Suchergebnisse

The subject of the study is the criminal policy in the context of contradictions in the functioning of the courts.The purpose of the study is to investigate, which contradictions of criminal policy are generated by a multi-level system of courts, and which mechanisms for overcoming them in order to optimize criminal policy could be found out.The methodology. In modern conditions of diversification of methodological approaches to organizing and conducting political-legal research, it is important not to discard, but to rethink and rediscover the epistemological possibilities of the methods of classical science, especially the method of dialectical analysis.The main results and scope of the study. The use of the category "dialectical contradiction" for the purpose of studying the problems of the functioning of the courts in terms of the interpretation and application of criminal law provisions opens up new possibilities in the study of criminal and judicial policy, as well as determining the prospects for its development. In the study, the law enforcement contradictions of criminal policy refer to the relations between courts of various types and levels that develop in the course of their functioning and reflect the opposite approaches of law enforcement bodies to the interpretation and application of criminal legislation. Considering the level and type of legal proceedings, these contradictions can be summarized in the following groups: (a) between national and international courts; (b) between superior courts of the national legal system; (c) between the courts of various instances of the system of courts of general jurisdiction.The contradictions between national and international courts, emerging in the field of protection of human rights and freedoms, are an objective source of development of judicial practice and policy. The resolution of these contradictions is based on the consensus of various courts and compromise. If the position of the European Court of Human Rights does not contradict the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the state adjusts its legal practice in the direction set by the authoritative international instance by means of: (a) direct application of national legislation with due regard for the ECHR's legal positions; (b) the application of national legislation in its constitutional interpretation by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which does not differ from the decisions and positions of the ECHR; (c) amending national legal acts in pursuance of ECHR judgments. In exceptional cases, when the position of the European Court touches upon issues of the country's constitutional identity, the contradiction between the international and national legal order is resolved by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the basis of the priority of constitutional norms.At the level of the superior national courts the contradictions are represented by the differing positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the assessment and interpretation of criminal law provisions. Such contradictions can be thought of as latent until they are not revealed in constitutional proceedings. The identification and resolution of these contradictions is the most important direction of legal policy in the country; it reflects the consistent solution of the aim of constitutionalization of the criminal law.At the level of the system of courts of general jurisdiction, the concept of "contradiction" can only be applied to those differing approaches of the courts to solving criminal cases that do not go beyond the rule of law. Contradictions arise only when, having correctly established the factual circumstances of the case, the courts disagree in the choice of the legal provision to be applied, although any such choice can be explained and motivated. These contradictions may or may not be related to the quality of criminal legislation. Therefore, the mechanism for their resolution includes not only law revision. It is important to use the capabilities of the judicial system itself to develop a consensual understanding of the textual content of the criminal law and the rules for its application.Conclusions. Overcoming the contradictions of the judicial criminal policy is possible only in the process of communication and dialogue between the courts of different levels on the basis of differentiation of jurisdiction, respect for authority and independence. ; Рассматриваются противоречия судебного уровня реализации уголовной политики, которые складываются в сфере функционирования международных и национальных судов различных уровней при толковании, оценке и применении правовых норм. Предлагается классификация этих противоречий на основе уровня, вида судопроизводства и источника возникновения, которая помогает лучше понять механизм функционирования судебной системы, роль судов в обеспечении верховенства права. Принимая во внимание диалектическую природу противоречий, доказывается, что механизм их преодоления должен включать в себя как организационные решения в части разграничения компетенции судов, так и идейно-нормативные решения, обеспечивающие компромисс судебных позиций ради достижения общей цели соблюдения прав человека при разрешении уголовно-правового конфликта.

On the basis of the conducted research on the directions of the criminal and penal–executive policy with regard to minors, the author of the article draws the following conclusions. The processes of humanization of criminal and penal enforcement laws affect under–age criminals, adjusting the procedure for appointing and executing criminal punishment, including deprivation of liberty. Despite these trends in recent years, the problem of juvenile delinquency is a fairly massive social and legal phenomenon. Thus, the analysis of statistical data has shown that juvenile delinquency grows 7 times faster than the total number of the population of this age group changes, and in some regions, minors determine the crime situation as a whole. The reason for repeated crimes committed by former juvenile convicts is that returning part of this category of people to the society is predisposed to spreading and propagating criminal "prison" traditions and customs among their peers, as well as among younger people, which contributes to the support and growth of criminogenic the potential of society. One of the directions of the criminal and penitentiary policy of Russia is the penitentiary and post-penitentiary resocialization of persons serving sentences in the form of deprivation of liberty, in particular minors. Thus, the process of training juveniles sentenced to release and creating conditions for their full integration into society is the most important task not only of educational colonies, but also of government bodies and civil society institutions. The absence of a federal law on the social adaptation of persons released from places of deprivation of liberty creates difficulties for minors in the process of resocialization. Adoption of this law is an important component and the main content of the law should be the establishment of strict control over the behavior of these individuals, and mainly the guarantee of state aid to them in the process of returning to normal life in society.

The author identifies three models of national criminal policy: the sovereign, reformist and experimental. The main criteria of such differentiation are the exposure to global influence, the criminological soundness and stability of criminal policy. Identification of the model of criminal policy in a particular state is a complex task that requires independent research.The subject. The article is devoted to modeling of the national criminal policy in modern conditions of globalization. The article discusses various models of criminal policy in the conditions of globalization.The purpose of the author is to describe the basic models of national criminal policy in modern conditions of globalization.The methodology. The author uses the method of analysis and synthesis, formal legal method as well as sociological methods (survey).The results, scope of application. The author identifies three models of national criminal policy: the sovereign, reformist and experimental. The main criteria of such differentiation are the exposure to global influence, the criminological soundness and stability of criminal policy. The sovereign model is based on doctrine of weak state and a strong combat criminal activity. It is distinguished by the pursuit of the realization of the equality of all before the law, criminal strategic and political planning system with a clear definition of goals and objectives; criminological security. The reform of criminal policy is characterized byuncertainty goals and objectives, utopianism and pretentiousness, dependence on standards of the international organization, the lower prestige of criminology, reduction of social programs, lobbying of group interests, permanent amendments to the criminal and criminal procedure legislation. Experimental model of criminal policy is connected with approbation of such technologies of management of society that are criminal and contrary to human experience in fighting crime.Conclusions. Criminal policy of the various states tends by globalist influence more or less. The desire for sovereignty in every sphere, including criminal justice, results the imposition of sanctions by the globalist structures. Reformist penal policy expresses the loss of a strategic, informed criminological development goals of criminal justice, and, as a rule, corresponds to the group, not the public interest. Experimental criminal policy demonstrates a high rate of development and takes a growing place in the globalist projects with an anti-Russian content. ; Рассматриваются различные модели уголовной политики в условиях глобализации. Выделяются три модели национальной уголовной политики: суверенная, реформистская и экспериментальная. Главными критериями такой дифференциации выступают подверженность глобальному воздействию, криминологическая обоснованность и стабильность уголовной политики. Идентификация модели уголовной политики в конкретном государстве представляет собой сложную задачу, решение которой требует самостоятельного исследования.

The article examines the objective and subjective factors that determined the criminalpolicy of the pre-revolutionary Russian State, describes the main stages of this policyand the specific legal forms of its expression, stresses the importance of studying theproblem in question. Any problem acquires a political character if its solution is directly or indirectlyconnected with class interests, the problem of power. It is the needs of classes that determinethe content of political interests. The social cause of politics, political actions, in thefinal analysis, is geopolitical interests. At its core, the independence of politics leads topositive results if it does not fundamentally contradict the economic conditions. Theseprovisions have methodological significance, contributing to a correct understanding ofcommon problems, disclosure of the objective content of the state's activities, which isthe essence of its policy in this or that sphere of public life. This formulation of the questionhas a direct bearing on the characterization of the criminal policy of the Russianstate. ; В статье рассматриваются объективные и субъективные факторы, опреде-лявшие уголовную политику дореволюционного Российского государства, харак-теризуются основные этапы этой политики и конкретные правовые формы ее вы-ражения, подчеркивается важность изучения рассматриваемой проблемы.Любая проблема приобретает политический характер, если ее решение прямоили опосредованно связано с классовыми интересами, проблемой власти. Именнопотребности классов определяют содержание политических интересов. Социаль-ную причину политики, политических действий, в конечном счете, составляютгеополитические интересы. В своей основе самостоятельность политики приводитк позитивным результатам, если она в корне не противоречит экономическим ус-ловиям. Указанные положения имеют методологическое значение, способствуяправильному пониманию общих проблем, раскрытию объективного содержаниядеятельности государства, составляющего существо его политики в той или инойсфере общественной жизни. Такая постановка вопроса имеет прямое отношение кхарактеристике уголовной политике Российского государства.

Author analyzes different approaches to the crime and criminality phenomenon understanding and criminal policy during formation and development of the Russian criminal law. He proposes E. Toffler wave theory as a basis of comparative analysis. According to this theory there were three waves of civilizations progress in the history of mankind, which were independent of societys national and cultural characteristics or political structure and regime. There were agricultural, industrial and informational Tofflers waves. Within each waves framework all social links from family to state, law and economy foundations are transformed. During all periods of its history, Russia was inclined to the first wave, the Earth culture. According to it the will of the state bureaucracy became a law. We can see simultaneous affection of the second and the third wave onto political and law system in contemporary world. It predetermines both possibility of advancing Russian state-law system on the higher level of civilization development, also rises the destructive changes linked with wave incompatibility danger. ; Автор излагает понимание феноменов преступление и преступность и особенностей уголовной политики на различных этапах становления и развития отечественного уголовного права. В качестве концептуального основания сравнительного анализа перечисленных категорий автор предлагает избрать волновую теорию Э. Тоффлера, в соответствие с которой человечество в своем историческом развитии попадает под влияние трех волн, каждая из которых является этапом цивилизационного развития и не зависит от национально-культурных особенностей той или иной социальной общности, а также от формы государственного устройства и политического режима. Волны Тоффлера подразделяются на сельско-хозяйственную, индустриальную и информационную. В рамках каждой волны претерпевают качественные трансформации все общественные отношения, от устройства семьи до базовых оснований государства, права, экономики. Россия на всех этапах своего развития тяготела к первой волне культуры земли, в рамках которой право представляло собой возведенную в закон волю представителей государственной бюрократии. В современных условиях наблюдается практически одновременное воздействие на политико-правовую систему индустриальной и информационной волн, что, с одной стороны, предопределяет возможности перехода государственно-правовой системы России на более высокую ступень цивилизационного развития, а с другой стороны, повышает опасность деструктивных изменений, связанных с волновой несовместимостью.

The article deals with the specifics which for mauthority of the prikazy, voivodes and gubnye institutions in the 17th century Muscovite State interms of anti-criminal activities that consist in maintaining public order and taking part incriminal procedure. The largest works copein relation tocombating crime was done by the Robbery prikaz that ran gubnye izby and set up a gubnoy starosta corps (by means of elections and appointments). Apart from the Robbery prikaz, law-enforcement duties, to a great extent, were also implemented by the Zemskiy and Sysknoy prikaz. Special attention with in this article is paid to the issue of voivodes competence formation in connection with anti-criminal policy, their duties were determined by «nakazy» from the centre and consisted both in maintaining law and order and arranging search and investigation into the cases under their jurisdiction. The article also addresses the lack of definite separation of duties within the jurisdiction context, e.g., political off enders could be and if needed had to be traced by police services of all levels, but an investigation was generally conducted at the prikaz level where as a judgment could be delivered at the highest power level. ; В статье рассматриваются особенности формирования полномочий приказов, воевод и губных учреждений в Московском государстве XVIIстолетия в сфере антикриминальной деятельности, заключающиеся в охране общественного порядка и участию в уголовно-процессуальном производстве. Наибольший объем работы по борьбе с преступностью выполнял Разбойный приказ, который руководил губными избами, формировал (путем выборов и назначением) корпус губных старост. Помимо Разбойного приказа, правоохранительные функции в значительном объеме осуществляли также Земский и Сыскной приказы.Особое внимание в статье уделено вопросу формирования компетенции воевод в сфере антикриминальной политики, их функции определялись «наказами» из центра и заключались как в поддержании правопорядка, так и в организации розыска и следствия по делам, которые находились в их юрисдикции.Обращается внимание на отсутствие однозначного разграничения функций в юрисдикционном контексте, например, розыск политических преступников могли и при необходимости должны были осуществлять правоохранительные органы всех уровней, но следствие проводили, как правило, на уровне приказов, а вынесение приговора могло состояться на высшем властном уровне.

The article presents an analysis of the directions of modern criminal law policy from the standpoint of the theory of criminal law prohibitions. The author of the article considers criminalization as a process and result of the formation of a criminal law prohibition in the criminal law. Using the example of Article 2007 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation, the application of criminalization criteria in the legislative process is investigated. Special attention is paid to the issue of the concept of criminal law, its connection with the process of legalization of criminal law prohibitions. The position is substantiated that the increase in the number of criminal law prohibitions does not have positive socially significant consequences. The author of the article comes to the conclusion that the use of the criminal law resource should correspond to the modern picture of the social world, as well as correspond to basic human values, the main of which is justice. Otherwise, the tasks assigned to the criminal law will not be solved. ; В статье представлен анализ направлений современной уголовно-правовой политики с позиции теории уголовно-правовых запретов. Автор статьи рассматривает криминализацию как процесс и результат формирования уголовно-правового запрета в уголовном законе. На примере ст. 2007 УК РФ исследуется применение критериев криминализации в законотворческом процессе. Особое внимание уделено вопросу о концепции уголовного закона, ее связи с процессом легализации уголовно-правовых запретов. Обосновано положение, что рост числа уголовно-правовых запретов не имеет положительных социально значимых последствий. Автор статьи приходит к выводу, что использование ресурса уголовного закона должно соотноситься с современной картиной социального мира, а также соответствовать базовым человеческим ценностям, основной из которых является справедливость. В противном случае задачи, возлагаемые на уголовный закон, решены не будут.

Historically, English criminal procedure is characterised by the role of private prosecution, which allowed each person to bring charges against any other person. A relic of the Middle Ages, it has nevertheless survived successfully to the present day, although it has undergone a number of significant transformations. Its remarkable resilience, despite its inability to serve as a fullfledged instrument of Crown criminal policy, is due to the fact that the ancient procedural form is constantly emerging with new uses. In the twentieth century there was a growing demand for it by commercial and noncommercial organizations who needed an instrument for the proactive prosecution (in public or private interests). Continental critics, who had earlier protested against the introduction of the English model of private prosecution into the criminal procedure of Germany or France, raised many objections against it, but the English history has shown that their fears were baseless. At the same time, the development of public prosecutions in England has greatly reduced the space for private initiative. Most of the procedural advances, among them the increased accessibility of criminal justice, were due to the expansion of the state.

The article is devoted to the study of the law enforcement of criminal punishment in the form of restriction of freedom and its significance in the system of punishment. Modern trends in the economy and social life in the country determine the policy of gradual humanization of punishment for some crimes while increasing the punishment for others. This process is accompanied by the introduction of new, previously not applied forms of punishment, which should serve as an alternative to imprisonment for a certain period. The analysis of statistical data on the application of punishment with isolation from society to various categories of convicts shows that the use of deprivation of liberty should be reduced, especially for minors and women. By limiting the use of punishment in the form of imprisonment, it is possible to protect the individual from the influence of the criminal environment. Punishment in the form of restriction of freedom allows achieving the goals of criminal punishment without deprivation of liberty and isolation from society. When considering the nature of punishment in the form of restriction of freedom should pay attention to such a legal structure as a conditional sentence. In the criminal-Executive practice, the punishment in the form of restriction of freedom and conditional conviction are implemented almost identically, but in the science of criminal law, there is no common position on the legal nature of the conditional conviction. The most important difference between restriction of freedom and conditional conviction is that the scope of restrictions on the right of a convicted person to punishment in the form of restriction of freedom is established in the law, and it is exhaustive, and the scope of restrictions on the right of a probationer can be both narrowed and expanded. Creation of alternatives to punishment in the form of imprisonment is one of the most important directions of modern criminal policy, both in Russia and abroad. This type of punishment in the future can be more ...

The article deals with the basic problems and measures for combating recidivism in Russia and in the Samara Region. The conclusion about the imperfection of modern legislation and the ineffectiveness of criminal punishment as important means of prevention of recidivism is made. ; В статье рассматриваются основные закономерности и меры противодействия рецидивной преступности в России и Самарской области. Делается вывод о несовершенстве современного законодательства и недостаточной эффективности уголовного наказания как основных средств предупреждения рецидивной преступности.

В статье рассматриваются проблемы дифференциации уголовной ответственности за повторно совершенные преступления. Анализируются положения уголовного законодательства в части регламентации ответственности за совокупность преступлений. На основе исследования положений действующего законодательства, судебной практики, данных судебной статистики делается вывод об отсутствии внутренней систематизации института множественности преступлений в Уголовном кодексе Российской Федерации в действующей редакции и несоответствии этого института принципам справедливости, неотвратимости ответственности. Следовательно, необходим дифференцированный подход к случайным и профессиональным преступникам. В заключение формулируются предложения по совершенствованию Уголовного кодекса Российской Федерации в целях обеспечения оптимальной дифференциации уголовной ответственности за множественность преступлений. ; The article deals with problems of differentiation of criminal responsibility depending on the social danger forms of multiple offenses. Conception of differentiation of responsibility is defined. Provisions of the existing criminal legislation are analyzed based on responsibility for the repeated crime and recidivism. The norms of the current legislation, judicial practice, judicial statistics are examined and noticed that the regulation of criminal responsibility in the Criminal Code contradicts to the forms of multiple crimes, and not according to the principles of humanism, justice, and the inevitability of punishment. The conclusion about expediency of a differentiated approach to casual and professional criminals is made. In conclusion, proposals for the reform of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are formulated in order to ensure the optimal differentiation of criminal responsibility, taking into account public danger forms of multiple offenses.

The subject. The article is devoted to the problems of simultaneous harmonization between the policy of humanization of the Russian criminal law and the reduction of the crime rate in society. The institute of incomplete crime is proposed as one of the promising areas of humanization of criminal legislation. The authors analyze the norms of the Russian Criminal Code which determine the essence of an incomplete crime, as well as the specifics of imposing punishment for its commission. The subject of the research also includes the strategic provisions of the Russian legislation, which reflect the main directions of the implementation of contemporary criminal policy, its goal and objectives. The purpose of the article is to confirm or dispute hypothesis that it is inadmissible to criminalize the actions committed at the stage of preparation for the commission of an intentional crime, as well as it is admissible to mitigate the liability for attempted crime. Research methodology and techniques are represented by a number of general scientific and specific scientific methods of cognition, used primarily in humanitarian research. The establishment of regularities between the growth of crime rates and the degree of criminalization, determined in the current criminal legislation, is ensured by the use of the dialectical method of cognition. The methods of analysis and synthesis were used to compare statistical data on the state of crime in Russia and the dynamics of the number of convicts serving imprisonment. Various methods of formal logic were applied in the process of evaluating measures aimed at ensuring the humanization of modern Russian criminal legislation. The method of comparative legal research was used to study the content of the norms on responsibility for an incomplete crime. The result of the study is proof of the necessity to decriminalize actions that are currently defined as "preparation for the commission of a grave or especially grave crime." The necessity of a significant reduction in the degree of punitive criminal-legal impact on persons found guilty of an attempt to commit an intentional crime has been substantiated. Conclusions. It as expedient to partially decriminalize an incomplete crime and exclude this institution from the General Part of the Russian Criminal Code. This decision fully complies with the fundamental principles of criminal law: legality, guilt, justice, and will also ensure the effectiveness of the implementation of the modern policy of humanizing Russian criminal legislation. ; Статья представляет собой комплексное обоснование необходимости пересмотра положений уголовного закона об ответственности за неоконченное преступление. Отмечается, что действия, квалифицируемые в настоящее время как приготовление к преступлению, в действительности не содержат в себе признаков состава преступления, а сводятся лишь к намерению совершить его в будущем. В этой связи декриминализация приготовительных действий может обеспечить приведение в соответствие содержание института неоконченного преступления основным принципам уголовного права, а также будет способствовать повышению эффективности и результативности процесса гуманизации уголовного законодательства как направлению современной российской уголовной политики.

Some aspects of the criminal policy of the Russian state were analyzed from 1016 to 1917. The crucial importance of the transformation of criminal executive policy is that this area reflects both the level of development of law in the state and the level of public justice. The relevance of studying the historical aspects of the penitentiary system of pre-revolutionary Russia is to contribute to a more effective definition of the prospects for the further development of scientific thought, as well as effective ways to improve the legislation on the enforcement of sentences of imprisonment and the social practice of its application. The comparative historical, systemic methods, as well as the method of observance of historical continuity, are the main tools in the approach to the study of the criminal–executive policy of Russia, as a developing, time-varying phenomenon. They help to consider the imposition of punishment in the form of deprivation of liberty in terms of how and when it arose, what the main stages in its development took place and what results led to. It is obvious that the attitude towards the punishment of the criminal changed throughout the entire historical development of the penitentiary policy of Russia. At the beginning of her execution, she treats the criminal extremely humanely, but by the middle of the XVI century we are witnessing a tendency to toughen punishment — the prison system is emerging, the list of punishments related to the isolation of the convict from society is expanding. During the reign of Alexander II, the streamlining of legislation, the easing of criminal repressions and the relaxation of the penitentiary policy of the state occur. The beginning of the 20th century, the Russian criminal thought reaches the heights of the world, but the penitentiary system itself, however, did not have time to assimilate these ideas.

In order to further theoretical modeling of crime prevention policies connected with human trafficking, the question of the concept, content, and place of criminological policy in the structure of an anti-criminal state mechanism is being considered. In the focus of the researcher is the correlation between criminal and criminological policy, in connection with which there are two diametrically opposite points of view of scientists (criminal policy, part of the criminological and vice versa), also formed due to the discrepancy between criminal law and criminological science. In this connection, the author of the publication expresses solidarity with the position of leading specialists on the necessity to strengthen integration between relevant branches of knowledge, including such interesting directions as criminology of law and criminology of criminal law. The researcher associates with this hope for the adoption of a basic law in the sphere of counteraction on crime connected with trafficking in persons, instead of the corresponding short-term interdepartmental plans. ; В целях дальнейшего теоретического моделирования политики противодействия преступности, связанной с торговлей людьми рассматривается вопрос о понятии, содержании, месте криминологической политики в структуре антикриминального государственного механизма. В фокусе исследователя находится вопрос соотношения уголовной и криминологической политики, в связи, с чем существуют два диаметрально противоположных точек зрения ученых (уголовная политика часть криминологической и наоборот), также сформированных по причине рассогласования между уголовно-правовой и криминологической наукой. В этой связи, автор публикации выражает солидарность с позицией ведущих специалистов о необходимости усиления интеграции между соответствующими отраслями знаний, включая такие интересные направления как криминология закона и криминология уголовного закона (права). Исследователь связывает с этим надежды на принятие базового закона в сфере противодействия преступности, связанной с торговлей людьми вместо соответствующих краткосрочных межведомственных планов.