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 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.

The public danger and qualification problems of illegal sale of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances in the prisons

2019 ◽  
pp. 60-68
Author(s):  
Марина Сергеевна Красильникова
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Narcotic Drug ◽  
Psychotropic Substances ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Illicit Trafficking ◽  
Narcotic Drugs

В статье актуализируется необходимость исследования вопросов квалификации незаконного сбыта наркотических средств и психотропных веществ в учреждениях уголовно-исполнительной системы. Представлены и проанализированы статистические данные, иллюстрирующие сложившуюся криминальную ситуацию в сфере незаконного оборота наркотических средств и психотропных веществ, а также примеры из судебной практики, порождающие немало вопросов. Среди уголовно-правовых проблем, связанных с незаконным оборотом наркотических средств и психотропных веществ, особо выделяются проблемы квалификации незаконного сбыта наркотиков, а также особенности юридической оценки такого сбыта, совершенного сотрудником пенитенциарного учреждения. Для решения обозначенной проблемы приведены руководящие разъяснения высшей судебной инстанции по данной категории дел, мнения ученых-юристов, тщательно изучены теоретические и практические аспекты тематики. На основе проведенного анализа установлено, что оценка деяния сотрудника учреждения уголовно-исполнительной системы, выразившегося в приобретении для осужденного или заключенного под стражу наркотического средства или психотропного вещества, как пособничества в приобретении наркотика без цели сбыта не соответствует смыслу закона, противоречит рекомендациям Пленума Верховного суда РФ, имеет не свойственную для приобретения без цели сбыта крайне высокую степень общественной опасности, а также дает возможность освобождения от уголовной ответственности. В завершение исследования подведены его итоги, подчеркнута необходимость пересмотра разъяснений Верховного суда Российской Федерации по данной категории дел, а также серьезной переработки уголовно-правовых норм об ответственности за незаконный сбыт наркотических средств и психотропных веществ. The article actualizes the need to study the criminal law aspects of the illegal sale of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances in penitentiary institutions. Statistical data are presented and analyzed to illustrate the current criminal situation in the field of illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, as well as examples from judicial practice that raise many questions. Among the criminal law problems associated with the illicit trafficking of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, the problems of qualifying illegal drug trafficking, as well as the peculiarities of the legal assessment of such a sale made by a penitentiary institution employee, are especially highlighted. To solve the indicated problem, the leading explanations of the highest court on this category of cases, the opinions of legal scholars are given, the theoretical and practical aspects of the topic are carefully studied. Based on the analysis, it was found that the assessment of the act of an employee of the penitentiary system, expressed in the acquisition of a narcotic drug or psychotropic substance for a convicted or imprisoned person, as aiding in the purchase of a drug without a sale purpose does not correspond to the meaning of the law, contradicts the recommendations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation has an extremely high degree of social danger, which is not typical for acquiring without a marketing objective, and also makes it possible to exempt from criminal No responsibility. At the end of the study, its results were summarized, the need to review the clarifications of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on this category of cases, as well as a serious revision of criminal law on liability for the illegal sale of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, was emphasized.

scholarly journals The Analysis of Key Provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 09.07.2020 No. 18 “On Judicial Practice in Cases of Illegal Crossing of the State Border of the Russian Federation and Crimes Related to Illegal Migration”

2020 ◽  
pp. 076-083
Author(s):  
P. A. Akimenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Illegal Migration ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uniform Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The norms introduced at different times into Russian criminal legislation and enshrined in Articles 322, 3221, 3222 and 3223 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation have a number of legal defects, resulting in a controversial practice that has generated a lot of debate in the scientific community regarding this research issue. There was a need to accumulate and analyze the existing judicial practice, taking into account advanced scientific views. As a result, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation issued a Resolution aimed at regulating criminal liability for violations of migration legislation. After that, the author of the article conducts a detailed analysis of the said judicial act and on this basis draws conclusions about the set of positive and negative aspects contained in it in order to help create a uniform law enforcement practice.

Scientific Commentary on the Review of Judicial Practice on Some Issues of the Application of Legislation on Business Entities

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 27-32
Author(s):  
V. K. Andreev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Business Entities ◽  
Law Making

The article discusses the forms of clarification on matters of judicial practice by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Presidium of the Supreme Court, as well as in the Review of judicial practice on some issues of the application of legislation on business companies dated December 25, 2019. Clarifications of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on issues of judicial practice are characterized as the positions of the courts identified in the course of studying and summarizing the judicial practice of the corresponding category of cases, which are acts of individual regulation of public relations. Focusing on Art. 6 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and Section 6, Art. 12 of the APC RF shows the validity of dividing wrong into two types of wrong: the «moderate» type of «judicial law-making and the position of the court» and the «radical» type of «judicial law-making», when the court develops the rule of law, which contradicts the constitutional principle of separation of powers. When resolving corporate disputes, it is necessary to investigate whether the charter of a non-public company does not contain the rights and obligations of its participants, which they themselves created by making a unanimous decision and including them in the charter of the company (paragraph 3 of Art. 66.3 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, paragraph 3 of Art. 14 of the Law about LLC).

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 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.

scholarly journals Criminal infraction as a mean of differentiating criminal responsibility and punishment

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
pp. 62-67
Author(s):  
E. A. BABAYANTS ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

Discussions caused by the initiative of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the introduction of a new category of offenses – criminal infraction which can occupy an intermediate link between an administrative offense and a criminal offense – do not stop. The article reveals the concept of a criminal infraction, lists its main features, considers the feasibility of introducing this category into domestic criminal legislation. A brief analysis of the legislation of a number of foreign countries is also given, the possibility of applying such experience in Russian conditions is assessed. The conclusion is formulated that it is necessary to recognize as fair the arguments challenging the necessity of adopting the draft law in the form in which it was submitted for consideration by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the fact that in those countries where the category of criminal offense was introduced, a fundamental reform of the criminal legislation was required: a total revision of the norms of the existing criminal legislation or the adoption of a separate Code of criminal infractions (for example, in Kyrgyzstan). Based on this the draft law under consideration appears to be a half-measure, which will lead to the complication of the existing legal regulation. The most correct way to resolve the problem under consideration would be to reduce the number of minor offenses in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

scholarly journals Malfeasances: features of law enforcement.

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-337
Author(s):  
M.P. Pronina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Assessment ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article deals with the problems of law enforcement in the group of malfeasances. Official crimes are most dangerous due to the fact that they undermine the prestige of the authorities and directly violate the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations. In this regard the legislator has established criminal liability for officials who abuse their functional duties. In particular the author studies the problems of qualification arising in the legal assessment of crimes enshrined in Ch. 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, due to the highest level of their blanketness and evaluativeness. Examples of judicial and investigative practice on competition issues of general and special rules are given. Difficulties are revealed in the legal assessment of the actions of officials when determining the signs of abuse of office, enshrined in Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Arguments are presented that are a clear demonstration of the fact that the solution to the identified problems of applying the norms of the criminal law lies in the plane of reducing the level of conflict of laws of criminal legislation. Practical proposals are being made to include amendments to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 09.07.2013 No. 24 “On judicial practice in cases of bribery and other corruption crimes” (clause 12.1) and Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 16.10.2009 No. 19 “On judicial practice in cases of abuse of office and abuse of office” (p. 21.1). The solution of the stated problems in the field of application of the norms of the criminal law consists in the development of a uniform practice of application of the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, reduction of the level of gaps in criminal legislation, the development of methodological and scientific recommendations with the participation of law enforcement officials and scientists, the preparation of draft laws and plenums of the Supreme Court aimed at elimination of gaps and gaps.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document