scholarly journals Legal problems of use of compulsory psychiatric treatment in Russia and Belarus

2022 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 187-196
Author(s):  
A. L. Santashov ◽  
M. Yu. Kashinskiy ◽  
L. N. Tarabuev

The subject of the research is the problems of legislative regulation of compulsory psychiatric measures in the criminal legislation of the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation.The purpose of the article is to confirm or refute the hypothesis that there are defects in legislative regulation that prevent the effective use of compulsory psychiatric treatment. They are not eliminated in the Criminal Codes of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus. Research methodology. On the basis of a system-integrated approach on an interdisciplinary basis, a scientific analysis of special legal and forensic psychiatric scientific literature and interpretation of the criminal legislation of the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation were carried out.Main results. An analysis of the Criminal Codes of the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation showed that compulsory psychiatric treatment is an independent institution of criminal law, which is regulated in sufficient detail in the national criminal legislation. The article includes a comparative legal analysis of the norms of the criminal legislation of both states (Chapter 14 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus and Chapter 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) that regulate psychiatric coercive measures applied to persons with mental disorders who have committed illegal acts. Based on the results of the study, a number of problems were identified in the legislative regulation of psychiatric compulsory measures in the criminal codes of both states, the authors propose directions for further improvement of the current criminal legislation.Conclusions. The Criminal Codes of the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation contain only general criteria for choosing the type of psychiatric measures of a coercive nature, in the most general form, the procedure for their change and termination is provided, they need editorial clarification of their purpose. There is no legislative definition of the concepts of “coercive security measures and treatment” (Chapter 14 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus) and “compulsory measures of a medical nature” (Chapter 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), etc., which causes serious difficulties in law enforcement practice and indicates the need to continue work to improve the current criminal legislation.The terminology used “coercive and security measures and treatment” (Chapter 14 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus) and “coercive measures of a medical nature” (Chapter 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) does not reflect the specifics of these measures, which in their essence and content are exclusively psychiatric measures. The identified problems of legislative regulation of psychiatric compulsory measures in the criminal legislation of both states require their further resolution, and based on the interdisciplinary medico-legal nature of the problems involved, with the obligatory involvement of forensic psychiatrists in their solution. 

Author(s):  
Василий Некрасов ◽  
Vasiliy Nekrasov

The article analyzes the issues of differentiation of responsibility and norm design technique on inchoate crime in the criminal legislation of the Republic of Belarus. The author examines the legislative definition of preparation for a crime, attempted crime and voluntary renunciation of criminal purpose. As a result of the study the author has found out the main methods and means of legislative technique, used by the Belarusian legislator. These are abstract and casuistic methods, the terminology of the criminal law and several others. Comparison of legal regulation of norms on unfinished crime in the Criminal code of the Republic of Belarus and the Criminal code of the Russian Federation has allowed to identify gaps made by the legislators of both countries in application of specific tools and techniques of legislative drafting. Court practice of the Republic of Belarus in cases of preparation for a crime and attempted crime also was analyzed in present article. The author has evidentiated the means of differentiation of the responsibility for committing inchoate crime, used by the Belarusian legislator. The definitions “inchoate crime” and “stage of the crime” were also analyzed in present study. As a conclusion the author has made the recommendations for improving the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus on regulation of criminal responsibility for an inchoate crime.


Author(s):  
Александр Викторович Сенатов

В связи с изменениями, внесенными Федеральным законом Российской Федерации от 01.04.2019 № 46-ФЗ «О внесении изменений в Уголовный кодекс Российской Федерации и Уголовно-процессуальный кодекс Российской Федерации в части противодействия организованной преступности» в уголовном законодательстве появилась ст. 210, предусматривающая уголовную ответственность за занятие высшего положения в преступной иерархии. Данное преступление имеет специальный субъект, обладающий дополнительными признаками, которые должны быть закреплены в законе. Однако в уголовном законодательстве, а также постановлениях Пленума Верховного суда Российской Федерации отсутствует определение данного понятия, а также признаки, в соответствии с которыми необходимо привлечь лицо к уголовной ответственности. В статье проанализированы научные определения «преступная иерархия», «иерархическая лестница уголовно-преступной среды», лицо, занимающее высшее положение в преступной иерархии, а также выделены конкретные признаки, характеризующие специальный субъект, закрепленный ст. 210 УК РФ. Рассматривается опыт борьбы с организованной преступностью в Республике Грузия, а также материалы следственной практики в отношении лица, привлекаемого к уголовной ответственности по признакам состава преступления, предусмотренного ст. 210 УК РФ. Due to the changes made by the Federal law of the Russian Federation of 01.04.2009 No. 46-FZ “On modification of the criminal code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation regarding counteraction of organized crime” to the criminal legislation there was Art. 210 providing criminal liability for occupation of the highest position in criminal hierarchy. This crime has a special subject with additional features that must be enshrined in the law. However, in the criminal legislation, as well as the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme court of the Russian Federation, there is no definition of this concept, as well as signs according to which it is necessary to bring a person to criminal responsibility. The article analyzes the scientific definitions of “criminal hierarchy”, “hierarchical ladder of criminal environment”, the person occupying the highest position in the criminal hierarchy, as well as the specific features, fixed Art. 210 of the Criminal Code. The article also discusses the experience of combating organized crime in the Republic of Georgia, as well as materials of investigative practice in relation to a person brought to criminal responsibility on the grounds of a crime under Art. 210 of the Criminal Code.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-26
Author(s):  
Aleksey Chistyakov ◽  
Saule Naurzalieva

The article reflects the study of juvenile delinquency in the Republic of Kazakhstan and their criminal responsibility. The scientific novelty of the research is that it was conducted on the basis of the new criminal legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in 2014. Therefore, the complex of issues, that were previously the subject of various studies in the light of modern realities and trends of criminal law policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, has received a new interpretation and argumentation from the perspective of the latest opportunities for study. First, the new legislative structure for determining the basis of criminal liability (Article 4 of the Criminal code of the Republic of Kazakhstan) required a reinterpretation of the content of circumstances that lead to emergence of criminal liability among juveniles. Secondly, the legally updated content of grounds for criminal liability of juveniles in the Republic of Kazakhstan has led to an update of the quality of criminal law relations that arise between juvenile offenders and state bodies, which also need a new scientific reinterpretation. Third, the new legal concept of the basis of criminal liability presupposes the existence of a new, in relation to the previous, content of the basis for the implementation of criminal liability of juveniles. Finally, the new criminal legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, along with the previously existing one, has introduced new forms and types of implementation of criminal liability of juveniles, which need an updated scientific and legal analysis. Its results and conclusions, obtained personally by the author, can be regarded as having scientific novelty for the above reasons. In addition, on the basis of the theory and practice research of criminal responsibility among juveniles in the Republic of Kazakhstan, the paper formulated proposals for improving the criminal legislation of not only the Republic of Kazakhstan, but also the Russian Federation, which also have a novelty. The theoretical significance of the research is to increase and systematize knowledge about the criminal liability of juveniles due to the presence of a new basis of criminal responsibility that has not been previously developed by the Russian criminal law science. The results of scientific understanding of new forms and types of implementation of criminal liability of juveniles, introduced by the Criminal code of the Republic of Kazakhstan in 2014, such as the obligation to apologize to the victim and the establishment of probation control, have theoretical significance. The conclusions, suggestions and recommendations contained in this work enrich the scientific understanding of the features of criminal liability of juveniles in the Republic of Kazakhstan. The practical significance of the work is that the provisions and recommendations contained in it can be used both in the Republic of Kazakhstan and in the Russian Federation: in the process of standard-setting activities in improving the norms of Chapter 6 of the Criminal code of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the norms of Section V of Chapter 14 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation; in the work of specialized inter-district courts for juveniles, considering cases against juveniles and assigning criminal penalties to them; by authorities and administration in the development of preventive measures.


2021 ◽  
pp. 22-28
Author(s):  
K.Y. Sasykin

In the article, the author examines the problem of criminal legal protection of creditors’ rights fromcrimes associated with malicious evasion by debtors from paying off accounts payable, for the commissionof which liability is provided under Article 177 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The author emphasizes that the norm of the article was introduced in 1996 together with the adoptionof the code and the disposition did not undergo changes over the next twenty-five years, remaininginsufficiently regulated. It is indicated with reference to judicial practice on the problem of the objective sideof the corpus delicti of this crime, which contains ambiguous evaluative signs.The author, based on the analysis of the article of the considered norm and a number of doctrinal pointsof view, concluded that the norm is subject to change with the “removal” of the controversial terminologyfrom the disposition. The author proposes a revision of the norm and, as an example, provides a similarprovision on liability from the criminal legislation of the Republic of Belarus.Also, based on the analysis of articles 144–145 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federationand taking into account the practice and doctrinal points of view, attention is focused on the need, in additionto substantive changes, changes and procedural norms of domestic legislation, namely, on the need totransform the stage existing in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation initiation of a criminalcase as hindering the timely detection and investigation of this type of crime.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 171-175
Author(s):  
Vladimir A. Ponikarov

Introduction: the paper investigates criminal and penal enforcement inconsistencies in the legislative regulation on the use of firearms by the staff of the penal system in their official activities. Legal details consist in the fact that we put forward scientifically substantiated proposals to reform criminal-legal and penal enforcement aspects associated with the use of firearms by employees (guns, submachine guns, rifles, which are operated by the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia). We analyze Article 86 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which establishes relevant security measures. We also consider the practice of foreign countries related to this problem. Aim: to investigate the criminal-legal and penal enforcement aspects related to the use of firearms by staff of the penal system for example, in relation to convicts. Methods: we use dialectical method as methodological and theoretical basis for the study, and deductive method to analyze the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation regarding the use of firearms. We also use systematized methods to study articles of the Criminal Code and the Penal Enforcement Code. They help to classify the legal facts that establish the legal right of staff to use firearms. We use empirical methods of mastering in order to improve penal officers’ performance in the use of firearms. The article presents the results of a survey of 318 employees. Results: we have investigated the essence of criminal-legal relations in terms of the use of firearms by employees of the penal system; we have also studied the practice of implementing the norms concerning the use of firearms by law enforcement officers; we propose a theoretical model for improving criminal legislation related to the use of firearms In addition, we provide scientifically substantiated ideas and empirical studies aimed at improving criminal and penal enforcement legislation on the use of firearms. Research findings of our paper include new ideas concerning the use of firearms within the boundaries of criminal and penal enforcement legislation (we suggest that the foundations associated with the use of firearms should be contained in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Key words: criminal legislation; penal enforcement legislation; use of firearms; legal facts; legal relations; security measures; Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia; penal enforcement system.


Author(s):  
Veljko Ikanović

This paper discusses the measure of the safety of compulsory psychiatric treatment and care in a health institution from the new Criminal Code of Republika Srpska. Here, in fact, it is about “returning” to the law of an old measure that previously existed in domestic criminal legislation until its 2003 reform. Considering that a new one has been abandoned in Bosnia and Herzegovina by the harmonization of criminal justice reform, the procedure against irregular perpetrators of criminal offenses and the introduced security measures that other legislation in the country does not know, we expect this to raise the attention of legal science, jurisprudence and certain international factors under the influence of which the measure was removed from the criminal legislation. With this work, we want to draw the attention of the scientific and professional public to the need for traditional, scientifically based and proven solutions to be quickly and uncritically abandoned, so that after a certain period of time, “after-mindedness,” it was understood that it was wrong and counterproductive.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-32

The relevance of the work is determined by the fact that the right to life belongs to the basic constitutional human rights, therefore, its observance and protection is the duty of the state. Despite its undeniable importance, today the right to life anywhere in the world is not really ensured in sufficient quantities. The constitutional consolidation of the right to life raises a number of issues related to the concept, nature, legislative and practical implementation of this right. It should be noted that various aspects of the human right to life were considered in the scientific works of G.B. Romanovsky, O.G. Selikhova, T.M. Fomichenko, A.B. Borisova, V.A. Ershov and other Russian authors. The aim of the study is to study and comparative analysis of the legal content of the constitutional norm that defines the right to life, to comprehend and identify possible problems of the implementation of this right. To achieve this goal, this article discusses relevant issues of ensuring the right to life, proclaimed by Article 20 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and Article 27 of the Constitution of Azerbaijan Republic. The results of a comparative analysis of these constitutional norms and the relevant norms of industry law allow us to determine, that there is no contradiction between Article 20 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the norms of the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation, which imply the death penalty as an exceptional measure of punishment, because a moratorium has been imposed on the death penalty in the Russian Federation since April 16, 1997. However, after the abolition of the death penalty in the criminal legislation of the Republic of Azerbaijan in 1998, there was a discrepancy between parts II and III of Article 27 of the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the criminal legislation of Azerbaijan Republic that requires the introduction of the necessary changes in the content of the analyzed constitutional norm. The value of the work is determined by the fact that the introduction of appropriate changes will contribute to the further improvement of the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the effective implementation of the right to life of everyone.


Author(s):  
SONA MKRTCHIAN ◽  

The purpose of the research is to identify the most successful ideas and legal techniques used in international law regarding regulations of defense against criminal offences in the sphere of cybersecurity, as well as blockchain functioning and cryptocurrency turnover. Results. On the basis of the positive international experience in regulating the criminal legal protection of relations in the last-mentioned sphere, the following directions for improving Russian criminal legislation were formulated: 1) fixation of the fair limits of the criminal administrative liability for defendant in reliance on the level of public danger of his personality and his offences; 2) creation of the formally defined crimes against computer information; 3) criminalization of some actions that precede cybercrimes; 4) expansion in the number of the mentioning of the sign "by interfering in the functioning of the resources of the storing, processing or transmitting computer information or data telecommunications network" as an essential or aggravating elements of crimes, typically committed with the use of information technologies (for example, in the articles number 133, 134, 135, 137, 138, 139, 146, 147, 163, 165, 240, 240.1, 241 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, etc.); 5) expansion in the number of the elements of crimes combined in the chapter 28 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, in reliance on the modern criminal schemes and typical criminal situations in the world of information technology; 6) expansion of the effect of the article number 274.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on any criminal offense to the critical information infrastructure of the Russian Federation and inclusion of the additional aggravating elements in the text of this article.


2021 ◽  
pp. 96-103
Author(s):  
N. Yu. Borzunova ◽  
O. S. Matorina ◽  
E. P. Letunova

The authors of the article consider the criminal- legal characteristics of crimes against representatives of the authorities, in particular, encroachment with the purpose of causing harm to the health, personal integrity, honor and dignity of a representative of the authorities. The definition of the term “representative of the authorities”is given. The main characteristics of a representative of the government are analyzed. Statistical data on the number of convictions and types of punishments in accordance with the provisions of articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Articles 318, 319) are summarized. Examples of judicial practice are considered. The ways of improving the criminal legislation are proposed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document