COUNTERING MATCH-FIXING: COMPARISON OF CRIMINAL LAW AND SPORTS LAW REGULATION ON THE EXAMPLE OF THE RUSSIAN ICE HOCKEY FEDERATION

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Евгения Германовна Ветрова ◽  
Илья Александрович Васильев
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Ice Hockey ◽  
Sports Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Subjective Side

В статье проводится сравнение положений ст. 184 УК РФ (Оказание противоправного влияния на результат официального спортивного соревнования) и соответствующих статей Дисциплинарного Регламента Федерации Хоккея России. Автор произвел сравнение составов анализируемых правонарушений: объекта, субъекта, объективной стороны и субъективной стороны и указал их сходства и отличия. The article compares the provisions of Article 184 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Illegal influence on the result of an official sports competition) and the corresponding articles of the Disciplinary Regulations of the Russian Ice Hockey Federation. The author compared the components of the analyzed offenses: the object, the subject, the objective side and the subjective side, and indicated their similarities and differences.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL AND LEGAL STUDY OF CONNIVANCE IN CRIME AS A SIGN CHARACTERIZING CONFLUENCE OF SEVERAL PERSONS IN ONE CRIME

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (72) (2) ◽  
pp. 236-241
Author(s):  
A. A. Kashkarov ◽  
D. A. Poshtaruk
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Legal Study ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Made In

A criminal and legal analysis of the objective and subjective signs, characterizing the connivance to the crime is made in the publication. The study found that connivance in a crime may be characteristic of various criminal law institutions, such as implication in a crime and complicity in a crime. In addition, the presented arguments show that connivance as a criminally punishable act may be associated with non-interference with unlawful activities that do not constitute a crime. The analysis shows that connivance in a crime can have a selfish purpose. It is noted that connivance in a crime is significantly different from other forms of implication in a crime, namely concealment of a crime and failure to report a crime. The subject of connivance in a crime is a person endowed with special powers to prevent, document and register crimes or offences. The article discloses that there is no special penal provision in the current Act of Criminal Responsibility of the Russian Federation that criminalizes it. The exception is the disposition of Art. 290 of the Criminal Code of RF, which contains an indication of connivance as a sign characterizing the objective side of receiving a bribe.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL-LEGAL FEATURES OF THE QUALIFICATION OF VIOLATIONS OF THE RULES OF OPERATION OF MEANS OF STORAGE, PROCESSING OR TRANSMISSION OF COMPUTER INFORMATION AND INFORMATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS (ARTICLE 274 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 489-496
Author(s):  
S.A. Styazhkina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Telecommunications Networks ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Points Of View ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Subjective Side

The article deals with the issues of qualification of violations of the rules of operation of means of storage, processing or transmission of computer information and information and telecommunications networks (Article 274 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The objective and subjective features of this corpus delicti are revealed. Special attention is paid to the problem of determining the subject of violation of the rules of operation of means of storage, processing or transmission of computer information and information and telecommunications networks. The question of the objective side of the Article 274 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is considered, in particular, the rules of means of storage, processing and transmission of computer information are defined, as which the rules should be considered, both contained in regulatory legal acts and in local documents of organizations, enterprises, institutions. The author analyzes the signs of the subjective side of the violation of the rules of operation of means of storage, processing or transmission of computer information and information and telecommunications networks, which cause a lot of controversy in the scientific literature. Different points of view regarding the subject of the crime, which can be a physical sane person who has reached the age of 16, are also considered.

scholarly journals AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES CHARACTERIZING SUBJECTIVE SIGNS OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 681-685
Author(s):  
V.I. Tikhonov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Subjective Side

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.

The Subject of a Crime Under Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 87-92
Author(s):  
E. G. Bykova ◽  
◽  
A. A. Kazakov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Practical Significance ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Code

The change in the disposition of Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation led to questions from law enforcement officers about from what moment a person is considered to be held administratively liable and what to mean by the commission of a similar act. The article carries out a systematic legal analysis of the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, as well as the position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in order to formulate proposals for solving the indicated problems. The fundamental method was dialectical. The formal legal method was used in the study of regulations governing certain aspects of the legal assessment of unlawful acts that take into account administrative precedence. Using a comparative legal method, a distinction was made between situations where a person was ordered to be held administratively liable and an administrative penalty was imposed. Scientific publications on the subject were analyzed. It was concluded that the current version of Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, containing a formally indefinite legal category, raises the problem of calculating the one-year period during which a person can be prosecuted under this norm if there is an administrative precedence. In addition, it is justified that a «similar act» should be understood only as an administrative offense, responsibility for which is provided for in Art. 20.3.1 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. The use of criminal law by analogy is unacceptable, therefore, it is proposed to amend the disposition of Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code to eliminate the identified gap. The problem identified could be the basis for further scientific research. The practical significance is due to the fact that the positions formulated by the authors can be taken into account in the process of improving criminal law, when amending the relevant explanations of the highest court in this category of cases in order to form a unified practice of applying criminal law.

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 ILLEGAL TURNOVER OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS: CRIMINAL LEGAL ASPECT

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 892-898
Author(s):  
S.A. Styazhkina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Aspect ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Official Document ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Subjective Side ◽  
Made In

The article discusses the issues of criminal liability for encroachments on the procedure of official document circulation. The concept and features of a document and an official document as subjects of criminal law protection are analyzed in detail. Criteria are proposed for distinguishing between a document and an official document, as well as the classification of documents. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of amendments to Article 327 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, made in the summer of 2019, which provide for responsibility for the falsification, production or circulation of fake documents, state awards, stamps, seals or letterheads. The article examines in detail the objective features of the elements of crimes encroaching on official documents, which include the acquisition, sale, stealing, destruction, damage, concealment, as well as forgery of official documents, the sale of fake official documents and their use. The issues of the subjective side of these crimes are considered. The article also focuses on the problems of delimiting the use of obviously fake official documents, the responsibility for which is provided for in paragraph 4 of Article 327 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation from crimes, where the use of fake documents acts as a means of committing a crime, such as fraud, illegal obtaining a loan, etc. Suggestions are made on the appropriateness amending a number of articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, providing for liability for encroachment on official documents.

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 The impact of administrative prejudice upon the content of penal prohibition

2021 ◽  
pp. 99-115
Author(s):  
Sergei Gennadevich Losev ◽  
Viktor Ivanovich Morozov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Record ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Subject ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Impact

The object of this research is the legal relations arising in the context of implementation of the norms of criminal law of the Russian Federation that establish liability for repeated administrative offenses. The subject of this research is the practice of application the criminal law norms of the Soviet and post-Soviet periods that regulate the institution of administrative prejudice, and acts of interpretation of the Russian Constitution, in which the Supreme Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation deals with the problems of the use of separate articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation that contain the norms with administrative prejudice, and parts of interrelation between the institutions of administrative prejudice and recurrence of offenses. The subject of this research is also justification of existence the institution of administrative prejudice in the national criminal law, main flaws in interpretation of the articles that describe the norms of the institution of administrative prejudice in the text of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Taking into consideration all shortcomings in interpretation of the articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the author offers unified definition of the composition with administrative prejudice. It is suggested to reintroduce the concept of recurrent offense in the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, taking into account the fact of administrative liability, outstanding criminal record, or criminal record that has not been expunged. The case if the legislator deems it necessary to take into account not identical, but homogeneous recurrence should be stipulated in the note to the article of the Special Part. The author also offers to include the Article 16.1 into the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the following wording: “The repeated offense is considered an act committed by a person who has previously been subjected to administrative penalty for similar type of offense, unless stipulated otherwise in the corresponding articles of the Special Part of the effective Code”.

scholarly journals On the construction of the purpose of punishment in criminal law

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-53
Author(s):  
S. A. Borovikov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Clear Guideline ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The One

The subject of consideration of this paper is the study of the purposes of punishment enshrined in article 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the similarities and differences in the approaches used to determining the purpose of criminal punishment in the laws of different countries and historical periods, the need for a critical assessment of the existing legislative decision. In the course of a comparative analysis the conclusion is formulated that the current version of the purposes of punishment in criminal law is overly broad, which creates the illusion of its achievement and in some cases the competition of its parts among themselves. So the first of those mentioned in article 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation the purpose of restoring social justice is a quality that should be inherent in punishment. The second of the purposes stated in the law – the correction of the convict – is one of several ways to achieve it. However the very purpose of the punishment is not to correct the convict. The third of these purposes – the prevention of crimes – is most consistent with the purpose of punishment, but it is quite lengthy and requires clarification. In addition it does not contain a clear focus on a person who can or has committed a crime. According to the results of the analysis it is proposed to carry out an adjustment of the purposes of criminal punishment in the law. The purpose of punishment should be one and have a common focus. In this regard it is proposed to define as the purpose of punishment – retention persons from committing crimes. The single and understandable purpose of punishment on the one hand will be a clear guideline in constructing the type and size of both the main and additional punishments in the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part, and on the other will allow the courts to choose the punishment that most corresponds to the intended result.

scholarly journals Criminal law protection of certain principles of the budgetary system of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
pp. 60-69
Author(s):  
Artem Aleksandrovich Pastushenko ◽  
Elena Yuryevna Antonova
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Inappropriate Use ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The subject of this research is the criminal law guarantees for the implementation of the principles of appropriate and targeted spending of budgetary resources as an element of ensuring national security of the Russian Federation. The author conducts the assessment of normative and law-enforcement material that determines the legal essence of the indicated principles of budgetary system of the Russian Federation. The article explores case law of implementation of certain norms of criminal legislation of the Russian Federation associated with contravention of the principle of appropriate use of budgetary allocations. This article is first to juxtapose the measures of criminal law protection of the principles of appropriate and targeted spending of budgetary resources. Based on the acquired results, the current position on the absence of penalties for the inappropriate use of budgetary allocations is being disputed. The conducted comparative analysis of the measures of criminal responsibility reveals large disparity with regards to protection of the two key principles of budgetary system of the Russian Federation. The author also established the presence of criminal elements that carry out preclusive function, which narrows down the capabilities of criminal law of the Russian Federation. The article offers an optimal and effective method for eliminating this problem and improving protective capabilities of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, including the tasks of ensuring national security.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document