Suchergebnisse

The article is devoted to the analysis of scientific concepts and legal terminology of criminal legislation, the identification of their relationship and role in lawmaking in the development and adoption of quality in form and perfect in content laws on criminal liability. The logical structure of criminal law concepts (content and volume) and their industry types are considered: specific, generic, evaluative concepts and categories as fundamental concepts of law; developed the basic rules for their determination and consolidation in the text of the law. The basic requirements (quality parameters) that are presented to legal terms are identified, with the help of which the law on criminal liability defines legal concepts that comprise the content of legal norms, legal structures and other legal formations that are components of this law. The proposals aimed at improving the form and content of criminal law are formulated.The problems of scientific concepts and legal terminology considered in the article, their analysis and formulated proposals are aimed, as a whole, at improving legislative activity on the development and adoption of high-quality criminal-form laws in form and perfect in content. Legal concepts and legal terminology - organically interconnected phenomena of criminal law - are specifically logical and linguistic means of displaying and consolidating verbally in criminal liability laws (in their norms, legal structures, other regulatory legal conditions) subject to legal regulation formations) of phenomena (objects) of reality that are subject to criminal law regulation. The deeper the legal concepts are developed, the more perfect the legal terminology used in the text of the law, the better the positive law, which should be objectively capable of optimally regulating public relations in the field of criminal law.

The present article stipulates on various disputable issues of applying the general legal maxims on overcoming the conflict of lex posterior derogate priori and lex specialis derogate legi generali based on the empirical examples of contemporary Russian criminal law. The objective is to clear the peculiarities of operating the lex posterior and lex specialis maxims including, inter alia, through appealing to the doctrine and positive law in the aspect of correlation with some specific colnflict rules. For this purpose, the author turns to a number of techniques, ways and methods of legal phenomena studies, such as, particularly, system approach, ascend from abstract to specific, using the logic of standard and normative statements, conceptual and definition analysis, speculative experiment, legal and dogmatic approach, legal simulation method, law comparison method. The main conclusion of the research is formulated as follows: though the principles of lex specialis and lex posterior are generated by the legal doctrine as criteria for selecting one out of two conflicting options, the principle that a law governing a specific subject matter overrides a law governing only general matters finds a wider scope of application compared to the principle of priority of a new law over the old one. The situation is explained by the fact that lex specialis is deliberately used by the legislators to construct logical relationships of legal rules, while lex posterior does not perform a similar function

The creation of an economically integrated Europe, based on free circulation across open borders, has probably facilitated an increase in transnational crime. One response to this phenomenon has been to try to create an integrated European criminal law. But legal integration will not magically solve all the problems related to transnational crime. Indeed, it may create problems of its own. By favouring efficiency (that is, repression) over legitimacy (the protection of fundamental rights), it favours a criminal justice policy oriented towards 'security'. By imposing the same rules throughout Europe, it disturbs the internal consistency of national legal systems. Nevertheless, the phenomenon of legal integration, facilitated by new legal instruments such as framework decisions, continues to develop. We might therefore ask ourselves, as an introduction, why this is so.