Grounds for the mitigation of criminal punishment in the criminal legislation of Russia

2019 ◽  
pp. 116-122
Author(s):  
Сергей Владимирович Тасаков ◽  
Владимир Сергеевич Тасаков
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation

В статье рассматриваются основания смягчения уголовного наказания в уголовном законодательстве Российской Федерации. Основания смягчения уголовного наказания направлены на снижение бремени уголовного наказания, что в свою очередь опосредованно влияет на процесс реализации уголовной политики. Проводится различие терминов «смягчение» и «освобождение» от уголовной ответственности и ее «исключение». Исследуются межотраслевое содержание системы оснований смягчения уголовного наказания, а также признаки системы оснований смягчения уголовного наказания и классификация оснований смягчения уголовного наказания. Дается доктринальное определение системы оснований смягчения уголовного наказания. The article discusses the grounds for mitigating criminal punishment in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. The grounds for mitigation of criminal punishment are aimed at reducing the burden of criminal punishment, and that, in turn, indirectly affects the process of implementation of criminal policy. A distinction is made between the terms “mitigation” and “exemption” from criminal responsibility and its “exclusion”. The intersectoral content of the system of grounds for mitigation of criminal punishment, as well as signs of the system of bases for mitigation of criminal punishment and the classification of the grounds for mitigation of criminal punishment are investigated. A doctrinal definition of the basis for the mitigation of criminal punishment is given.

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 RULES ON INCHOATE CRIME IN THE CRIMINAL LEGISLATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS

2016 ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Василий Некрасов ◽  
Vasiliy Nekrasov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Tools And Techniques

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.

Signs characterizing the person occupying the highest position in criminal hierarchy

2020 ◽  
pp. 75-80
Author(s):  
Александр Викторович Сенатов
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Organized Crime ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation

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.

scholarly journals On the Appropriateness of the Use of the Term “Inducement” in Article 2301 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 433-444
Author(s):  
A. V. Syntin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Medical Personnel ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Other ◽  
Long Time ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The One ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The problem of prohibited substances (methods) abuse in sport has existed for quite a long time. On the one hand, by criminalizing certain anti-doping rules violations, legislation expanded the liability limits of coaches, sports medical personnel, and of other specialists in the field of sports, which can be regarded positively. On the other hand, it made certain mistakes which impeded the effectiveness of these laws enforcement. Among other things, there is a problem with definition of the term “inducement”. The term itself is defined in the note to article 2301 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code, but there is a controversy in demarcation of inducement. methods. While deception, the use of violence and instructions as inducement methods are socially dangerous at substantial level and can be regarded as methods of committing the crime, the provision of information or the prohibited substances themselves (means of using methods) cannot be regarded as methods of committing the crime. Such a definition of inducement means also leads to contradictions with the corpus delicti under Article 2302 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code. In addition, there are also different interpretations regarding the methods of inducement, coercion, involvement in the other corpus delicti, which, all together with the lack of a unified interpretation of the terms affects the possibility of bringing the guilty persons, especially coaches, sports medical personnel and other specialists in the field of sports, to criminal responsibility. The survey conducted among lawyers also has revealed difficulties in distinguishing these terms in practice. Based on the criminal legislation analysis, the author comes to the conclusion that the amendments in the Russian Federation Criminal Code are necessary.

scholarly journals Doctrinal issues of criminal responsibility in Russian criminal law

2019 ◽  
pp. 128-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. N. Barkhatova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Definition Of

The paper is devoted to determining the moment of criminal responsibility and its content. The positions existing in science and practice are analyzed. The point of view on the occurrence of criminal responsibility at the moment when a person is being charged with a crime is substantiated. This opinion is supported by an analysis of Art. 299 and 305 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The relationship between the characteristics of the subjective side of the crime and the emergence of criminal responsibility is demonstrated. The content of criminal responsibility has been examined both in the criminal law and in the criminal procedure aspect. The emergence and termination of criminal responsibility, as well as its content, are examined, inter alia, through the prism of the grounds for relief from it provided for in Sec. 11 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Other measures of a criminal legal nature have been studied as constituting criminal responsibility. The issue of the possibility or impossibility of including them in the content of criminal responsibility has been resolved. The classification of the components forming the content of criminal responsibility is proposed. The definition of criminal responsibility is formulated, which, according to the author, should be enshrined in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Special Military Criminal Penalties: Status and Prospects

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (91) ◽  
pp. 67-71
Author(s):  
R.V. Zakomoldin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Military Personnel ◽  
Military Service ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Data Types ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Penalties ◽  
Criminal Legislation

Presents an analysis of the problems of legislative regulation and practice of applying special military types of criminal punishment under the current military criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. Close attention is paid to such types of military criminal penalties as deprivation of military ranks, restriction on military service, detention in a disciplinary military unit and arrest with detention in the guardhouse. The definition of “special military criminal penalties”is formulated. The classification of these punishments into types on various grounds is given. The author analyzes the shortcomings of the provisions of the criminal law regarding military criminal penalties, as well as the judicial practice of assigning these types of criminal punishment to convicted military personnel. In addition, proposals for amendments and additions to the existing military criminal legislation and in court practice to preserve data types of criminal punishment, an increase in the practice of their application and increasing their effectiveness. It is pointed out that it is necessary to identify the reasons for the non-use of certain types of military criminal penalties and eliminate them. Proposals aimed at excluding special military types of criminal punishment from the Criminal code of the Russian Federation have been criticized, since this trend excludes the declared variety of types of criminal punishment, does not allow taking into account the special status of subjects of criminal responsibility, which excludes the individualization and differentiation of criminal responsibility and criminal punishment of military personnel. The author’s position is supported by an analysis of the opinions of scientists, practical material, and legislative activities.

scholarly journals Encouragement to Commit Suicide or Assisting with Suicide: Critical Analysis

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 151-159
Author(s):  
T. D. Ustinova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Commit Suicide

Taking into account recent changes in criminal legislation, the paper critically analyzes the features of a newly introduced crime in the criminal code, such as encouraging to commit suicide or assisting with suicide (article 110.1). Special attention is given to the methods of encouraging and facilitating suicide in terms of their validity, accuracy, content and the need to list them in the criminal law. Examples of excessive detail in the formulation of certain criminogenic characteristics are given, which contradicts the principles of legal technique. These include features such as persuasions, suggestions, advice, instructions, information, and a promise to conceal the tools or means of committing suicide. The elements of these crimes are considered in detail from the point of view of their relevance and reflection of the degree of public danger of the committed acts. This statement refers to such characteristics of victims that aggravate criminal responsibility, such as the age of a minor, the state of pregnancy, financial or other dependence on the perpetrator. The author proposes solutions for the classification of disputable situations when the crimes in question are committed against minors, the insane, or persons suffering from mental disorders. The paper considers cases when the studied crimes may be committed by a criminal community, and lists options for the classification of what was done. Special attention is given to the classification of encouragement to commit a terrorist act by self-detonation. The issue of responsibility of a minor who encourages a minor to commit suicide or contributes to his / her suicide has been raised as a matter of discussion. Proposals are made to improve the disposition of the criminal law norm. The author expresses reproaches to the notes to article 110.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides exemption from criminal responsibility in the commission of the investigated crime, and proposes a new edition of notes, which must be placed after the text of article 110.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, taking into account characteristics of the main and aggravated offenses.

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 Confiscation of property as a criminal punishment

2021 ◽  
pp. 64-82
Author(s):  
М.Ф. Гареев
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Legislative Regulation ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

В статье рассматривается и обосновывается необходимость возобновления в уголовном праве института конфискации имущества в качестве уголовного наказания. Необходимость его возобновления обусловлена наличием ряда преступных деяний, представляющих угрозу обществу, государству, национальной безопасности Российской Федерации. В настоящее время законодательная регламентация конфискации имущества в качестве иной меры уголовноправового характера, вызванная неопределенностью его сущности, целевых установок и механизма назначения, не выполняет предупредительную задачу, установленную уголовным законодательством. The article discusses and substantiates the need to renew the institution of confiscation of property in criminal law as a criminal punishment. The need to resume it is due to the presence of a number of criminal acts that pose a threat to society, the state, and the national security of the Russian Federation. Currently, the legislative regulation of the confiscation of property as another measure of a criminal-legal nature, caused by the uncertainty of its essence, targets and the mechanism of appointment, does not fulfill the preventive task established by the criminal legislation.

scholarly journals CONSTITUTIVE EVALUATIVE CONCEPTS IN CRIMINAL LAW: CONCEPT, TYPES, FUNCTIONS, ESSENTIAL FEATURES

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 450-458
Author(s):  
D.R. Kasimov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Structural Features ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
New Classification ◽  
Functional Features ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Cognitive Meaning

The article provides a new classification of evaluative concepts enshrined in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, indicates the purpose of its existence in the doctrine of criminal law. The article describes the definition of constitutive evaluative concepts that are determined as legislatively vague evaluative concepts that, by their normative-essential and functionally-substantive characteristics, are absolute, necessarily alternative, or accompanying structural features of a crime. Through the prism of the features of constitutive evaluative concepts, their varieties, essential features and functions are distinguished; interpretation (including cognitive) meaning is revealed. Moreover, the interpretation features of these evaluative concepts are considered in two interdependent aspects: the structurally-essential (associated with the types, attributes and functions of constitutive evaluative concepts) and the procedural-substantive (associated with the informative and informative activities of the interpreter). It is indicated that the interpretation features of an structurally-essential nature are, firstly, in the composition and criminogenic properties of constitutive evaluative concepts, and secondly, in the semantic structural composition, indicating a meaningful dependence of the evaluative concept on the accompanying structural features of a crime, and thirdly, legally significant functional features. At the same time, interpretative features of a procedural-substantive order are also highlighted, which include, firstly, the need for a paramount definition of the criminogenic determinant, designed to establish the structural features of a crime in a perfect act, and secondly, in an increased degree of normative casuistic derivative of these evaluative concepts. The author comes to the conclusion that constitutive evaluative concepts are interpreted according to the same logical-linguistic and legal laws, but with some marked structurally meaningful features.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document