scholarly journals Special Subject of Crime as an Object of Criminological Determination

Author(s):  
Andrey Makarov ◽  
Aleksandr Protasevich ◽  
Aleksandra Zhukova

Currently, many authors pay attention to the criminological description of the object of their research. This approach is absolutely justified. It is better to examine the institutes of criminal law in correlation with the interdisciplinary spheres of knowledge. The article presents an analysis of adjacent but not equal legal categories of the subject of crime and the personality of a criminal. This research is relevant today because crimes committed by persons with characteristics of a special subject in general, and with the use of their official position in particular, have a higher degree of public danger. It is connected with a wide area of official interests of public officers. Their criminal offences destabilize the normal work of governmental bodies. Corruption, abuse of office, general crimes committed for personal gain act as negative social and legal phenomena that widen the range of persons in criminal statistics referring to special subject. A heightened degree of public danger in the actions of public officers is a factor that influences current criminal legislation. An example is the abuse of public office as a circumstance that aggravates criminal liability. The contents of the norms in the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation could be named a legislative reaction of the authorities to the growing level of misuse of office. The current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation mentions the misuse of office with mercenary motives or for personal gain, acting as an aggravating circumstance for the main crime, over 60 times. Taking into account that the contemporary condition and scale of the self-determination of crime according to the characteristic of a special subject are developing interconnected systemic causes and conditions, it is possible to discuss the necessity of criminological prevention of crimes with a special subject — a criminogenic person who has specific functions (as a rule, a representative of authorities).

10.12737/5505 ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (9) ◽  
pp. 93-102
Author(s):  
Ольга Семыкина ◽  
Olga Semykina

The article provides a comparative analysis of the legal measures to combat discrimination in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Moldova. Such a problem as regulation in the criminal law of antidiscrimination is active a large scale. In the Russian criminal legislation important legal guarantee the constitutional principle of equal rights and antidiscrimination is article 136 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Violation of equality of rights and freedoms of man and citizen). Meantime, as illustration the analysis of international antidiscrimination standards and trends to expand of these prescriptions in the legislation of CIS states, this criminal norm is far from perfect. The liability for discrimination can not be treated in direction with the commission of using official position. In our view, preventive legal prohibition in the article 136 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation will be significantly enhanced if to ask: 1) the return of criminal liability for discrimination of any individuals; 2) criminalization new aggravating circumstances.


Author(s):  
V.I. Tikhonov

The Institute of mitigating and aggravating circumstances is presented not only in the norms of the General part of the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. The application of these circumstances in the construction of individual elements of a crime allows the legislator to differentiate the orientation of the criminal law influence in relation to a specific crime element or in qualifying the fact of life reality. In law enforcement practice, proving the subjective side of a crime often causes significant problems. At the same time, motivation and achievement of a specific goal of committing a crime can have both a mitigating and an aggravating effect. The subjective side has a significant impact not only on the design of the offenses of the Special Part of the Criminal Law, but also on the process of sentencing through legal regulation of circumstances mitigating or aggravating criminal punishment. In this regard, both general and mandatory features of the subject of the crime also affect the procedure for establishing guilt and determining punishment in accordance with the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Of scientific interest is the study of the influence of the process of legal regulation of mitigating and aggravating circumstances in terms of the impact on this process of subjective signs of criminal behavior.


2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-106
Author(s):  
V.V. Kusakin ◽  

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-165
Author(s):  
T. Yu. Popova

Article is devoted to search of author's determination of the criminal procedure status of the head of investigative body. Determination of the status is given in it is general legal sense, types of legal statuses, such as the general (constitutional), special (patrimonial), individual, the status of the foreigner and branch legal statuses are allocated. The discussion about a ratio of legal status and a legal status on the basis of which conclusions the author has divided concepts of legal and procedural status per se is given. Are carried to number of elements of legal status of the head of investigative body: the rights and duties provided by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and specified departmental standard legal by acts of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, SK of Russia and FSB of Russia; the criminal liability regulated by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the disciplinary responsibility provided by subordinate regulations for non-execution or inadequate execution of the procedural powers; procedural and administrative accountability of activity of the head of investigative body to the head of higher investigative body. Elements of the criminal procedure status of the designated participant of criminal trial, according to the author, are the rights and duties provided by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; the accountability of activity of the head of investigative body to the head of higher investigative body regulated by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. The author has also mentioned a discussion about existence of criminal procedure responsibility of participants of criminal legal proceedings. In article the maintenance of each of elements of the status and justification of reference of each of them to this or that type of the status is opened. Proceeding from the considered structure, the concept of the criminal procedure status of the head of investigative body as the position of the head of the investigative body including his procedural laws, duties and accountability to the head of higher investigative body regulated only by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation is formulated.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 324-330
Author(s):  
V.V. Popov ◽  
◽  
S.M. Smolev ◽  

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vadim Zamaraev

The article considers and analyzes some gaps in the legislative interpretation of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It examines the objective aspect of the crime, and also presents the problems of prosecuting for mediation in bribery according to the specifics of the qualification of this socially dangerous act. The author substantiates the grounds and limits of criminal liability for mediation in bribery, taking into account the act of committing various forms of this crime. On the basis of a comprehensive analysis of criminal legislation and scientific works of not only Russian scientists, but also foreign experts in the field of criminal law, the main prospects for the development and solution of the above mentioned problematic issues related to gaps in the legislative interpretation of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are proposed. Special attention is also paid to certain issues of qualification of the investigated act, which directly depend on the amount of the bribe. As a result of the study, it is recommended to introduce some changes and additions to Parts 1 and 5 of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (12-3) ◽  
pp. 230-234
Author(s):  
Natalia Martynenko ◽  
Anatoly Maydykov

The article analyzes the ideas of the Russian scientist in the field of criminal law Ivan Yakovlevich Foinitsky (1847-1913) on the establishment of criminal liability for kidnapping. The influence of I.Y. Foinitsky's ideas on the modern concept of criminal law protection of a person from abduction is shown. It is concluded that the norm on responsibility for the abduction of a person existing in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, its location in the structure of the norms of the Special Part, in many respects includes the provisions laid down by I.Y Foinitsky.


Author(s):  
Nikolai Alekseyevich Ognerubov

We consider various approaches to understanding and classifying such phenomenon as “iatrogenesis”. Taking into account the specifics of the stated theme, we highlight informational and mental manifestations of iatrogenesis, we identify approaches where these types differ, as well as approaches where they are identical. Due to this, we analyze informational and mental iatrogenesis from the juridical science point of view. We define the reasons for the criminal liability of a medical worker for “classical” mental iatrogenesis as highly controversial. At the same time there is a civil liability, namely, the issue of causing moral harm. In the context of the consideration of informational iatrogenesis, we propose to pay attention to the provisions of Article 137 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Article 732 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, as well as the provisions of criminal legislation on offenses to which medical workers may be subject, and the provisions of civil legislation on redress for the non-pecuniary damage as a civil liability. The conducted research led to the conclusion that it is impossible to identify informational and mental iatrogenesis from a legal point of view. We substantiate the necessity of conducting work at the legislative level on a clear classification of iatrogenesis as a basis for further research on its individual differentiations, which have legal significance both in doctrinal and practical terms.


2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 135-142
Author(s):  
E V Barkalova

In this article are analyzed the problems of determination of the amount of damage caused by commission of tax crimes. The author delineates the concepts of «damage» as the circumstance to be proved, in cases of commission of tax crimes and as a part of the grounds for exemption from criminal liability for commission of tax crimes under the art.76.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and art. 28.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. Various scientific points of view and judicial-investigative practice on application of the mentioned above grounds for exemption from criminal liability are considered.


2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 02012
Author(s):  
Andrey Viktorovich Sarubin

The article considers the problems of exemption from criminal liability for restricting competition (Art. 178 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The criminal legislation of Russia and the practice of its application in terms of exemption from liability for restriction of competition are analysed. It is thought that the main objectives of the criminal-law prohibitions contained in Chapter 22 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, is to ensure the criminal-legal protection of economic relations, preventing the growth of crimes that threaten the development of financial institutions of the state. Purpose of work: Identify problems of exemption from criminal liability for restricting competition in the modern practice of preliminary investigation and court, and propose ways to improve the criminal law on the exemption from criminal liability for restricting competition. Methods. The methodological basis of the research was the general dialectical method of scientific knowledge, which has a universal character, as well as methods of logical deduction, induction, cognitive methods and techniques of observation, comparison, analysis, synthesis and description, formally logical. Results. The research revealed the problems of application of the criminal law on the exemption from criminal liability for restriction of competition and suggested ways to improve paragraph 3 of the notes to the Art. 178 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, providing for the possibility of exemption from criminal liability for restricting competition.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document