scholarly journals MISCARRIAGE OF JUS- TICE AS ONE OF THE REASONS FOR NOT ACHIEVING PURPOSES OF CRIMINAL PUNISHMENT

2021 ◽  
pp. 125-130
Author(s):  
A.F. Kovalyov ◽  
Ch.Sh. Kupirova ◽  
E.V. Nechaeva ◽  
V.Ya. Perepyolkin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Judicial Errors ◽  
Judicial Error

The article considers the hypothesis that a judicial error can significantly reduce the likelihood of achieving the goals of criminal punishment. The concepts of miscarriage of justice and the goals of punishment are formulated, and the consequences of failure to achieve the goals of criminal punishment are analyzed. Statistical data are provided that confirm the existence of the problem of inefficient implementation of the goals of criminal punishment. Possible, probable, as well as actually committed judicial errors are considered, as a result of which the goals of punishment cannot be achieved. The authors come to the conclusion that a significant reduction in the number of judicial errors will have an exceptionally positive impact not only on the judicial system, including its authority, but also on other involved systems – criminal law, penal enforcement, etc. A correct court decision regarding the size and type of punishment is a necessary basis for achieving the goals specified in Part 2 of Article 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Suspended Sentence and Placement in a Special Educational Institution: Features of Application and Correlation in the Context of the Systematic Nature of Criminal Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 267-271
Author(s):  
Vаleria A. Terentieva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Educational Institution ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Simultaneous Application ◽  
Closed Type ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Regulation

The systematic nature of criminal law forms the main features of the industry, namely: normativity, universalism, that is, the absence of casuistry and obligation. The strict consistency of both the entire industry and its individual institutions allows avoiding the redundancy of criminal law regulation, clearly determining the legal status of a person in conflict with the law. However, the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation do not always meet these requirements due to defects in legal technology, and, sometimes, gaps in regulation. In practice, the courts, in an effort to minimize the above defects, sometimes resort to excessive criminal law regulation; as an example, the article gives the ratio of the application of suspended sentence and placement in a special educational institution of a closed type. The article analyzes sentences to minors in which Art. 73 and Part 2 of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation were simultaneously applied in one sentence for the same act. For a comprehensive study, the article analyzed sentences to minors held in special educational institutions of a closed type for the period from 2014 to 2020, criminal statistics posted on the website of the Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, as well as various points of view of leading legal scholars. The research methods of static observation, analysis and synthesis, the system-structural method, as well as a number of factographic methods, were used. The study develops from the general to the specific, i.e., first, systematicity is analyzed as a property of the branch of criminal law and then as a property of a legal institution, namely, the release of minors from criminal liability. Consistency as a property of the institution of exemption from criminal punishment presupposes the impossibility of intersecting elements within one institution. Special attention is paid to the legal nature of suspended sentence as the most common punishment measure for minors, and its effectiveness. Then the cases of the simultaneous application of Art. 73 and Part 2 of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are analyzed. In the course of the study, the author examines the features of suspended sentence and placement in a special educational and educational institution of a closed type, compares these two forms of criminal liability, and highlights the differences. The conclusion is that the simultaneous placement in a special educational institution of a closed type and suspended sentence are a redundancy of criminal law regulation. The article raises the question of the need to improve the Criminal Code in terms of the development of placement in a special educational and educational institution of a closed type as a type of exemption from criminal punishment: the court is to be provided with the opportunity to control the juvenile offender’s correctional process.

scholarly journals The goals of criminal punishment as a reflection of modern criminal policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 324-330
Author(s):  
V.V. Popov ◽  
◽  
S.M. Smolev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

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.

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.

Judicial penalty as an element of “quasi-criminal law”

2020 ◽  
pp. 34-42
Author(s):  
Олег Вячеславович Дорошенко
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Criminal Penalty ◽  
Physical Suffering ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Russian Federation

В статье рассматриваются проблемные аспекты судебного штрафа. Делается вывод, что, поскольку судебный штраф по своей правовой природе является иной мерой уголовно-правового характера, поэтому он должен быть справедливым (ст. 6 УК РФ), не может иметь своей целью причинение физических страданий и унижение человеческого достоинства (ст. 7 УК РФ). Судебный штраф схож с уголовным наказанием, поскольку лицо, совершившее преступление и освобожденное от уголовной ответственности с назначением судебного штрафа, испытывает страдания, схожие со страданиями лица, к которому применено уголовное наказание, однако в меньших размерах. Проводится сравнительный анализ штрафа как уголовного наказания и судебного штрафа. Делается вывод, что в некоторых случаях судебный штраф является более строгой мерой, нежели штраф как уголовное наказание. Анализируется статистика назначения судебного штрафа. Автор приходит к выводу, что при назначении судебного штрафа должно учитываться мнение потерпевшего (при его наличии). The article discusses the problematic aspects of the court fine. It is concluded that a judicial fine by its legal nature is a different measure of a criminal-law nature, since it is established for committing crimes (Art. 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), it must be fair (Art. 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), and it cannot aim at causing physical suffering and humiliation of human dignity (Art. 7 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The court fine is similar to criminal punishment, since the person who committed the crime and who is exempted from criminal liability with the imposition of a judicial fine suffers similar suffering to the person to whom the criminal penalty was applied, but to a lesser extent. A comparative analysis of the fine as a criminal punishment and the judicial fine is carried out. It is concluded that in some cases, a judicial fine is a more severe measure than a fine as a criminal punishment. The statistics of the appointment of a fine are provided. The author concludes that when imposing a fine, the opinion of the victim (if any) should be taken into account.

scholarly journals The Purpose of Punishment in the Science of Criminal Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-139
Author(s):  
A. I. Rarog
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Legislative Decision

Despite a centuries-old debate among scientists from different countries, the question about the purposes of criminal punishment remains relevant. The criminal legislation of the Soviet period was inconsistent in formulating the purposes of punishment and repeatedly changed the list of purposes and their wording, therefore, in the criminal law doctrine there were long and fruitless discussions on this issue. They have not stopped to this day, although the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation unambiguously proclaimed the purposes of punishment to be the restoration of social justice, the correction of the convicted person and the prevention of new crimes. The discrepancy between the purposes of punishment in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the purposes of the execution of punishment in the Penal Enforcement Code of the Russian Federation to a certain extent interferes with a uniform interpretation of the purposes of criminal punishment. The paper proves the validity and comprehensive nature of the legislative decision and rejects the importance and possibility of legislative adjustment of the purposes of punishment or supplementing their list with the purposes of punishment, expiation, resocialization of the convict, his re-education, etc.

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.

SOME PROBLEMIC ISSUES ARISING DURING THE PERFORMANCE OF A PUNISHMENT IN THE FORM OF DEPRIVATION OF THE RIGHT TO TAKE A CERTAIN POSITION OR TO PERFORM CERTAIN ACTIVITIES

2020 ◽  
pp. 54-57
Author(s):  
Ирина Александровна Лакина ◽  
Анна Борисовна Назарова
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Initial Investigation ◽  
Scientific Analysis ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Character

В статье рассматриваются проблемные вопросы, возникающие при организации исполнения уголовного наказания в виде лишения права занимать определенную должность или заниматься определенной деятельностью. Анализируются статистические данные о количестве назначенных судами Российской Федерации наказаний и мер уголовно-правового характера, не связанных с лишением свободы, о количестве осужденных лиц, состоящих и прошедших по учетам уголовно-исполнительных инспекций Российской Федерации. Авторами статьи обосновывается необходимость осуществления первоначальных розыскных мероприятий в отношении изучаемой категории подучетных лиц и, как следствие, внесение соответствующих изменений в действующее законодательство Российской Федерации, в связи с тем что в настоящее время положения указанных нормативно-правовых актов не предполагают проведение первоначальных розыскных мероприятий и объявления в розыск осужденных к уголовному наказанию в виде лишения права занимать определенную должность или заниматься определенной деятельностью. В формате рекомендаций, направленных на повышение эффективности проведения первоначальных розыскных мероприятий, приводятся конкретные предложения, ориентированные на снижение показателя заведенных розыскных дел. Авторами статьи акцентируется внимание на необходимости дальнейшего научного анализа теоретических, практических и концептуальных аспектов, связанных с правоотношениями, возникающими при реализации уголовного наказания в виде лишения права занимать определенную должность или заниматься определенной деятельностью. The article deals with the problematic issues arising in the organization of execution of criminal punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to hold a certain position or engage in certain activities. Statistical data on the number ordered by the courts of the Russian Federation of punishments and measures criminally-legal character are not related to deprivation of freedom, the number of convicted persons which held the records of the penal inspections of the Russian Federation. The authors of the article substantiates the need to implement the initial investigation governmental activities in the study category of the registered individuals, and as a consequence, appropriate changes to the existing by-law of the Russian Federation, in connection with the, that now provisions of the specified normative legal acts do not assume carrying out initial search actions and announcements in search condemned to criminal punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to occupy a certain position or to be engaged in certain activity. In the format of recommendations aimed at improving the effectiveness of the initial search activities, specific proposals aimed at reducing the rate of opened search cases are presented. The authors of the article focus on the need for further scientific analysis of theoretical, practical and conceptual aspects related to legal relations arising in the execution of criminal punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to hold a certain position or engage in a certain activity.

Criminal-Legal Characteristics of Encroachment on the Health, Personal Integrity, Honor and Dignity of a Representative of the Authorities

2021 ◽  
pp. 96-103
Author(s):  
N. Yu. Borzunova ◽  
O. S. Matorina ◽  
E. P. Letunova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Personal Integrity ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation

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.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document