NECESSARY DEFENSE OR NECESSARY PROTECTION?

2021 ◽  
pp. 77-81
Author(s):  
Александр Михайлович Смирнов
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The State ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Individual

В статье актуализируется вопрос замены наименования ст. 37 Уголовного кодекса Российской Федерации «Необходимая оборона» на «Необходимую защиту» как более четкого с точки зрения языка закона и юридически грамотного. Приводятся научно обоснованные аргументы в пользу подобного изменения в российский уголовный закон. Отмечается, что оборона, по своей сути, это военный термин, содержание которого выходит за пределы нормативных границ реализации действий в состоянии самозащиты права, регламентированного в данной статье. О защите правового статуса личности, интересов общества и государства от общественно опасного посягательства говорится в диспозиции данной статьи. Вместе с тем Конституция Российской Федерации предоставляет каждому лицу право на самостоятельную защиту, а не самостоятельную оборону своих прав и свобод в различных сферах жизнедеятельности всеми не запрещенными законом способами (ч. 2, ст. 45). Именно о защите, а не обороне социальных благ и интересов говорится в Европейской конвенции о защите прав человека и основных свобод (ч. 2 ст. 2 Раздел I). С содержательной точки зрения оборона предполагает совершение подготовительных, заблаговременных действий, а также контрнаступление (нападение на противника, его полную ликвидацию), что с законодательной точки зрения выступает превышением нормативных границ необходимой обороны, согласно действующей редакции рассматриваемой уголовно-правовой нормы. Помимо этого в науке уголовного права и ряде других отраслей юридической науки вопросы реализации необходимой обороны рассматриваются в рамках правового института «самозащиты права». The article updates the issue of replacing the name of Art. 37 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation «Necessary Defense» to «Necessary Protection» as the most correct in terms of the language of the law and legally competent. Scientifically grounded arguments are presented in favor of such a change in the Russian criminal law. It is noted that defense, in its essence, is a military term, the content of which goes beyond the normative boundaries of the implementation of actions in the state of self-defense of law, regulated in this article. The disposition of this article speaks about the protection of the legal status of the individual, the interests of society and the state from socially dangerous encroachment. At the same time, the Constitution of the Russian Federation grants each person the right to independent defense, and not independent defense of their rights and freedoms by all in various spheres of life, in ways not prohibited by law (part 2, article 45). It is about the protection, not the defense of social benefits and interests that is said in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Part 2 of Art. 2 Section I). From a substantive point of view, defense involves the commission of preparatory, early actions, as well as a counteroffensive (attack on the enemy, his complete elimination), which from a legislative point of view is an excess of the normative boundaries of necessary defense, in accordance with the current version of the criminal law in question. In addition, in the science of criminal law and a number of other branches of legal science, the implementation of necessary defense is considered within the framework of the legal institution of «self-defense of law».

CODIFICATION PROBLEMS OF NECESSARY DEFENSE AFFECTING ITS IMPLEMENTATION

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 155-163
Author(s):  
PETRUSHENKOV ALEXANDR ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Educational Institutions ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Teaching Staff ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Activities

Objectives. The goal of scholarly research is to develop proposals for amendments in criminal law General and Special part of Criminal code of the Russian Federation governing self-defense. The scientific article identifies legislative gaps and contradictions that hinder the effective implementation of the necessary defense and require prompt solutions. Methods. The article analyzes such concepts as “self-defense”, “public assault”, “excess of limits of necessary defense”, “violation of the conditions of lawfulness of necessary defense”, “surprise assault”, “rights defending or other persons, interests of the state”. The use of logical and comparative legal methods allowed us to develop proposals for making changes to the criminal law norms that establish the necessary defense. Conclusions. The article shows the conflicts and gaps legislative recognition of self-defense and, in this regard, the complexity of its implementation in the articles of the Special part of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation and practical application. Changes are proposed to the criminal law norms regulating the necessary defense, both in the General and in the Special part of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. Sense. The content of the scientific article can be used by the teaching staff of higher educational institutions when teaching the course “Criminal law”. The results of the work can be useful to persons who carry out legislative activities in the field of criminal law. The leitmotif of the article can be used in the preparation of dissertation research.

On Research and Realities of Decriminalization of Criminal Acts in Russia

2019 ◽  
pp. 2044-2057
Author(s):  
Sergey A. Markuntsov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The State ◽  
Entire Period ◽  
Comprehensive Understanding ◽  
Fundamental Nature ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Adequate Coverage

The relevance of the research of decriminalization of criminal acts in Russia is due to both the lack of current adequate coverage of this issue even in some specialized studies of fundamental nature and the need to obtain a comprehensive understanding of decriminalization in Russia in the context of the trend of its modern criminal law policy humanization. The aim of the article is to study the processes of decriminalization of criminal acts in Russia through assessing the state of modern criminal law discourse on the problem specified. The research concludes the secondary, derivative nature of the analyzed decriminalization issues in most modern studies, the actual scale of full decriminalization of criminal acts in Russia, which aims for arithmetic error against the background of current decriminalization processes (for the entire period of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation only 4 criminal acts were fully decriminalized)

scholarly journals TECHNOLOGIES IN THE CRIMINAL LEGISLATION OF RUSSIA: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS

2020 ◽  
pp. 85-92
Author(s):  
Vasily N. Nekrasov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Innovative Activity ◽  
Innovation Activity ◽  
Technical Innovations ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Impact

In this paper, the author tried to consider the impact of such innovation results as technology on domestic criminal law and to understand whether the legislator is ready for them. In the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the legislator does not once use a single general concept in relation to technical innovations, which allows to characterize its various elements. At the same time, the legislator traditionally uses such private terms as tools, means, equipment, system, etc. When considering this issue, the first thought that comes to mind is that technical innova-tions in the Criminal Code are regarded as instruments or means of committing a crime. In criminal law theory, there are many points of view on the question of distinguishing between "instrument" and "means" of crime. The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not clearly understand the concepts under analysis. Technical innovations, such as equipment by domestic lawmakers, are regarded as instruments and means of committing a crime. The above concepts were traditionally used by the legislator to construct the norms of the Russian criminal law. At the same time, due to the active development of innovation activity, new technical innovations are appearing today, which, firstly, did not exist before, and secondly, they have a number of specific features. At the same time, definitions that were not previously used in the Russian criminal law, which allow judging about new possibilities of technology, which only stimulate the discus-sion about the legal status of technology, both in criminal law and in legislation as a whole, are already in place today. Social relations are undergoing certain changes as a result of innovative activities. In this regard, the object of crime is also being transformed. As a result, a new type of property is emerging, namely intellectual property, which is also subject to criminal law protection. It seems that today there is a need to combine the norms in the field of crimes that infringe on innovative activity into a separate group of norms. These social relations have a number of features that make it possible to consider forming them into a separate type of crime object. Separating groups of crimes in the area of innovative activity will be of great importance. In particular, it will make it possible to establish public danger in relation to a group of crimes and to analyse changes in the degree of public danger of crime depending on the type of quali-fying and attracting circumstances.

scholarly journals ON THE LEGISLATIVE CONSTRUCTION OF TERRORIST CRIMES IN THE SPECIAL PART OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION (ON THE EXAMPLE OF ARTICLES 205–205.6 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 46-52
Author(s):  
D. V. Golenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article discusses current trends characteristic of the Russian criminal law and the practice of its application in the fi eld of combating terrorism. The acts provided for in Chapter 24 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Articles 205205.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) are analyzed in detail from the point of view of the location of the legislative material, as well as the structures of the elements of the crimes. Special attention is paid to the structure of Articles 205205.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (dispositions, sanctions, notes). The types of structures of terrorist crimes at the time of completion are considered. The article analyzes the current practice of applying this Articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as offi cially published judicial statistics. The study allowed us to identify existing contradictions within the criminal law and formulate some recommendations for improving legislation in the field of combating terrorism.

scholarly journals Another example of the situational nature of changes in domestic criminal and criminal procedural legislation or a vital short story?

2020 ◽  
pp. 79-83
Author(s):  
Nikolay Letelkin ◽  
Dmitry Neganov
Keyword(s):  
Short Story ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The State ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Corona Virus ◽  
The Russian Federation

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).

The necessary defense and excess of its limits: legislative improvement opportunities

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (3) ◽  
pp. 111-117
Author(s):  
Andrei Nikulenko ◽  
Maksim Smirnov
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The State ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Improvement ◽  
Criminal Legislation

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.

Exemption from Criminal Responsibility in Cases over Crimes in the Field of Economic Activity

10.12737/7254 ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Оксана Макарова ◽  
Oksana Makarova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Economic Activity ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
The Russian Federation

In recent years in our country the steady tendency to increase of authority of the state in the sphere of business and strengthening of economic security is observed. The state finds new opportunities of effective counteraction of crime in the economic sphere, including by means of liberalization and a humanization of the criminal legislation. Among the main acts aimed at the improvement of criminal law, can be called the Federal law of December 7, 2011 No. 420-FZ “On Amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation” which provides the special basis of release from criminal liability for commission of crimes in the sphere of economic activity. The specified basis is fixed in the new Article 761 “Exemption from criminal liability in cases of crimes in the sphere of economic activity” of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In the explanatory note to this document it is noted that “such addition of the criminal law is caused by the necessity of its further humanization and counteraction to abuses in the field of investigation of economic crimes”. In the article mentioned Article 761 thoroughly analyzed in conformity with the requirements of the legal techniques and modern economic realities. The special attention is paid to the conditions of release from criminal responsibility provided for in second part of Article 761, given their critical assessment. It seems to the author that the legislator, providing special possibility of the exemption from criminal liability in cases of crimes in the sphere of economic activity had departed from the constitutional principle of equality of citizens before the law and court, having allowed thereby an inequality between the persons who have committed a crime.

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 The Basis for Exemption from Criminal Responsibility

2018 ◽  
pp. 161-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. V. Blagov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Main Body ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Criminal Legislation

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.

Vulnerability of the modern criminal legal system of Russia from the methods and means of conducting hybrid wars

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 30-44
Author(s):  
Leonid V. Goloskokov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The State ◽  
Law System ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Hybrid War ◽  
Criminal Legal System

The features of the manifestations of hybrid wars were investigated by examples of its action in certain sectors of science, education, economics, finance, and criminal law. Certain characteristics of actions and events have been identified as elements of a hybrid war and not as random events. The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not contain the necessary articles that would allow sufficient legal protection of the rights of citizens and the interests of the state from the actions and consequences of hybrid wars. In general, the criminal law system is not ready to identify and classify events as elements of a hybrid war, repel hybrid war attacks and waging confrontation, and work on the initial preemption and prevention of hybrid wars. This article, which is proposed to be introduced into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, reveals the concept of hybrid war and provides its full definition in a new article. In conclusion, criminal legal measures and the possibilities of only the criminal legal system cannot solve the problems of confrontation in hybrid wars, and involvement of all the forces and resources of the state is necessary. A proposal was made on the need to move to organizing the work of Russian law enforcement agencies on new principles: preemptive and prevention of hybrid wars instead of merely identifying their consequences and fragmentary application of criminal punishment for actions that are insignificant in comparison to the scale and damage caused by a hybrid war.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document