scholarly journals THE MECHANISM OF THE CRIMINAL LEGAL EVALUATION OF THE OBJECT OF CRIME PROVIDED BY ARTICLE 229.1 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (№5 2021) ◽  
pp. 142-145
Author(s):  
Д.Л. Никишин ◽  
Д.О. Орешкова
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Object Of Crime

The main problems of operational-search counteraction to bribery in Russia (based on the example of the practice materials in the Komi Republic)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-157
Author(s):  
Vladimir Danko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Practical Experience ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Komi Republic ◽  
Legal Problems ◽  
Subject And Object ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Object Of Crime

The work is carried out on the basis of special methods of knowledge, including historical-legal, logical, formal-legal. In the article, taking into account scientific sources and practical experience, the legal problems of operative-search counteraction to crimes provided for in Article 290-291.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are considered. The analysis of bribery is realized jointly, because there are identical characteristics in all its corpus delicties – the same subject and object of crime. The existing norms of criminal and criminal procedure laws in relation to bribery are analyzed. Principal operative-search measures used in documentation of bribery are determined. They are surveillance and operational experiment. Their difference is justified and successful use examples are examined. An actual statistics of the Komi Republic for 2015-2018 is given. The lack of normative securing for interaction between operational subdivisions and preliminary investigation body is ascertained. Based on personal practical experience some measures to counteract bribery are proposed.

scholarly journals Registries Supporting Self-Regulation in the Construction Industry as an Object of Crime

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 846-855
Author(s):  
Yuliya Leskova ◽  
Iurii Povarov
Keyword(s):  
Construction Industry ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Important Criterion ◽  
State Register ◽  
Functional Factors ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Object Of Crime

The authors follow the traditional «general-particular» structure and present a systemic study of the problem of considering registers that support self-regulation in construction to be objects of crime (primarily, from the viewpoint of subjective and functional factors). They analyze the concept of a «unified state register» used in criminal legislation, single out and critically assess the «literal» and the «meaning-based» interpretative approaches. Besides, they prove the necessity of the immediate inclusion of a specific register as an object of crime in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and (or) in a special law; they also claim that the legal value of this register should be viewed as the most important criterion during such regulation. The object of a detailed study (its subject and maintenance procedure, contents and legal role, transparency and public authenticity, and others) is every register that supports self-regulation in construction. The authors also draw attention to the fact that only the state register of self-regulatory organizations is subject to the rules of Art. 285.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. As for other — «conditionally public» — registers (register of self-regulatory organization’s members and national registers of specialists), the authors present arguments in favor of criminalizing most dangerous actions connected with the distortion of their data. They conclude that it is necessary to eliminate the ambiguity of interpreting the concept of a register as an object of crime. It is proven that the development of legislation in this area should be connected with the unification of terminology (and its agreement with the cate-gories of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and the inclusion of a specific register in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and (or) a special law as an object of crime.

CODIFICATION PROBLEMS OF NECESSARY DEFENSE AFFECTING ITS IMPLEMENTATION

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 155-163
Author(s):  
PETRUSHENKOV ALEXANDR ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Educational Institutions ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Teaching Staff ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Activities

Objectives. The goal of scholarly research is to develop proposals for amendments in criminal law General and Special part of Criminal code of the Russian Federation governing self-defense. The scientific article identifies legislative gaps and contradictions that hinder the effective implementation of the necessary defense and require prompt solutions. Methods. The article analyzes such concepts as “self-defense”, “public assault”, “excess of limits of necessary defense”, “violation of the conditions of lawfulness of necessary defense”, “surprise assault”, “rights defending or other persons, interests of the state”. The use of logical and comparative legal methods allowed us to develop proposals for making changes to the criminal law norms that establish the necessary defense. Conclusions. The article shows the conflicts and gaps legislative recognition of self-defense and, in this regard, the complexity of its implementation in the articles of the Special part of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation and practical application. Changes are proposed to the criminal law norms regulating the necessary defense, both in the General and in the Special part of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. Sense. The content of the scientific article can be used by the teaching staff of higher educational institutions when teaching the course “Criminal law”. The results of the work can be useful to persons who carry out legislative activities in the field of criminal law. The leitmotif of the article can be used in the preparation of dissertation research.

The use of mass media and information and telecommunication networks as an evidence of offences punished for illegal trafficking of items and materials

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (4) ◽  
pp. 80-88
Author(s):  
Andrey Antipov
Keyword(s):  
Mass Media ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Telecommunication Networks ◽  
Russian Society ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Illicit Trafficking ◽  
Special Control ◽  
Comprehensive Study

In This paper is dedicated to the examination of one of the most relevant and significant problems of Russian society – illegal trafficking of items and materials, carried out using mass media andinformation and telecommunication networks. Top officials of the state raise the issue of the importance of special control in this area by law enforcement agencies. Despite this attention, comprehensive study on the criminal-legal significance of the use of mass media and information and telecommunication networks in illegal trafficking has not been yet undertaken in the frame of criminal law of Russia. The author examines the concept of «illegal traffic», analyses the texts of the articles of the criminal code of the Russian Federation, which explicitly criminalize illicit trafficking. The author makes a conclusion about the reasonableness of making changes to certain articles of the criminal code of the Russian Federation, in regard to the part concerning establishing stricter penalties for committing socially dangerous acts using mass media and information and telecommunication networks.

Types of Criminal Acts

2021 ◽  
pp. 255-260
Author(s):  
Alexander V. Shesler ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Essential Feature ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Forced Labor ◽  
Drug Addicts ◽  
Federal Republic Of Germany ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
A Minor

The article examines criminal acts, with which the law associates certain criminal legal consequences. The aim of the article is to substantiate the identification of various criminal acts and show their specificity in comparison with crimes. The research is based on the domestic criminal legislation, materials of judicial practice and the legislation of the Federal Republic of Germany. The research methods are: the method of comparative law, which allowed comparing the provisions about criminal offenses in the 1960 Criminal Code of the RSFSR and in the 1996 Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Code of Germany; the method of document analysis, which made it possible to analyze the judicial practice and proposals of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the introduction of provisions on criminal offences in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; the formal-logical method that made it possible to analyze the content of the norms of the Criminal Code about criminal acts. The article concludes that, in addition to crimes, criminal acts should include: a criminal offence, which entails criminal liability in the form of replacing punishment with a more severe one (fine, compulsory labor, correctional labor, restriction of freedom as the main type of punishment, forced labor) or criminal liability in the form of the cancellation of any type of probation (suspended sentence, parole, deferred sentence, deferred sentence for drug addicts); a minor act; socially dangerous behavior of persons who are not subjects of a crime due to their minor age or insanity; innocent infliction of harm. The article shows the specificity of a misdemeanour, consisting in the fact that this act is not socially dangerous, does not contain signs of a crime, violates the liability of the convicted person to be subject to limitations arising from the court-appointed punishment or type of probation (suspended sentence, parole, deferred sentence, deferred sentence for drug addicts). It is substantiated that a minor act should be referred to circumstances that exclude the criminality of an act due to the absence of public danger, an essential feature of a crime. It is argued that acts, provided for by the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, committed in a state of insanity and entailing compulsory medical measures, should not be subject to criminal law. The article criticizes the judicial practice of a broad interpretation of the commission of a crime by a group of persons, according to which it is not only a co-execution, but also any execution of the objective side of the crime by several persons, of which only one can be the perpetrator. It is argued that causing harm due to the non-compliance of the psychophysiological qualities of a person with the requirements of an extreme situation does not apply to innocent infliction of harm.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document