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 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 Criminal liability for illegal banking activities in the context of countering criminal money cashing

2020 ◽  
pp. 140-144
Author(s):  
Dmitry Ovchinnikov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Law Enforcement Officers ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Economic Sector ◽  
The Russian Federation

Currently, the economic sector of public relations is characterized by exceptional criminality. One of the main phenomena responsible for this is illegal money cashing. Almost every business entity considers it acceptable and even necessary to resort to various criminal schemes for obtaining unaccounted cash and tax evasion. The very type of this crime has actually become a thriving and profitable business, which consists in providing services for withdrawing funds from legal circulation. While the existing judicial and investigative practice in the issue of countering this phenomenon has not yet developed a clear answer about the need for appropriate qualifications. There are about a dozen articles of the criminal law in which law enforcement officers try to find the correct legal assessment, and at present, article 172 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation “Illegal banking activities” deserves special attention.

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 Features of signs of the crime object provided by article 166 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-198
Author(s):  
Алена Харламова ◽  
Alena Kharlamova ◽  
Юлия Белик ◽  
Yuliya Belik
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Direct Object ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

The article is devoted to the problematic theoretical and practical issues of the content of the signs of the object of the crimes under Art. 166 of the Criminal Code. The authors determined the main direct object, revealed the essence of the right of ownership, use and disposal. Marked social relations that can act as an optional direct object. Particular attention is paid in the article to the subject of the crime. Attempts have been made to establish criteria that are crucial for the recognition of any vehicle as the subject of theft. The content of the terms “automobile” and “other vehicle” is disclosed. The analysis of the conformity of the literal interpretation of the criminal law to the interpretation of the law enforcer is carried out. It is summarized that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation narrows the meaning of the term “other vehicle”, including in it only vehicles for the management of which, in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, is granted a special right. The authors provide a list of such vehicles and formulate a conclusion on the advisability of specifying them as the subject of a crime. The narration of the article is accompanied by examples of decisions of courts of various instances in cases of crimes under Art. 166 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

scholarly journals Efficiency of practical application of criminal law prohibition in the sphere of economy of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (4) ◽  
pp. 118-123
Author(s):  
Vladimir Tunin ◽  
Natal'ya Radoshnova
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Economic Crime ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Economic Crimes

The article considers the practical effectiveness of the criminal law prohibition in combating economic crime in the Russian Federation. 22nd Chapter of the Criminal code currently includes 58 articles. This is maximum number of articles in relation to other chapters of the criminal code, in the same Chapter of the Criminal code. Accordingly the need for such a number of prohibitions in the economic sphere should be confirmed by judicial practice. However, a completely different picture emerges. Based on the analysis of the statistical reports of the Judicial Department under the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the authors conclude that the enforcement practice in cases of economic crimes is insufficient.The authors express their opinion on the reasons for the ineffectiveness of the practical application of the articles constituting the 22nd Chapter of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation, and suggest ways to address them.

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 Problems of proving guilt in criminal cases in connection with tax evasion

2019 ◽  
pp. 170-176
Author(s):  
V. V. Dubrovin
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The establishment of an intentional form of guilt and its specific type is mandatory for the implementation of the provisions of Art. 8 of the Criminal Code. In criminal proceedings in connection with tax evasion, a direct intent should be established in the act of the accused, otherwise the provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 28, 2006 No. 64 “On the practice of criminal law on liability for tax offenses”. One of the proofs of direct intent in the act of the accused may be the decision of the tax authority to prosecute for the tax offense, made according to the results of tax control measures (in-house or on-site tax audits). In the event that it establishes an imprudent form of the taxpayer’s guilt in committing a tax offense, in proving the guilt of the accused in the course of criminal proceedings there may be an intractable contradiction.

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.

PUNISHING AUTONOMOUS ROBOTS: CRIMINAL LAW PERSPECTIVES

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 303-313
Author(s):  
ILDAR BEGISHEV ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Autonomous Robots ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Optimal Solution ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Potential Possibility ◽  
The Russian Federation

The purpose of the research. To develop and propose to the legislator a model of the criminal-legal reaction of the state to the potential possibility of harming public relations, values and interests protected by law in the process of functioning of autonomous robots. In this article, for the first time in the theory of domestic criminal law, an attempt is made to comprehensively state the problem of determining the boundaries of responsibility for causing harm to interests protected by criminal law in the process of functioning of autonomous robots, and the optimal solution to this problem is proposed. Results. The variability of the legal relationship between the behavior of a subject capable of being subject to criminal liability and the fact of causing harm in the course of functioning of an autonomous robot allowed us to develop a specific theoretical model for the application of criminal measures against autonomous robots for harm caused in the course of their functioning. Pursuing the goal of the most complete and comprehensive solution of the tasks of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, adapting existing criminal law norms to the trends of dynamically progressing digital technologies, we find it possible in the foreseeable future, when the technological singularity is reached and autonomous robots appear, to propose to the legislator to supplement the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with a new chapter «Criminal law measures applied to autonomous robots», which gives criminal legislation a new impetus in the light of the development of end-to-end digital technologies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document