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 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.

scholarly journals Criminal liability of juveniles in the Republic of Kazakhstan

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-26
Author(s):  
Aleksey Chistyakov ◽  
Saule Naurzalieva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Scientific Understanding ◽  
Theoretical Significance ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Criminal Legislation

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.

scholarly journals Criminal liability as a means of counteracting sanitary and epidemiological rule violations in a pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 118 ◽  
pp. 03010
Author(s):  
Andrey Vladimirovich Makarov ◽  
Larisa Vladimirovna Makogon ◽  
Oleg Vyacheslavovich Firsov ◽  
Aleksandra Sergeevna Zhukova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Main Idea ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The purpose of the study is a comprehensive analysis of the issues of the application of criminal liability as a means of countering violations of sanitary and epidemiological rules in a pandemic. The main idea of the study: the validity and expediency of amending the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation establishing punishment for violation of sanitary and epidemiological rules and criminalization of the spread of an infectious disease. A methodological toolkit is a set of methods, means and techniques with the help of which the criminalization of violations of sanitary and epidemiological rules in a pandemic is substantiated. The following methods were used in the work: hypothetical-deductive; dogmatic (formal legal analysis); description; comparative. The result of the work is the provision that in a pandemic, a necessary condition for ensuring national security seems appropriate to criminalize the spread of infectious diseases that pose a danger to others, which will make it possible to prosecute people who, deliberately or through negligence, have committed infecting a disease included in the category of dangerous to others. These recommendations are due to the noted problems in science and practice, including the results of comparative legal analysis. The novelty of the research lies in the substantiation of amending the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation by federal law. The amendments introduce stricter types of punishments, establish responsibility for the threat of a mass disease or people intoxication, and additions have been made in the form of a third part which provides for liability for violation of sanitary standards that inadvertently entailed the death of two or more people. The peculiarities of bringing to criminal responsibility for similar acts in certain foreign countries are also considered. There is a tendency to classify such crimes as terrorism-related.

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 HOLDING THE HIGHEST POSITION IN THE CRIMINAL HIERARCHY: CRIMINAL LAW ASPECT

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (3(65)) ◽  
pp. 108-120
Author(s):  
Валерий Анатольевич НОВИКОВ
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Russian Federation

The paper discusses the most pressing issues of criminal responsibility for holding the highest position in the criminal hierarchy. Liability for such an act was introduced by Federal Law No. 46-FZ of April 1, 2019 by supplementing the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with Article 210¹. In order to characterize the constituent elements of this crime, the legislator used the concepts of «criminal hierarchy» and «the highest position in the criminal hierarchy» that are not defined in the current normative legal acts, which makes it difficult to apply the considered criminal law norm. Some scientific publications note that the introduction of criminal liability for a person occupying the highest position in the criminal hierarchy is not in agreement with Article 8 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which, as the sole basis of responsibility, specifies a socially dangerous act containing all the elements of a crime and not the status of a person in the criminal world. Purpose: based on modern scientific concepts and judicial practice, a comparative study of national legislation with similar legal provisions of other states, to interpret the concepts in question and, on that basis, to define the range of socially dangerous acts, which may be incriminated against a person prosecuted under Article 210¹ of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Methods: methods of analysis and synthesis, generalization, comparative legal, formal logical, legal dogmatic and other methods of scientific knowledge are used. Results: on the basis of the study, the author concludes that not the status of a criminal leader itself, but the administrative activity due to the highest position in the criminal environment to streamline organized crime in freedom and in places of execution of punishments constitutes grounds for responsibility under Article 210¹ of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. There is also an indicative list of persons to be considered as perpetrators of offences under Part 4 of Article 210 and Article 210¹ of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL MISUSE: SOME DISCUSSION ISSUES

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-297
Author(s):  
G.A. Reshetnikova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Conceptual Changes ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Legal Consequence ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

At present, the topic of the stated research is relevant because the phenomenon of "criminal offense" can become a novelty of the modern criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. There are objective grounds for this - this is the reintroduction of the draft federal law "On Amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the introduction of the concept of a criminal offense" to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. For this reason, the study was not conditioned by the decision on the expediency (benefit) of introducing this concept into the criminal legislation. The author's attention was focused on the problems of criminal misconduct discussed in the scientific literature and their solution in the proposed bill. The author limited the study to only the most significant questions, first of all about the genus of the criminal offense and some other issues that follow from this and require consideration. The study showed that the authors' predictions that the introduction of a criminal offense (if the bill is adopted) will hardly entail any conceptual changes in criminal legislation are hardly justified. We believe that the coverage of the concept of “criminal offense” will not be so global, at least in this edition, since a criminal offense does not have its own generic differences, being in essence a guilty socially dangerous act prohibited by criminal law. The specific difference, which does not characterize the essence of a criminal offense, but indicates its possible (in view of the relativity of this concept) legal consequence, is the application to the offender of other measures of a criminal-legal nature applied when a person is released from criminal liability.

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 TRENDS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR CRIMES AGAINST THE SECURITY OF COMPUTER INFORMATION IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariya V. Talan ◽  
Ramil R. Gayfutdinov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Computer Technology ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
General Description ◽  
Historical Overview ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Modern Computer ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Modern Computer Technology

The development of modern computer technology and changes in federal legislation introduced in recent years, have caused the authors to identify the main trends in the development of criminal liability for crimes against the security of computer information: four areas that encourage the need to increase criminal liability for acts committed with computer technology. The paper also gives a historical overview devoted to the development of computer technologies and a general description of crimes in the field of computer information, taking into account changes introduced into criminal legislation by Federal Law No. 194-FZ dated July 26, 2017.

scholarly journals ON THE ISSUE OF IMPROVING THE CRIMINAL LAW NORMS ON LIABILITY FOR VIOLATION OF THE RULES OF DRIVING OR OPERATION OF CARS

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-106
Author(s):  
V.V. Kusakin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Traffic Safety ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Military Vehicles ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Observation Methods ◽  
Expert Assessments ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article is devoted to the analysis of Article 350 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for criminal liability for violation of the rules of driving or operating cars, the evolution of this article and the problems of sentencing under it are considered. One of the suggestions for improving this article is to change its sanction, which will eliminate the identified significant legal gap. The author conducted a comprehensive analysis of various aspects related to the criminal violation of traffic safety rules and the operation of military vehicles, and proposed the author's solution to the problematic aspects. The study used specific dialectical methods: comparative, hermeneutical, discursive, formal-legal, as well as some sociological methods: observation, methods of expert assessments and analysis. The provisions contained in the materials of the article can be used to improve the current criminal legislation and to develop explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in reviews of judicial practice.

scholarly journals Novels of the Criminal Code on responsibility for abusesin public procurement: background and problems of qualification

2018 ◽  
pp. 34-43
Author(s):  
A. Ya. Asnis
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Service Contract ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Contract Managers

The article deals with the criminological grounds and background of the adoption of the Federal law of April 23, 2018 № 99-FZ, which introduced criminal liability for abuse in the procurement of goods, works and services for state or municipal needs (Art. 2004 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and for bribery of employees of contract service, contract managers, members of the Commission on the implementation of the procurement of persons engaged in the acceptance of the delivered goods, performed works or rendered services, other authorized persons, representing interests of customer in the scope of the relevant procurement (Art. 2005 of the Criminal Code).The author formulates private rules of qualification of the corresponding crimes and differentiation of their structures from structures of adjacent crimes and administrative offenses. The necessity of changing the position of the legislator regarding generic and direct objects of these crimes, the adoption of a special resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to explain the practice of applying the relevant innovations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document