Features the participation of a specialist in the investigation of crimes related to the introduction of knowingly false information in the inter-plan, technical plan, act of survey, project of land or land interdiction or map-plan of the territory (v. 170.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

2020 ◽  
pp. 221-223
Author(s):  
E.M. Kurbanova ◽  
A.A. Pimanova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
False Information ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Technical Plan

scholarly journals Problems of Protecting the Rights of a Private Prosecutor in Defamation Cases

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 651-660
Author(s):  
Natalya Artebyakina ◽  
Tatyana Makarova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Local Governance ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
False Information ◽  
Justices Of The Peace ◽  
The Russian Federation

The growing complexity of public relations creates a need for the criminalization of some acts and de-criminalization of others. Defamation is one of the offenses affected by this trend. Some time after its de-criminalization, the crime of defamation was brought back to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, there is no actual legal mechanism in Russia that victims of defamation could use to fully protect their rights. The authors point out a trend for acquittals in criminal proceedings initiated after the complaints of private prosecutors when they concern deliberately false information that besmirches the honor and dignity of other people and harms their reputation, when these complaints are filed with the governmental, including the law enforcement, authorities. They present their research of court statistical data regarding cases heard by Justices of the Peace under Part 1, Art. 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation between 2014 and the first half of 2018. The authors have analyzed the practices of Justices of the Peace in Ulyanovsk Region on criminal cases initiated under Part 1, Art. 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. They use the examples of specific criminal cases to prove that judges use clauses of Art. 33 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and Art. 6 of the Federal Law «On the Procedure of Handling Applications of Citizens of the Russian Federation» when deciding cases based on Part 1, Art. 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and protect the right of citizens to appeal to the governmental (including law enforcement) authorities; they point out that an appeal to governmental or local governance cannot be viewed as spreading deliberately false information. In this case, private prosecutors have no opportunity to protect their rights even if it is proven that the information is deliberately false, and they also have to bear additional expenses connected with the recovery of procedural costs. Besides, the research includes a comparative legal analysis of legislation on defamation in a number of foreign countries (the USA, China, the UAE and others) as well as the historical-legal analysis of the development of Russian legislation on liability for defamation.

Responsibility for Dissemination of Knowingly False Information

2021 ◽  
pp. 59-64
Author(s):  
Brilliantov A. V. ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Public Information ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
False Information ◽  
Administrative Legislation ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article is devoted to the analysis of the compositions of crimes «Public dissemination of knowingly false information about the circumstances that pose a threat to the life and safety of citizens» (Article 207.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and «Public dissemination of knowingly false public information, which caused serious consequences» (Article 207.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The article compares the objects of these crimes, elements of objective and subjective parties, an attempt is made to distinguish these compositions. In addition, the work is carried out and comparative analysis of these criminal offences with similar administrative offences. The analysis showed problems related to the practical application of the rules on the offences under consideration and concluded that the need for amendments to criminal and administrative legislation should be made.

ON THE DISTINCTIONS OF CRIMINAL-LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE-LEGAL ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS FOR VIOLATION OF THE SELF-ISOLATION REGIME IN THE CONDITIONS OF DANGER OF THE SPREAD OF CORONAVIRAL INFECTION IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2020 ◽  
pp. 35-41
Author(s):  
S. B. Syropyatova ◽  
◽  
L. N. Kabanova ◽  
P. A. Kabanov ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Self ◽  
False Information ◽  
Legal Enforcement ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Restrictive Measures ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The paper considers the issues of differentiation of criminal and administrative penalties for violation of the regime of restrictions imposed by the government authorities of the Russian Federation, government authorities of the RF subjects to prevent the spread of coronaviral infection. The authors define restrictive measures as the rules of behavior when introducing a high-alert regime. The paper reveals the issues of regulation by the law of the main restrictions caused by the coronavirus spread in the territory of the Russian Federation. The authors define the parameters of restrictions on rights and freedoms, such as self-isolation, high-alert regime, quarantine, emergency, emergency state, as well as liability for violations of restrictive measures when imposing each of the regimes. The paper identifies the lack of sharply defined criteria to introduce one of the regimes as a reason for the lack of practice of applying criminal liability for non-compliance with the above requirements. The authors considered the issue of assigning an action to a criminal or administrative category and clarified the criteria for attribution. The types of violations (regime violations, dissemination of deliberately false information, business violations) that resulted in criminal penalties are defined. The authors considered the conditions for the application of criminal legislation and determined responsibility, depending on the application of a qualifying feature. The paper formulates the proposals for the application of criminal and administrative legislation: they should be distinguished depending on the current regime and not on the ensuring of consequences of its violation. That happens because currently, it is difficult to identify causal relationships due to the understudy of a new phenomenon – the spread of coronaviral infection. The authors consider the adopted amendments to the RF Criminal Code as the state’s activity to ensure the security of the nation.

scholarly journals Problems of qualification of crimes prescribed in articles 207.1, 207.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 02002
Author(s):  
Maksim Viktorovich Bavsun ◽  
Kirill Valerievich Vishnevetskii ◽  
Aleksandr Nikolaevich Ignatov ◽  
Aleksey Aleksandrovich Kashkarov ◽  
Vandan-Ish Amarsanaa
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
False Information ◽  
Significant Information ◽  
The Public ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Implementation Purpose ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article is devoted to the problems of qualification of crimes prescribed by Articles 201.1 and 207.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The article analyzes the practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, aimed at clarifying the new provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as requirements for their practical implementation. Purpose: to identify the advantages and disadvantages of criminal-legal regulation of disseminating knowingly false information that poses a danger to the life or health of people and their safety in the pandemic. Methods: the study of the relevant norms using the systemic method, general scientific methods (structural-functional analysis, comparison, logical method, and content analysis of the practice of courts). Main results: the study made it possible to identify the advantages and disadvantages of the norms providing for criminal liability for the public dissemination of knowingly false information regarding the circumstances that pose a threat to the life and safety of citizens and the public dissemination of knowingly false socially significant information, which entailed grave consequences, as well as separate qualification errors in judicial and investigative practice that arose at the initial stage of their implementation. Conclusions and substantiation of the novelty of the work: the insufficient effectiveness of the existing approach to the problems of legal assessment of crimes is substantiated, which provides for responsibility for the public dissemination of knowingly false information regarding the circumstances that pose a threat to the life and safety of citizens and the public dissemination of knowingly false socially significant information, which entailed grave consequences, and the ways of solving the specified problems are proposed. At the same time, it is noted that the changes in legislation, especially such as criminal one, should be the result of targeted criminological analysis, with an appropriate criminological (and not spontaneous action – reflection on what is happening) forecast of the situation development. The authors highlight the unprecedented character of the measures taken by the state and the need to cancel them when external factors change, which provoked the changes in the criminal-legal regulation of public relations.

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.

The main problems of operational-search counteraction to bribery in Russia (based on the example of the practice materials in the Komi Republic)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-157
Author(s):  
Vladimir Danko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Practical Experience ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Komi Republic ◽  
Legal Problems ◽  
Subject And Object ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Object Of Crime

The work is carried out on the basis of special methods of knowledge, including historical-legal, logical, formal-legal. In the article, taking into account scientific sources and practical experience, the legal problems of operative-search counteraction to crimes provided for in Article 290-291.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are considered. The analysis of bribery is realized jointly, because there are identical characteristics in all its corpus delicties – the same subject and object of crime. The existing norms of criminal and criminal procedure laws in relation to bribery are analyzed. Principal operative-search measures used in documentation of bribery are determined. They are surveillance and operational experiment. Their difference is justified and successful use examples are examined. An actual statistics of the Komi Republic for 2015-2018 is given. The lack of normative securing for interaction between operational subdivisions and preliminary investigation body is ascertained. Based on personal practical experience some measures to counteract bribery are proposed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document