scholarly journals Special Confiscation as a Measure of Criminal Law under Ukrainian Legislation

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 19
Author(s):  
Tetiana Nikolaienko ◽  
Viktoria Babanina ◽  
Tetiana Bohdanevych
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
European Standards ◽  
The Right ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article is devoted to the study of special confiscation as a measure of criminal law, other than punishment, which was introduced into the legislation of Ukraine on the way of transformation and reformation of the institution of confiscation of property. The study found that the emergence of special confiscation was dictated primarily by Ukraine's choice of European integration and the need to fulfil its obligations to bring domestic criminal law in line with European standards and international legal practice in combating crime. The article notes that today the confiscation of property remains one of the most controversial measures of criminal law in both domestic and foreign law. Traditionally, in the criminal law of Ukraine, this measure played the role of one of the types of punishment. However, at the present stage of development of criminal law, the legal regulation of forced confiscation of property has undergone significant changes. Currently, this is not only a form of criminal liability, but also different from the latter, another measure of criminal law, which manifests itself in three forms, namely as: 1) special confiscation of property of an individual; 2) confiscation of property of a legal entity; 3) special confiscation of property in respect of a legal entity. The article analyzes the provisions of the current criminal legislation of Ukraine on the regulation of special confiscation as another measure of criminal law and considers the main problematic aspects of this institution in the doctrine of criminal law of Ukraine. The correlation between general confiscation and special confiscation was revealed in the article. The conclusion was drawn that these two types of confiscations are different in legal nature. Confiscation of property is a type of additional punishment, and special confiscation of property is an independent type of other measures of a criminal law nature. The main difference between the investigated institutions is that their application seizes property of different nature, namely: the subject of confiscation of property is property that belongs to the convict on the right of ownership, and in the case of special confiscation, property related to the commission of a crime is subject to confiscation.

scholarly journals Draft Law on Criminal Misconduct given the German Experience of Legal Regulation

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 133-141
Author(s):  
Ya. M. Ploshkina ◽  
L. V. Mayorova
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
A Minor

The paper considers the second attempt made by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in terms of introducing the concept of criminal misconduct into the Russian criminal and criminal procedure legislation, examines the goals of its introduction. The authors conclude that the introduction of a criminal offense in the draft law No. 1112019-7 will entail the need to review some approaches in Russian law: the legal nature of the crime, the ratio of a criminal offense with a minor act and an administrative offense, the elements of a crime with administrative prejudice, the principle of justice. It seems possible to achieve procedural effectiveness, reduce the burden on judges and protect the rights of victims without introducing a criminal offense within the existing criminal and criminal procedural mechanisms related to exemption from criminal liability and expansion of non-rehabilitating grounds for termination of a criminal case or criminal prosecution. It seems possible to use the already established categorization of crimes in relation to crimes of small and medium gravity. In terms of expanding the grounds for terminating a criminal case or criminal prosecution, it is appropriate to use the experience of the German legislator, which provides for the possibility of terminating criminal prosecution on grounds of expediency when the accused fulfills various duties and regulations assigned to him. In German criminal procedure law, the termination of criminal prosecution on grounds of expediency when assigning duties or prescriptions to the accused is the right of the relevant officials and bodies, and not their obligation, since in fact it is an alternative to criminal prosecution. This will allow it to be terminated at a certain stage in the case when there are all legal grounds for criminal prosecution.

scholarly journals Protection of the labor rights, freedoms and social interests in the criminal law: experience of foreign countries

2020 ◽  
pp. 32-35
Author(s):  
Tetiana LYSKO
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Labor Rights ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Labour Rights ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
Social Interests ◽  
Labour Legislation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The analysis of certain points of the criminal legislation of the foreign countries, which provide protection of labour rights, freedoms and social interests, is made in the paper with the help of comparative legal analysis. Despite the quite wide legal regulation of labour relations in all countries in the world, the special criminal law protection of labour rights has remained a feature of "eastern" countries of the continental family of law mainly, the so-called post-socialist family of law. The analysis of criminal legislation of foreign countries regarding criminalization of the violation of labour rights of a person is conducted in the paper. Comparative-legal analysis allows defining general approaches to formation of labour rights of employees, including in the sphere of contractual relationship. The most similar and corresponding to the national criminal legislature are the Criminal codes of Spain an Polish Republic, which establish criminal liability for violation of not only labour legislation in force, but also conditions of individual labour acts (agreements, contracts etc.). It is stated in the text that the protection of labour rights in the modern legislation of foreign countries often has fragmentary, unsystematic nature. The violation of labour safety rules is most often regulated in the criminal legislation of foreign countries. Other types of violation of the labour legislation are regulated with arbitration under administrative or civil legislation. The drawbacks of the fatherland`s legislation are mentioned and the main positive improvements in this sphere after adoption of the Criminal Code of Ukraine in 2001 are emphasized. It was made the conclusion that the list of crimes against labour rights, which are provided by modern criminal legislations, is strong enough and has specific features. The list mentioned above could be the target for improving Ukrainian criminal legislation in certain cases. Therewith it is important to remember that formation of the legislation in the sphere of the protection of labour rights, freedoms and social interests directly depends on the development of the regulatory legislation. It is the clarity and certainty of blanket norms that will become the fundamental basis for the formation of effective criminal law protection of labour rights, freedoms and interests.

scholarly journals Difficult way of the institution of criminal liability for attacks on the honor and dignity of the person, or problems of targeting

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 48-56
Author(s):  
T. V. Klenova
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Historical Method ◽  
Democratic State ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
The Impact

The article is devoted to the institution of criminal liability for attacks on the honor and dignity of the individual. The article, using the historical method, examines the stages of development of this institution and the features of protecting the honor and dignity of the individual from the point of view of the values of a modern democratic state. The author analyses the impact of explicit and implicit criminal policy objectives on the ways to protect the honor and dignity of the individual. Particular attention is paid to the criminalization and decriminalization of libel and slander. The research is aimed at identifying the problems of targeting in changes in the institution of criminal liability for attacks on honor and dignity, when the relevant criminal law norms are replaced by administrative law norms. The author seeks to depoliticize the protection of the personal right to honor and dignity on the basis of the principle of equality of citizens before the law. The current Russian criminal legislation is mainly aimed at protecting the honor and dignity of persons in connection with their social accessories. Within the protective concept of criminal law, the author of the article justifies the conclusion that the right of anyone who has suffered from slander or insult to achieve the truth and state censure of the perpetrator is guaranteed. Such a view will also be interesting to researchers of the criminal process.

scholarly journals Category of guilt in criminal law: economic approach

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 98-105
Author(s):  
O. Bibik
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Economic Approach ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Potential Offender ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The subject of the paper is guilt as criminal legal category.The main aim of the paper is to confirm or disprove the hypothesis that there is a need for risk management in order to prevent crime.The description of methodology. The author uses economic approach and the theory of rational choice as well as the dialectic and formal-legal methodology.The main results and scope of their application. The greater the probability of socially dangerous consequences of actions, the greater the risk, the greater the degree of guilt of the subject and the degree of danger of the crime. In criminalization the risks should be optimally distributed between the state (installs criminal prohibitions) and the citizens (complying with those prohibitions), as well as between the potential offender and the victim. It is necessary to quantify the risk of socially dangerous consequences (for example, as a percentage) for each form of guilt. This will make it possible to streamline and develop forms of guilt, to correlate specific types of guilt with specific crimes in terms of the risks that the crime carries. New forms of guilt, in particular criminal ignorance, need to be introduced. Unlike negligence, which is difficult to control, ignorance, as well as competence, can be fully controlled. It is necessary to take into account the guilt of the victim, who by his behavior contributed to the crime. If the victim has not taken all precautions ( the more provoked the offender) - he must share the overall result, bear the risk of socially dangerous consequences. If there is a violation of the rules of conduct by the offender and the victim, the court should have the right to substantially mitigate the punishment or to refuse to apply it at all, taking into account the nature and extent of the violations committed by each party. For example, with regard to crimes of minor gravity when the victim provoking a crime, failure to take precautions should provide for mandatory exemption from criminal liability with compensation for harm in civil law. Premeditated intent seriously complicates the disclosure of crimes. This intent should be seen as a basis for more severe sanctions. The results of research may be used as the basis of correction of the criminal legislation.It is concluded that any form of guilt in any legal system is based on an assessment of the risks of negative consequences.

scholarly journals Violating the Confidentiality of Adoption: Problems of Implementing a Complex Law Mechanism in the Russian Federation

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 817-825
Author(s):  
Svetlana Kornakova ◽  
Elena Chigrina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Democratic State ◽  
Priority Task ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

The priority task of any democratic state is safeguarding the interests of children, including the right of every child to live in a family. Adoption of orphans or children deprived of parental care is becoming more and more common in present-day Russia, which makes the issue of legal regulation highly relevant. The article examines the problems of implementing a complex legal mechanism that regulates the protection of the confidentiality of adoption and imposes criminal liability for violating it. It should be acknowledged that there are diverse approaches to the problem of criminal law protection of the confidentiality of adoption. The authors analyze the views of different scholars on this problem. They present a critical analysis of the viewpoint that the norm imposing liability for such a violation should be abolished and prove the social importance of preserving the confidentiality. The authors also discuss the problem areas of criminal law characteristics of crimes connected with violating the confidentiality of adoption and conduct a comprehensive research of this issue. The analysis of current legislation shows that it includes a sufficient number of norms safeguarding the confidentiality of adoption. At the same time, this legal institute includes some specific norms that need improvement, require editing or amending, which, according to the authors, stops them from performing their preventive functions. The article contains concrete recommendations on improving current Russian legislation in this sphere, in particular, on improving the clauses of Art. 155 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which establishes criminal liability in those cases where the confidentiality of adoption is violated. Besides, the authors examine the controversial issue of limiting the confidentiality of adoption because they believe that it is not lawful to deny a person who has reached majority the right guaranteed by the Constitution of the RF to learn information concerning him/herself, in this case, the right to know who their parents are. They suggest amending Art. 139 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, which will make it possible to fully guarantee the constitutional rights of citizens.

scholarly journals Circumstances excluding the criminal act, in the criminal law of Russia and Vietnam

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-240
Author(s):  
Sergey Milyukov ◽  
Andrei Nikulenko
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Socialist Republic ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Law Enforcement Officials ◽  
The Right ◽  
Criminal Legislation

the article describes the circumstances excluding criminality of the act in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation in comparison with the corresponding Chapter of the criminal law of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. A comparative analysis of the content of the norms regulating lawful harm is made. A number of issues related to the use of weapons by law enforcement officials in Russia and Vietnam were raised. Using the comparative method, the authors try to investigate the relevant norms, identify the advantages and disadvantages of legal regulation of circumstances that exclude the criminality of an act. note that the authors are in the position of expanding the range of circumstances that exclude the criminality of the act, which are subject to normative consolidation in the criminal legislation. Moreover, in view of the ambiguous and often inconsistent practice of applying criminal legislation in this area, it is proposed that in the further reconstruction of the relevant norms of Chapter 8 of the criminal code, use a casual way of presentation to create the most understandable for citizens wording of norms that allow lawfully cause harm to public relations protected by criminal law. Otherwise, the very fact of their existence in criminal legislation is called into question because of the inability and unwillingness of citizens to use the right granted by law. Possible ways of resolving contradictions in the criminal legislation of Russia and Vietnam are suggested.

On the Question of the Theoretical Foundations of Regulating Justifiable Defense in Criminal Legislation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.V. Parhomenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legislative Regulation ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Moment ◽  
The Right ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Theoretical Foundations

The article considers the problem of creating effective criminal legal guarantees for the natural human rights realization in terms of legal regulation of such a circumstance that precludes the criminality of an act, as a necessary defense. The need for legislative regulation of the justifiable defense institution is proved by its social and legal purpose, proceeding from the idea of natural law. To make balanced legal decisions on the justifiable defense regulation in criminal law, it is necessary to identify the shortcomings of the previous theoretical and legal approaches. Basing on the analysis of the federal legislation provisions and the criminal law doctrine, the author proposes a model of legislative regulation of the studied norm. At the same time, it is argued that the subject of defense is the main addressee of the normative provisions on the justifiable necessary defense, it is he who should be able to obtain full information that affects the assessment of the legitimacy of his behavior: from the law and until the moment of implementation of the act of defense, and not at the stage of investigation on the fact of its illegality. Following the letter and spirit of the Russian Constitution, the legislator, who has defined the range of acts prohibited by the Criminal Code, must determine the ways of exercising the right to defense. The solution to this problem must have a differentiated approach, taking into account the value of the protected good and the typical nature of the situation in which this good is threatened with harm.

scholarly journals Foreign experience in legal regulation of extrajudicial forms of protection of an individual’s rights and freedoms, excluding the criminality of the act

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 144-154
Author(s):  
Alexander М. Smirnov ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
State Response ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
Scientific Attention ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Given

The article describes the provisions of the sources of criminal law of some foreign countries regarding the regulation of extrajudicial forms of protection of an individual’s rights and freedoms, excluding the criminality of the act. The author refers to these forms as a necessary defense, causing harm to the person who committed the crime, and extreme necessity. The article discusses the possibility of implementing the provisions of these sources in Russian criminal law to improve the state response to the implementation of these forms. The author comes to the conclusion that the most positive and constructive features of legal regulation in foreign countries, extrajudicial forms of protection of an individual’s rights and freedoms while excluding the criminality of the act, deserve scientific attention and consideration of their implementation in domestic criminal law and legal practice. The main features consist of the following: the conditions for the onset of the right to necessary defense, extreme need and infliction of harm during the detention of a person who has committed a crime, and the grounds for exceeding it; taking into account the situation when determining the legitimacy of the given circumstances; allocation of privileged conditions under which a person is either exempted from criminal liability or not exempted from it, but can count on mitigation of punishment; criminal prosecution for actions if absolutely necessary only if they have resulted in more harm than the harm prevented; regulation of legal and factual error with the necessary defense and extreme necessity; legal regulation of the conditions for the use of weapons in the implementation of these forms; holding accountable those who provoked the necessary defense; the emergence of the right to necessary defense of the person whose rights are being encroached upon.

scholarly journals On the issue of criminal liability for negligent joint infliction of criminal - illegal consequences

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (16) ◽  
pp. 43-53
Author(s):  
Maryna Yevhenivna Grigoryeva
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Theoretical Issues ◽  
Legal Consequences ◽  
Current Stage

The article is devoted to the consideration of problematic issues related to criminal liability for negligent joint infliction of criminal consequences. Issues related to the negligent joint infliction of criminal consequences do not lose their relevance at the current stage of development of Ukrainian criminal law. The article defines the concept of negligent joint infliction of criminal consequences and provides a thorough description of its mandatory features. It is separately stated that correctly determining the basis of criminal liability of persons who jointly caused negligent damage, qualifying their actions and establishing rules for sentencing them is an important task for law enforcement and therefore it requires detailed justification and elaboration of general theoretical issues. legal consequences and the development of features of such a definition. It is proved that negligent joint infliction of criminally illegal consequences is the commission by two or more subjects of a certain criminal offense, illegal, objectively interconnected and mutually conditioned act, which is part of the objective side of a criminal offense that has a negligent form of guilt, and creates a single, common to all subjects socially dangerous result provided by criminal law. It is established that in case of negligent joint infliction of criminally - illegal consequences there is an objective interdependence and interaction of actions (actions or inactions) of such subjects who took part in achievement of those socially dangerous consequences which are provided by the criminal legislation.

Legal nature of compulsory medical measures: criminal legal and criminal executive aspects

2019 ◽  
pp. 18-29
Author(s):  
Александра Викторовна Васеловская
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Main Task ◽  
Compulsory Treatment ◽  
Security Measures ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
Legal Nature

Предметом рассмотрения в настоящей статье стали общественные отношения, возникающие в связи с применением предусмотренных уголовным законом принудительных мер медицинского характера. Основной задачей автора в рамках заявленного предмета стало выявление правовой природы принудительных мер медицинского характера. В процессе работы над статьей были использованы как общенаучные (анализ, синтез), так и частнонаучные методы исследования (формально-юридический, логико-языковой). Посредством применения указанных методов был проведен комплексный анализ представленных на современном этапе развития науки уголовного права подходов к определению правовой природы принудительных мер медицинского характера. Исследование показало, что на сегодняшний день в юридической науке сформировалось несколько позиций относительно определения правовой природы принудительного лечения (медико-юридические меры, меры безопасности, один из видов «иных мер уголовно-правового характера»). По мнению автора, представленные подходы не позволяют в полной мере уяснить суть принудительных мер медицинского характера и определить их место среди иных мер, предусмотренных Уголовным кодексом РФ. В статье обосновывается позиция, согласно которой принудительные меры медицинского характера не однородны по своей правовой природе. Принудительное лечение, применяемое в качестве самостоятельной меры в отношении невменяемых, не является уголовной ответственностью и не может выступать «иной мерой уголовно-правового характера», устанавливаемой за совершение преступления. В свою очередь, принудительные меры медицинского характера, назначаемые ограничено вменяемым лицам наряду с наказанием, отнесены к уголовной ответственности и определены автором в качестве некарательной формы ее реализации. С учетом представленных выводов в статье обосновывается позиция, согласно которой выявление правовой природы принудительных мер медицинского характера позволяет выработать механизм разграничения между собой уголовно-исполнительных и административных аспектов реализации принудительного лечения. The subject of this article is the public relations arising in connection with the application of compulsory medical measures. The main task of the author was to identify the legal nature of compulsory medical measures. In the process of work on the article there were used both general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis) and private scientific methods (formal-legal, logical-language methods). Using these methods, the author conducted a comprehensive analysis of the approaches presented at the present stage of development of the science of criminal law to determine the legal nature of compulsory medical measures. The study showed that today the legal science has formed several positions to determine the legal nature of compulsory treatment (medical and legal measures, security measures, one of the types of "other measures of criminal law nature"). According to the author, the presented approaches do not allow to understand the essence of compulsory medical measures and to determine their place among other measures established by the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. The article substantiates the position according to which compulsory medical measures are not uniform in their legal nature. Compulsory treatment, used as an independent measure in relation to the insane, is not a criminal liability and cannot be “other measure of criminal law nature”, established for the commission of a crime. In turn, compulsory medical measures, imposed on limited sane persons along with punishment, are criminalized and identified by the author as a non-punitive form of its implementation. The article substantiates the position according to which the identification of the legal nature of compulsory medical measures allows to develop a mechanism for distinguishing between criminal-executive and administrative aspects of the implementation of compulsory treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document