scientists, but also foreign experts in the field of criminal law, the main prospects for the development and solution of the above mentioned problematic issues related to gaps in the legislative interpretation of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are proposed. Special attention is also paid to certain issues of qualification of the investigated act, which directly depend on the amount of the bribe. As a result of the study, it is recommended to introduce some changes and additions to Parts 1 and 5 of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 02017
Author(s):  
Aleksandr Viktorovich Pobedkin ◽  
Andrey Petrovich Fil’chenko ◽  
Tatyana Valentinovna Pinkevich ◽  
Natalia Eduardovna Martynenko ◽  
Vladimir Yurievich Zhandrov

The consequence of the pandemic caused by COVID-19 was the introduction of social restrictions, which led to an increase in the number of users of social networks, as well as their activity on the Internet. The involvement of citizens in the digital environment has changed the targets of criminal efforts of the criminals. The public’s fear of the coronavirus was subjected to criminal exploitation, new forms and methods of theft appeared, as a result, the spectrum of crime shifted to the criminal use of information and communication technologies (hereinafter – ICT. The purpose of the study is to analyze the dynamics of the indicators of Russian crime during the pandemic, to assess the adopted criminal-political decisions in terms of adequacy to the changes in crime, to develop on this basis the proposals for criminal law improvement able to increase the consistency of the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and its compliance with the requirements of the criminal-political situation in Russia. The assessment of the sectoral structure consistency in the regulation of criminal liability for committing crimes in the special conditions of a pandemic was used as the main research method. The research was carried out by the authors based on the dialectical method, which made it possible to manage changes in social reality by means of legal response, other scientific methods: sociological, modeling, concrete historical, comparative were applied as well. The results obtained showed that overcoming the negative changes in crime requires adjusting the vector of criminal policy from liberalization towards tightening in relation to crimes committed using ICT. It is proposed to expand the list of aggravating circumstances, limit the use of some mechanisms for terminating criminal liability associated with exemption from it, and review the possibilities of applying conditional conviction to persons who have committed crimes in a pandemic, up to and including refusal of this form of implementation of criminal liability. The formulated new proposals for improving the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation restore the consistency of the criminal law and increase the consistency of criminal-political decisions during a pandemic.


Author(s):  
Andrei Nikulenko ◽  
Maksim Smirnov

The article is devoted to the necessary defense as a circumstance that precludes the criminality of an act in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. The significance and importance of the existence of this norm is proclaimed both in the criminal law and in the Basic law of the state – the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The existence of a rule on necessary defense in the state emphasizes the development of its legal system, allowing citizens to defend their own interests and protect the interests of others, in ways not prohibited by law, thereby preventing exceeding the limits of necessary defense. A number of issues related to the application of the norms provided for in article 37 of the Criminal code of Russia, as well as the norms of the Special part of the Criminal code of Russia, which provide for liability for crimes committed when exceeding the limits of necessary defense, were raised. The study of the relevant norms makes it possible to identify the advantages and disadvantages of legal regulation of circumstances that exclude the criminality of an act, including the shortcomings of judicial and investigative practice. The author criticizes the existing approach and suggests ways to resolve these problems, including by correcting the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated September 27, 2012, № 19 «About application by courts of legislation on necessary defense and causing harm when detaining a person who has committed a crime». Because of the ambiguous and often inconsistent application of norms of the criminal legislation on necessary defense, the authors give the recommendations (in further reconstruction of the relevant provisions of article 37 of the Criminal Code) to use an enumeration approach of presenting the legal formulation of these rules that allow the defender to cause any harm to an attacker. At the same time, it creates the most understandable, for citizens, formulation of the norm that allows lawfully causing harm to public relations protected by criminal law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document