scholarly journals Legal liability in the mechanism of countering current threats to national security: a novel coronavirus infection

2021 ◽  
pp. 25-35
Author(s):  
Dmitriy Anatol'evich Lipinsky ◽  
Nikolai Vladimirovich Makareiko ◽  
Ivan Evgen'evich Popov
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
National Security ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Liability ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Coronavirus Infection ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

  The object of this research is the legal liability relations aimed at countering current threat to national security in form of coronavirus infection. The authors review the amendments introduced to the legislation on administrative offenses and criminal legislation, which establish liability in the area of ensuring sanitary and epidemiological wellbeing of the population. Emphasis is placed on the fact that it resulted in a number of legal conflicts that have not been overcome through the ruling of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and require legislative resolution. The article examines the practice of implementation of administrative enforcement measures in countering coronavirus infection, as well as the resulting competition for administrative, preventive, procedural, liability and protection measures. It is indicated that the high dynamics of threats to national security justifies the need for the development and legislative consolidation of the effective mechanism that would ensure national security. In this mechanism, a significant role is played by legal liability capacity, primarily such public law types as administrative and criminal liability. The research reveals that the rapid response of the legislator to the threat to national security in form of a novel coronavirus infection via reforming the institutions of administrative and criminal liability generated certain conflicts. They have not been resolved through the ruling of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and require additional legislative attention. The authors substantiate that by acknowledging the role and importance of administrative and criminal liability within the mechanism of ensuring national security, it should be taken into account that they are means of post-unlawful response of the government. Therefore, it is necessary to enhance the measures aimed at preventing and countering threats to national security, including those caused by coronavirus pandemic.  

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.

scholarly journals On the Issues of the Application of Part 6 of Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 79-84
Author(s):  
N. N. Korotkikh
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyzes some of the controversial, in the opinion of the author, recommendations of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 10 of 15.05.2018 «On the practice of the courts applying the provisions of paragraph 6 Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation». Lowering the category of crime always requires clear criteria by which the actions of the defendant could be qualified with a change in the gravity of the crime. Based on examples from judicial practice, the thesis is substantiated that “taking into account the factual circumstances of the case” and “the degree of its public danger” are evaluative e criteria and do not always allow to decide the validity of the application of part 6 article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The discrepancy between some of the recommendations contained in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is shown. It is concluded that it is impossible to exempt a person from criminal liability on the grounds specified in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Modern Problems of Establishing and Implementing Criminal Liability for Illegal Migration Crimes

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 341-351
Author(s):  
Vladimir Taranenko ◽  
Stanislav Kharitonov ◽  
Maria Reshnyak ◽  
Sergey Borisov
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Regulatory Compliance ◽  
Place Of Residence ◽  
Illegal Migration ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

This study aims to identify and consider modern problems in establishing and implementing criminal liability for crimes pertaining to illegal migration, such as illegal crossing of the Russian Federation State Border, organizing illegal migration, fictitious registration of citizens of the Russian Federation at a place of stay or place of residence in residential premises in the Russian Federation, fictitious migration registration of foreign citizens or stateless persons at a place of residence in residential premises in the Russian Federation, as well as fictitious registration of foreign citizens or stateless persons at a place of stay in the Russian Federation. On this basis, proposals to improve legislative and regulatory compliance practices in this area have been formulated. The object of research is social interaction associated with the establishment and application of criminal law provisions on accountability for the crimes. The subject of research is a complex of legislative, doctrinal and practical issues, the study of which contributes to the development of criminal law theory in the area of liability for illegal migration crimes. This article considers the clarifications issued by the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation cited in resolution No. 18 “On Judicial Practice in Cases on Illegal Crossing of the State Border of the Russian Federation and on Crimes Pertaining to Illegal Migration” of July 9, 2020, relevant court practice materials and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Judicial Department’s statistical data. Research methodology is based on general and specific scientific methods, including comparative legal and concrete-sociological ones. As a result of the comprehensive analysis of criminal justice vulnerabilities in response to crimes pertaining to illegal migration, proposals for further development of the criminal legislation on the fields of criminal liability for such crimes and practices associated with its application have been formulated. For example, this article reveals the content of actions that form the objective aspect of crimes pertaining to illegal migration, defines the legal and factual aspects of committed offences, and provides recommendations concerning their qualification, including differentiation between them and their separation from related crimes and similar administrative offenses.

scholarly journals Criminal Misconduct: An Objective Need or a Declared Necessity?

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 142-154
Author(s):  
N. Yu. Skripchenko ◽  
S. V. Anoshchenkova
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The actively defended idea of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the inclusion of an offencse  of criminal misconduct in the criminal legislation was reflected in the revised draft federal law submitted to the  Parliament on October 13, 2020. The purpose of the study is to determine the key changes in the content of the  institutions of criminal misconduct and other measures of a criminal law nature proposed for consolidation in the  Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, to assess the objective need of the reforms initiated by the Supreme  Court of the Russian Federation. The methodological basis is a set of methods of scientific knowledge. General  scientific (analysis and synthesis, dialectics) and specific scientific research methods (system structural, formal legal)  were used. A comparative analysis of draft laws allows us to classify the substantive content of acts constituting a  criminal misconduct as key changes and the modification of other measures of a criminal legal nature. The authors  critically assess the idea underlying the classification of acts as criminal misconduct. By laying in the criteria for  the isolation of acts that are minimal in terms of the degree of danger, not legally significant elements of corpus  delicti, but the types and amount of punishments, the lack of criminal experience, the interests of the business  community, the developers of the draft law violate the system of law, since the proposed approach excludes the  assessment of the public danger of the act based on the significance of the protected by the criminal the law of  public relations. The meaning of the differentiation of criminal liability declared by the initiator of the reforms is  lost with the proposed duplication of other measures applied both to persons who have committed a criminal  misconduct and to those guilty of committing crimes of small or medium gravity, and the proposed conditional  nature of other measures levels the idea of liberalizing the criminal law. The paper focuses on the provisions of  the project that require revision and additional comprehension.

scholarly journals Problems of Applying Special Grounds for Exemption from Criminal Liability for Kidnapping

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatiana Bersh ◽  
Anna Khristyuk
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Practical Interest ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Mere Presence ◽  
The Russian Federation

Despite the positive attitude towards the presence of compromise norms in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, containing the possibility of exemption from criminal liability for a committed crime, their mere presence seems insufficient. It is important to introduce a mechanism for the functioning of the norms, which will describe in detail all the stages necessary for their application. The article discusses controversial issues of insufficient legislative regulation of exemption from criminal liability on the basis of the application of a note to Art. 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The opinions of scientists concerning the application of special grounds for exemption from criminal liability for kidnapping are generalized, the position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation regarding the understanding of the term “voluntary release of the kidnapped” is considered. A number of controversial issues that have not been taken into account by the legislator, which require mandatory regulation, are cited. The article examines the existing judicial practice of applying the note to Art. 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. A lack of uniformity in the law enforcement activities of the judiciary was revealed. Supplements are proposed to the new resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 24, 2019 No. 58 to increase the effectiveness of the application of the considered grounds for exemption from criminal liability. As a result, a proposal was put forward that is aimed at improving the note to Art. 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The issues raised in the article are of scientific and practical interest.

Accounting of public danger of crime in the sphere of illicit trafficking in drugs and psychotropic substances at assignment of punishment

2019 ◽  
pp. 30-40
Author(s):  
Евгения Сергеевна Витовская
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Psychotropic Substances ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Protection ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Illicit Trafficking

Статья посвящена проблеме учета общественной опасности преступления в сфере незаконного оборота наркотических средств и психотропных веществ при назначении наказания. Рассмотрены различные позиции ученых по вопросу критериев, определяющих общественную опасность совершенного преступления. Отмечается, что происходит формирование нового взгляда на содержание общественной опасности преступного деяния. Автор придерживается позиции, которая включает в содержание общественной опасности преступного деяния вредоносность и прецедентность, показателями такой опасности выступают ее характер и степень. Вредоносность обусловлена прежде всего уровнем наркотизации населения, позволяющим оценить совокупность наступивших негативных последствий приспособительного и преобразовательного свойства наркопреступности. Характеризуя прецедентность, следует иметь в виду оценку наркоситуации, которая проявляется в возможности ее повторяемости и несет свойства человеческой практики. Специфика общественной опасности преступления в сфере незаконного оборота наркотических средств и психотропных веществ определена ее характером и степенью. Обращается особое внимание на то, что характер общественной опасности определен через объект уголовно-правовой охраны. Общественные отношения, охраняющие здоровье населения, определяют социальную сущность преступления в сфере незаконного оборота наркотических средств и психотропных веществ, выступают основанием уголовной ответственности, служат основанием для классификации преступлений. Приводятся статистические показатели различных структур, характеризующие здоровье населения и ситуацию в сфере незаконного наркооборота. Обращается внимание на то, что содержание общественной опасности должно быть закреплено не в постановлении Пленума Верховного суда РФ, а на законодательном уровне, что позволит совершенствовать уголовное законодательство и практику его применения. The article is devoted to a problem of accounting of public danger of crime in the sphere of illicit trafficking in drugs and psychotropic substances at assignment of punishment. The author considers various positions of scientists on the criteria defining public danger of the committed crime. It is noted that there is a formation of a new view on the content of public danger of criminal action. The author adheres to a position which includes injuriousness and a pretsedentnost in the content of public danger of criminal action, its character and degree act as indicators of such danger. The injuriousness is caused first of all by the population narcotization level allowing to estimate set of the come negative consequences of adaptive and converting property of narcocrime. Characterizing a pretsedentnost, it must be kept in mind assessment of a drug abuse situation which is shown in a possibility of its repeatability and bears properties of human practice. The specifics of public danger of crimes in the sphere of illicit trafficking in drugs and psychotropic substances are defined by its character and degree. Special attention that the nature of public danger is defined through object of criminal protection is paid. The public relations protecting health of the population define social essence of crimes in the sphere of illicit trafficking in drugs and psychotropic substances, act as the basis of criminal liability, form the basis for classification of crimes. The statistics of various structures characterizing health of the population and a situation in the sphere of an illegal narcoturn are given. The author pays attention that the content of public danger has to be enshrined not in the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, and at the legislative level that will allow to improve the criminal legislation and practice of its application.danger of crimes in the sphere of illicit trafficking in drugs and psychotropic substances at assignment of punishment. The author considers various positions of scientists on the criteria defining the nature of public danger of the committed crime. It is noted that there is a formation of a new view on the content of nature of public danger of criminal action. Special attention that in the existing resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation «About practice of appointment of criminal penalty as courts of the Russian Federation» the nature of public danger is defined through object of criminal protection is paid. The public relations protecting health of the population define social essence of crimes in the sphere of illicit trafficking in drugs and psychotropic substances, act as the basis of criminal liability, form the basis for classification of crimes. The statistics of various structures characterizing health of the population and a situation in the sphere of an illegal narcoturn are given. The author pays attention that the content of nature of public danger has to be enshrined not in the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, and at the legislative level that will allow to improve the criminal legislation and practice of its application.

scholarly journals Features of informatization of the criminal process in the context of the pandemic: New challenges

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 544-554
Author(s):  
Evgenii V. Smakhtin ◽  
◽  
Irina G. Smirnova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Digital Data ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Coronavirus Infection ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyses the features of the application of the current criminal procedural legislation in practice in the context of the new coronavirus infection (COVID-19) after recognizing it as a disease that poses a danger to others, the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of April 08, 2020 and Reviews on certain issues of judicial practice related to the application of legislation and measures to counter the spread of the new coronavirus infection in the Russian Federation of April 21, 2020 and April 30, 2020. However, the difficulties that have arisen in law enforcement practice, also assessed in the article, indicate that criminal procedural legislation will be adjusted in the near future since the number of Decisions of the Presidium and the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation are not sufficient to eliminate ambiguities and contradictions in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. In particular, the article reflects such key problems as the emerging system of procedural decisions at the pre-trial and trial stages in a pandemic, the possibility of considering not only criminal cases but also case materials using videoconferencing systems as well as the prevailing and optimal understanding by law enforcement agencies of the category “urgency” of such consideration. The authors pay special attention to the absence in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation of the concepts introduced by paragraph “m” Art. 7 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation such as “information technologies” and “digital data turnover”. The results of the study make it possible to formulate proposals for improving criminal procedural regulation in terms of the described problems.

Resolution No. 48 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 26, 2019, “On the Practice of the Courts’ Application of Legislation on Liability for Tax Crimes”: An Analysis of the Main Novels

2021 ◽  
pp. 18-24
Author(s):  
Igor O. Tkachev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Current Version ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article provides a critical analysis of a number of provisions of the Resolution No. 48 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 26, 2019, “On the practice of the courts’ application of legislation on liability for tax crimes”. The author notes that the current version of the decree allows considering tax evasion as a formal crime. Thus, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation laid down the preconditions for classifying tax evasion as a continuing crime, which would significantly reduce the number of criminal cases terminated due to the expiration of the statute of limitations for criminal liability. The author also draws attention to the refusal of the Supreme Court to define the category “concealment of funds or other property” for the purposes of applying Art. 199.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It is noted that such a refusal may lead to a broader interpretation by the courts of this criminal law norm.

Conciliatory Justice in Modern Russia

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 19
Author(s):  
Katerina DREMOVA
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Business Environment ◽  
Synthesis Methods ◽  
Universal Method ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government

The research studies conciliatory justice in modern Russia. Its formation and peculiarities in the institution of alternative ways of resolving legal conflict on the example of mediation are considered. Various views regarding the mediation definition are analyzed, and the author's vision of this category concept is given. The origins of mediation history abroad and in Russia are studied. The essence and peculiarities of mediation application as an alternative method of economic disputes settlement are characterized. The benefits of using conciliatory procedures in a business environment are revealed. The main aspects of the procedural legislation reform initiated by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation concerning the change in the legal regulation of conciliatory procedures application in the settlement of legal conflicts are outlined. It is noted that the beginning of procedural reform in Russia with regard to dispute settlement through conciliatory procedures was triggered by the resolution of the plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation ‘On submission to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of Russian Federation a federal law draft ‘On amendments to a number of legislative acts of the Russian Federation in connection with conciliatory procedure improvements’ adopted on 18 January 2018 and the resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation. Statistics on the ratio of dismissals agreed, dispute settlement through the mediation procedure, as well as plaintiff-triggered dismissals are provided. Methodology: the study is carried out on the basis of the universal method on scientific study of the social development principles –dialectical materialism provisions, as well as general and specific scientific methods: dogmatic, regulatory legal, legal comparative, fragmented historical and legal, case studies (statistical data and judicial statistics analysis), logical (hypotheses, analogy, modeling, analysis and synthesis methods), philosophic (axiological, derivation methods on the basis of priori and axiomatic provisions), generalization and abstraction methods. Conclusions: To date, entrepreneurs are increasingly using conciliatory procedures when settling disputes. This way of dispute settlement becomes very convenient, businessmen are not in the need to spend their time on litigation, often protracted, but can settle issues more quickly and effectively. Today, conciliatory justice in the Russian Federation is going through the stage of formation and development and in the future is to become a demanded institution of judicial law.

The Nature of the Institution of Confiscation of Property and its Application

2021 ◽  
pp. 93-104
Author(s):  
Vladimir K. Andrianov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Difficult Problem ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

Legislative reform in respect of forfeiture, having returned it in 2006 in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, but in an altered status – other measures of a criminal-legal nature – after its exclusion in 2003 as a form of punishment, made a confiscation as one of the most difficult problem and controversial in the doctrine of criminal law. This is due not only to the attribution of confiscation of property to the category of other measures of a criminal-legal nature as in itself still insufficiently defined and highly controversial, but also by the inter-sectoral nature of the problem of confiscation, regulated not only by the norms of criminal, but also by criminal procedural legislation, as well as interconnected with measures of civil law – the return of property to the rightful owner, and compensation for any damage. Understanding the complexity of the legal nature of the confiscation of property lead to quite frequent changes in the Chapter 151 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (19 of federal laws on amendments), as well as cause a lot of questions of their use in practical lawyers. This is evidenced by the resolution adopted by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of June 14, 2018 No. 17 «On some issues related to the use of confiscation of property in criminal proceedings». The target of this article is to study the confiscation of property as another measure of a criminal-legal nature by resolving theoretical and applied issues of the application of Chapter 151 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. An important role in the research process was played by work on the problems of other measures of a criminal-legal nature, confiscation of property, as well as published court practice. The methodological basis of the study were the principles of the dialectical method of cognition, as well as general scientific and private scientific methods (sociological, system-structural and formal-logical) methods. In the proposed publication, based on the analysis of special scientific literature and legal positions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, such complex issues as the legal nature of confiscation in terms of its generic and specific characteristics, correlation with criminal punishment and criminal liability are considered, and specific recommendations are given on topical issues of application of the Chapter 151 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document