scholarly journals Subject Of A Crime Under French Criminal Legislation

Author(s):  
Khurshida Mirziyatovna Abzalova ◽  

This article deals with the issues of criminal liability of persons (the subject of the crime) for committing crimes under the Criminal Code of France. It is noted that the French criminal law does not contain any special chapter devoted to the subject of the crime, but provides for important provisions on the responsibility of individuals and legal entities. Based on the analysis, it was concluded that it is necessary to apply the experience of France in terms of liberalizing the responsibility of minors and introducing the responsibility of legal entities.

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-154
Author(s):  
Muchammad Chasani

The regulation of corporate criminal liability in Indonesia's criminal justice system is basically a new and still debatable issue. It is said that because in the Criminal Code is not recognized and regulated explicitly about the corporation as a subject of criminal law. This is a natural thing since the WvS Criminal Code still adheres to the principle of "societas delinquere non potest" or "non-potest university delinquere", that is, a legal entity can not commit a crime. Thus, if in a society there is a criminal offense, then the criminal act is deemed to be done by the board of the corporation concerned. Regarding the corporate criminal responsibility system in Indonesia, in the corruption law Article 20 paragraph (1), if the corporation committed a criminal act of corruption, then those responsible for the criminal act shall be the corporation only, the management only, or the corporation and its management. Thus, it can be said that the regulation of corporate criminal liability in the legal system in Indonesia is expressly only regulated in special criminal legislation, because the Criminal Code of WvS still adheres to the principle of "societas delinquere nonpotest" so it is not possible to enforce corporate criminal liability in it.


Author(s):  
Ольга Васильевна Коростылёва

В статье рассматривается история становления и развития учреждений и органов, исполняющих уголовные наказания и иные меры уголовно-правового характера, не связанные с изоляцией от общества. После Октябрьской революции 1917 г. был актуализирован вопрос введения мер уголовной ответственности, не связанных с изоляцией осужденных от общества. Для исполнения указанных мер в 1919 г. было создано Бюро принудительных работ, которое со временем было переименовано в инспекции исправительно-трудовых работ. В настоящее время, с 1996 г., инспекции получили свое окончательное наименование - уголовно-исполнительные инспекции. На протяжении своего существования инспекции меняли только наименование, но и ведомственную принадлежность. Уголовно-исполнительные инспекции являются учреждением, исполняющим наибольшее количество уголовных наказаний и иных мер уголовно-правового характера, установленных уголовным законодательством, а также реализуют меры процессуального учреждения, связанные с применением системы электронного мониторинга подконтрольных лиц. Проведен анализ нормативного регулирования на предмет законодательного закрепления института учреждений, исполняющих наказания, альтернативные лишению свободы, в преддверии празднования 100-летнего юбилея существования уголовно-исполнительных инспекций. The article deals with the history of the formation and development of institutions and bodies executing criminal penalties and other criminal law measures not related to isolation from society. After the October revolution of 1917, the issue of introducing criminal liability measures not related to the isolation of convicts from society was actualized. For execution of these measures, in 1919, established the Office of forced labor, which eventually was renamed in the inspection of hard labor. At present, since 1996, the inspections have received their final name - criminal Executive inspections. Throughout its existence, the inspection changed only the name, but also departmental affiliation. Criminal-Executive inspections are the institution executing the greatest number of criminal punishments and other measures of criminal-legal character established by the criminal legislation, and also realizes the measures of procedural organization connected with application of system of electronic monitoring of under control persons. The analysis of normative regulation on the subject of legislative consolidation of the institution of institutions executing punishment alternative to imprisonment on the eve of the celebration of the 100th anniversary of the existence of criminal and Executive inspections.


Author(s):  
Евгений Русскевич ◽  
Evgeniy Russkevich

The monograph is devoted to the complex of theoretical and applied problems of adaptation of the domestic mechanism of criminal law protection to the "digitalization" of crime in the conditions of formation of the information society. Along with General theoretical issues, foreign criminal legislation and the provisions of international law are deeply analyzed. The paper presents a refined criminal-legal characteristics of crimes in the field of computer information, including the novelties of the Russian criminal law — the illegal impact on the critical information infrastructure of the Russian Federation (article 2741 of the criminal code), developed proposals for the differentiation of criminal liability for attacks on the security of computer data and systems, developed scientifically sound recommendations for qualification. The monograph is designed for researchers, teachers, practicing lawyers, students and postgraduates of law schools and faculties.


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.


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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 68-77
Author(s):  
Aleksandr V. Fedorov ◽  
◽  

The article is dedicated to the general issues of establishment of the criminal liability of legal entities in the Slovak Republic (Slovakia). Similarity of prerequisites for introduction of such liability in the Slovak Republic is noted. Gradual establishment of criminal liability of legal entities in Slovakia is noted, initially it was by means of amendment of the Criminal Code of Slovakia by Law No. 224/2010, which allows for using such “protective measures” as redemption and deprivation of property in relation to legal entities, then it was by means of adoption of Law No. 91/2016 on criminal liability of legal entities. Basic provisions of the Slovak law on criminal liability of legal entities are considered. The attention is paid to the fact that in the Slovak Republic there is a so-called selective criminalization as to the criminal liability of legal entities, when they can be held criminally liable not for all crimes specified in the Criminal Code of the Republic of Slovakia, but only for those of them, which are specified in the special Law No. 91/2016. A list of crimes, for which criminal liability is possible for legal entities, and conditions under which a crime is admitted to be committed by a legal entity, is specified. It is specified, which types of legal entities are foreseen by the Slovak law, and noted that not all of them can be the subjects of criminal liability according to the national laws. The effect of the criminal law is considered in relation to legal entities that have committed crimes in the territory of the Slovak Republic and outside it. The article contains the description of the types of criminal punishments of legal entities, which include: liquidation of the legal entity; deprivation of property; deprivation; penalty; prohibition to carry out activity; prohibition to receive subsidies and grants; prohibition to receive assistance and support from funds of the European Union; prohibition to participate in state procurement; publication of conviction.


Author(s):  
R.O Movchan ◽  
A.A Vozniuk ◽  
D.V Kamensky ◽  
O.O Dudorov ◽  
A.V Andrushko

Purpose. Critical analysis of the criminal law provision on illegal mining of amber, identification of its shortcomings, development of proposals for their elimination. Methodology. The system of philosophical, general scientific and specific scientific methods and approaches, which have provided objective analysis of the subject under consideration, in particular, the method of systemic and structural analysis, specific sociological, statistical, comparative, formal-logical methods. Findings. Shortcomings of the criminal law provision on illegal mining, sale, acquisition, storage, transfer, shipment, transportation and processing of amber, in particular, unjustified expansion of the criminal law prohibition under consideration, unsuccessful design of the main and qualified components of the criminal offense under review, as well as unjustified sanctions. Originality. The authors have been among the first researchers in the domestic criminal law doctrine to provide a comprehensive critical understanding of the provision dedicated to the regulation of criminal liability for illegal amber mining, which has made it possible to develop scientifically based recommendations for improving domestic criminal law. Practical value. Based on the research results, specific proposals addressed to domestic parliamentarians have been developed, which can be taken into account in the process of further lawmaking in terms of updating relevant provisions of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. It is argued that the improved Art. 240-1 should only cover illegal mining of amber. The main structure of the researched criminal offense is proposed to be designed as material. It has been proven, including through references to specific law enforcement materials, that sanctions of Part1 of Art. 240-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine should provide for a fine as the only non-alternative main type of punishment, while referenced to alternative punishments in the form of a fine and imprisonment should be included in Parts 2 and 3.


Author(s):  
Dongmei Pan

The article discusses the latest changes in the Criminal Code of the People’s Republic of China that were introduced at the end of 2020. The amendments were adopted after numerous revisions and discussions, and were officially published on December 26, 2020. As a result, fifteen new offences were added to the Criminal Code, and 47 articles were modified or amended. These amendments refer to financial security, intellectual property, security of public healthcare, production of food and medications, and the regulation of criminal liability for crimes connected with minors. Thus, they reflect the reaction of criminal legislation to public life through the criminalization and penalization of some publically dangerous actions. At the same time, they indicate the direction of Chinese criminal policy that combines «leniency» and «strictness». For example, most of the newly added offences are minor. On the whole, changes and amendments to the current Criminal Code of China are connected with different institutes of criminal law: reduction of the age of criminal liability for some offences; addition of new offences; introduction of changes and amendments to the dispositions and sanctions of some of the existing offences; provision of an opportunity to impose penalties that are under the lower limit determined by the corresponding Article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of China if the property obtained in the crime is recovered, or the economic damage to the victim is compensated.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (44) ◽  
pp. 307-315
Author(s):  
Oleksiy Pasyeka ◽  
Ruslan Shekhavtsov ◽  
Oleh Marmura ◽  
Stepan Burda ◽  
Taras Lutskyi

The purpose of the article is to study the main problematic aspects of the regulation of liability for sabotage in the legislation of Ukraine. The subject of the research is the problematic aspects of the regulation of criminal liability for sabotage under the laws of Ukraine. In order to obtain reliable results, a number of methods are applied: dialectical, formal-logical, hermeneutic, logical-semantic, statistical, comparative-legal, etc. The results of the conducted research: modern threats to the national security of any state require effective measures of counteraction, including the qualitative criminal legislation. The main shortcomings of the regulation of liability for sabotage under the laws of Ukraine are due to the imperfection of the components of this criminal offense, as well as the misinterpretation of its provisions by the enforcer. In addition, it is determined that one of the important problems of liability for such action is the parallel existence of a terrorist act in the criminal legislation of Ukraine, and the components of a terrorist act by its content and nature in most cases coincides with the components of sabotage. A number of changes and additions to the criminal legislation of Ukraine on elimination of the specified problems are proposed.


Author(s):  
R. V. Zakomoldin ◽  

The paper analyzes special norms and provisions of the RF Criminal Code reflecting the specifics of criminal law impact towards such a particular subject as military personnel. The author studies the nature, meaning, and varieties of special criminal law norms. The paper highlights the diversity of such norms and their presence in General and Special parts of the criminal law. In this respect, the author explains that these norms have a dual purpose: they are applied both instead of general norms and along with them, supplementing and specifying them. The author emphasizes the certainty, necessity, and reasonability of special norms and provisions in criminal law. The study pays special attention to military criminal legislation as a special criminal legal institution and a set of special rules and provisions that allows differentiating and individualizing criminal responsibility and criminal punishment of servicemen, taking into account the specifics of their legal status and the tasks they perform in the conditions of military service. The author considers special norms and provisions of the General Part of the RF Criminal Code regulating particular military types of criminal punishment and the procedure for their imposition (Articles 44, 48, 51, 54, 55), as well as the norms and provisions of the Special Part of the RF Criminal Code on crimes against military service (Articles 331–352). Besides, the study identifies close interrelation and interdependence of special norms and provisions of the criminal law with the criminal procedure and criminal executive legislation because they are the elements of a single mechanism of criminal law impact on military personnel, and only their combination ensures the effectiveness of such impact. Based on the analysis, the author formulates the conclusions and proposals to introduce amendments and additions to the RF Criminal Code concerning military criminal legislation. First of all, the author proposes highlighting the section “Criminal liability of military personnel” and the chapter “Features of criminal liability and punishment of military personnel” in the General part of the RF Criminal Code and abandoning the provision of part 3 of Art. 331 in the Special part.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document