Law Enforcement Review / Правоприменение
Not a member yet
455 research outputs found
Sort by
Обоснованность обязанностей и запретов, установленных для осужденных к лишению свободы
Get PDFThe subject of the research. The research focuses on the legal prohibitions and obligations for convicts to imprisonment fixed in the norms of legislation and in subordinate regulatory legal acts adopted in accordance with it.The purpose of the research is to confirm or refute the hypothesis that there is a current discrepancy between the content of the legal responsibilities of convicts and the goals of the penal enforcement such as rehabilitation and preventing of the commission of new crimes, their social essence and legal nature.Methods of the research. The research uses retrospective analysis of legislation in the field of execution of criminal punishment in the form of imprisonment, as well as analysis and synthesis of legal literature and empirical research data. To confirm the conclusions of the research authors use sociological survey of 364 citizens and 221 employees of penal institutions located in the Siberian Federal District (the cities of Kemerovo, Novokuznetsk, Novosibirsk, Tomsk, Omsk) aged from 18 to 73 years.The main results of the research and the scope of their application. On the basis of retrospective analysis of the norms of penal enforcement (formerly correctional labor) law, which establish the penitentiary duties of convicts, the goals and objectives of penal enforcement legal regulation, the results of an empirical study, it is concluded that some of the responsibilities (including prohibitions) of convicts in criminal enforcement law do not have a strict scientific explanation. Their establishment is dictated not only by the need to achieve the purposes of convicts rehabilitation and preventing the commission of new crimes, but also to solve a number of other tasks that do not fit into the existing concept of the execution of punishment in the form of imprisonment and violate the balance between the "punitive" and "correctional-preventive" content of punishment. These include responsibilities that: are a relic of the Soviet socialist society; provide administrative, economic, managerial and other activities of penal institutions; unreasonably "seem" to be an effective way to rehabilitate convicts and prevent the commission of new crimes by both convicts and other persons.Conclusions. The solution of the mentioned problems in the light of the development of penal enforcement policy in general and of its legislative form in particular is possible in several ways. The first one is that the legal responsibilities of the convicts to imprisonment should be reviewed (excluded, or the content should be changed), taking into account their real impact on the achievement of the goals established by law (or change the latter) and the constantly changing rules and traditions of the human society. The second one is to change the goals of the penal enforcement legislation to its current (and possibly future) norms. The third "middle ground" way consists in simultaneous changing of the goals of the penal enforcement legislation and of the legal responsibilities of convicts in the direction of expanding the dispositive principles of criminal enforcement legal regulation, excluding certain of their responsibilities and prohibitions and expanding their rights.Анализируются установленные в уголовно-исполнительном праве обязанности и запреты для осужденных к лишению свободы на предмет их соответствия цели исправления и предупреждения совершения новых преступлений (ч. 1 ст. 1 Уголовно-исполнительного кодекса РФ). Делается вывод, что не все из них вписываются в существующую концепцию исполнения наказания в виде лишения свободы, нарушая тем самым баланс между «карательным» и «исправительно-предупредительным» содержанием наказания. Указанное обстоятельство диктует необходимость дальнейшего совершенствования обязанностей и запретов для осужденных к лишению свободы с учетом постоянно меняющихся в обществе норм, правил и традиций человеческого общежития
Право на жизнь: момент возникновения и утраты
Get PDFThe subject of the article is the right to life interpretation issue, as well as the definition of the term "life" applicable in the legal field, the study of the problems of establishing of the constitutional right to life realization moment and its loss. This is necessary due to the formalized nature of law and the unification of the legal categorical apparatus, controversy in the scientific community, as well as the lack of a holistic understanding of the moments of its origin and loss, which will improve modern legislation in the field of protecting the right to life, eliminate existing contradictions.The purpose of the study is to confirm or refute the author's hypothesis about the moment of the emergence of the right to life and its termination as processes interrelated with the context and society. The author interests how this moment is fixed in current Russian legislation as well as in international legal norms and the constitutions of some foreign countries.The methodology. The following general scientific and special methods of cognition were used in the work: dialectical, systemic, historical, comparison, analysis and synthesis, formal legal and statistical methods. The method of comparison was used in the analysis of the texts of constitutions in order to consolidate the moments of the emergence and loss of the right to human life. The formal legal method made it possible to identify contradictions in the legislation of Russia in terms of issues related to the emergence and loss of the right to life. The use of these methods in combination with the latest achievements made it possible to identify and analyze the content, essence and features of the emergence and loss of the human right to life in the Russian Federation and foreign states.The main results, scope of application. Within the framework of the scientific and practical problem the author considers various approaches to the right to life emergence and loss moments, identifies the main problems of the current legislation of Russia and compares it with international legal norms and the constitutions of some foreign countries in order to fix the right to life emergence and loss the moments.Conclusions. The moment of the occurrence of the right to life must be recognized as a birth of viable infant, and the moment of loss of the right to life – the onset of his death. The right to life of a premature newborn, including those with extremely low body weight, as well as those with certain complications, is realized by providing him with full medical care.Рассмотрены различные подходы к определению моментов возникновения и утраты права на жизнь, обозначены основные проблемы действующего законодательства России и проведено его соотношение с международно-правовыми нормами и конституциями некоторых зарубежных стран на предмет закрепления начала и окончания действия права на жизнь. Отмечено, что в научной среде и законодательстве отсутствует целостное понимание о моменте возникновения и утраты права на жизнь, что вызывает проблемы в правоприменительной деятельности по охране рассматриваемого права. Сделан вывод о том, что моментом возникновения права на жизнь необходимо признавать его рождение жизнеспособным младенцем, а моментом утраты – наступление его смерти
Совершенствование правовой регламентации института налогового льготирования в Российской Федерации
Get PDFThe article is devoted to the institution of tax incentives, which is currently significant important for the development of the Russian state, that is objectively determined by the essence of tax incentives, which consists in intensifying the legal behavior of subjects of specific relations. Based on the analysis of the theoretical and legal foundations of tax benefits, the author developed a definition of tax incentives, highlighted its stages, analyzed the problems of legal regulation of the institution being considered, as well as legal means to increase the effectiveness of tax benefits.The purpose of the study. Analysis of legal regulation and practice of applying tax incentives in the Russian Federation, identifying existing problems, as well as formulating proposals of a theoretical and practical nature to improve the current tax legislation governing the institution of tax incentives in the Russian Federation. Research methods. The research was carried out through the use of a complex of general scientific methods (analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction, logical method, system analysis, etc.) and private scientific (special legal) methods. The main research method was the formal legal method, which made it possible to identify gaps in the legal regulation of the process of tax incentives in Russia and to formulate proposals for supplementing and changing certain regulatory provisions of tax legislation.Main scientific results. As a result of a comprehensive analysis of the legal regulation of the institution of tax benefits in Russia, theoretical provisions were formulated and substantiated, revealing the specifics of the content and essence of tax incentives, taking into account the current state of development of the national and world economy.Conclusions. The article draws conclusions about the importance of tax incentives for reforming the Russian system of taxes and fees in the context of developing the economic potential of business entities. The scientific research contains author's proposals for improving the current tax legislation in order to effectively use the institution of tax incentives in Russian practice. The obtained scientific results testify to the achievement of the set research goal.Рассматривается институт налогового льготирования, который в настоящее время имеет существенное значение для развития российского государства, что объективно обусловлено сущностью налоговых льгот, заключающейся в активизации правового поведения субъектов конкретных отношений. На основе анализа теоретико-правовых основ налоговых льгот разработана авторская дефиниция налогового льготирования, выделены его стадии, проанализированы проблемы правовой регламентации рассматриваемого института, а также правовые средства повышения эффективности налоговых льгот
Исключение юридического лица из Единого государственного реестра юридических лиц: случаи использования, порядок и последствия
Get PDFThe subject of research. In 2005, a new institution for exclusion of a legal entity from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities by decision of the registering authority (or, as it is also called "administrative termination of a legal entity"). Subsequently, as a result of a number of changes, including the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, introduced by federal laws in 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2019, this institution was formed in the form in which it currently exists Its importance, at first more technical, has increased significantly after the changes in 2015, when this institution began to be used to conduct a large-scale "cleaning" of the Unified State Register of Legal Entities from inactive legal entities. As a result, millions of legal entities have been excluded from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities in recent years. In addition, the range of situations in which this institution began to be applied has expanded. Accordingly, the increase in the number of disputes is due to the fact that such exclusion affects the rights and interests of many persons (creditors, participants of excluded legal entities, members of their governing bodies). These disputes have often been the subject of close attention of the Russian Constitutional Court (the latest example is the decision of the Russian Constitutional Court of May 21, 2021 No. 20-P). The article examines the goals of this institution, its development, shows the most problematic situations related to the application of the institution of exclusion of a legal entity from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities.The purpose of the article is to identify the main problems of the institution of exclusion of a legal entity from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, as well as formulate the main directions for changing this institution. The author's main scientific hypothesis is that during the development of the institution of exclusion of a legal entity from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, its original goals were lost. New goals and meanings were also formulated (in the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation), which eventually (taking into account the significant shortcomings of the exclusion procedure itself) lead to violation of the rights of a significant number of interested persons. The author believes that in the development of this institution there is clearly a disproportion in terms of its application in relation to limited liability companies and persons controlling such a company. The author also notes the lack of a unified concept of the institution of exclusion from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, since along with the administrative procedure for the termination of legal personality, the legislation also recognizes the judicial procedure. Description of research methods and methodology. The research is based on a systematic analysis, as well as the use of methods of interpretation developed in the doctrine.The main results, scope of application. The goals of creating the institution of exclusion of a legal entity from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities are established, the development of this institution is shown taking into account the legal positions of the Russian Constitutional Court, judicial practice, conceptual provisions on reforming civil legislation.Conclusions. There is a need for a complete renovation of the institution of exclusion of a legal entity from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities. The main directions for improving the institution of exclusion of a legal entity from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities are formulated.Исследуются цели института исключения юридического лица из Единого государственного реестра юридических лиц (ЕГРЮЛ), его развитие с учетом правовых позиций Конституционного Суда РФ, судебной практики, концептуальных положений о реформировании гражданского законодательства. Цель статьи состоит в том, чтобы на основании анализа законодательства, судебной практики, доктрины выявить основные проблемы института исключения юридического лица из ЕГРЮЛ, а также сформулировать основные направления изменения этого института. Основная научная гипотеза состоит в том, что в ходе развития института исключения юридического лица из ЕГРЮЛ были утрачены его первоначальные цели; были также сформулированы (в правовых позициях Конституционного Суда РФ) такие новые цели и смыслы, которые в итоге (с учетом значительных недостатков порядка самого исключения) ведут к нарушению прав значительного числа заинтересованных лиц; автор полагает, что в развитии этого института явно видна диспропорция в части его применения в отношении обществ с ограниченной ответственностью и контролирующих такое общество лиц. Также отмечается отсутствие единой концепции института исключения из ЕГРЮЛ, поскольку наряду с административным порядком прекращения правосубъектности законодательство признаёт и судебный порядок. По мнению автора, с учетом выявленных в исследовании недостатков, а также известных правовых позиций Конституционного Суда РФ, институт исключения из ЕГРЮЛ подлежит полной реновации
Актуальные вопросы реализации и защиты прав человека в практике применения технологии смарт-контракта
Get PDFThe subject and the aim of the study. The article analyzes the approach to smart contract technology, which is reflected in the scientific literature and legislation of Russia and foreign countries, formulates the advantages and disadvantages of a smart contract that affect the implementation and protection of certain constitutional rights, including freedom of contract, the right to protect, the right to manage personal data.Methodology. Guided by formal dogmatic and comparative law methods in research, the author formulates approaches to the concept of a smart contract that has been developed in the practice of foreign countries and deduces how each of the approaches affects the implementation of constitutional human rights. The paper notes that the use of a smart contract based on the federal blockchain does not allow the full implementation of such rights as freedom of contract, the right to self-defense, and the right to manage personal data. In addition, the transnational nature of smart contracts usage, their pseudonymity and failure to unified concept of legal regulation create obstacles to the effective implementation of the right to judicial protection.The main results. The practice of legal regulation of smart contracts in foreign countries, aimed at minimizing the negative consequences of the use of technology is considered. Some countries follow to the concept of recognizing a smart contract as a form of contract (Italy, United States, Republic of Belarus) and a way of guaranteeing fulfilment of obligations (China, Italy, Republic of Belarus, Russian Federation). The second concept is considered as being the most restrictive for digital progress from one side but being able to guarantee protection of human rights such as right to judicial protection or freedom of contract. The first concept which shows smart contract being a type of contract carries additional risks associated with conclusion of a treaty - inconsistency of the smart contract with the actual will of the parties. The third concept considered smart contract as a type of contract is accepted in the Republic of Malta. The Republic of Malta regulated procedure of voluntary certification for smart contracts that allow to eliminate such threats as violation of human rights and the use of smart contracts for criminal purposes. The experience of legal regulation of smart contracts in the Republic of Malta is recognized as reasonable and effective, however, it is concluded that certification will achieve its goals only if it will be implemented in the legal system of wide range of the countries.Conclusions. It is concluded that despite the fact that the smart contract technology has high potential for its implementation in various fields of social and economic life, the effective implementation of smart contract technology in various spheres of society requires the formation of general legal principles for their application, the definition of areas in which the use of smart contracts is prohibited, as well as the development of international standards for their safe execution.Проанализированы подходы к технологии смарт-контракта, получившие отражение в научной литературе и законодательстве России и зарубежных стран, сформулированы преимущества и недостатки смарт-контракта, оказывающие воздействие на реализацию и защиту отдельных конституционных прав, в том числе свободы договора, права на защиту, права на управление персональными данными. Проанализирована практика правового регулирования смарт-контрактов в отдельных странах, направленная на минимизацию негативных последствий применения технологии. Сделан вывод о том, что эффективное внедрение технологии смарт-контрактов в различные сферы жизни общества требует формирования общих правовых принципов их применения, определения сфер, в которых применение смарт-контрактов запрещено, а также разработки международных стандартов их безопасного исполнения
Экспериментальные правовые режимы мобилизационного вида как способ правового регулирования в условиях распространения COVID-19
Get PDFExperimental legal regime; COVID19; legal regime; legal experiment; “regulatory sandboxes”; legal technique; classification of legal experiments; legality; experimental legal regimes of mobilization type on legal forecasting and legal interpretation methods. The theoretical basis of the research includes well-known legal science categories, i.e. legal regime and legal experiment that get a new interpretation with the appearance of experimental legal regime institute. The main results of the research, scope of application. Experimental legal regime is a broader legal phenomenon than regulatory sandboxes, which includes not only regulation of the digital innovation sphere, but also other rules that are limited in time and space. There are legal regimes with signs of experimentation that are not officially identified by the state as experimental legal regimes. The work studied the experience which arose due to modern changes in state and legal regulation caused by the global epidemic of COVID-19. It is suggested to divide the legal experiments according to the purpose of experimental legislation into the following groups: optimizing, progressive and mobilization ones. The aim of the first group named “Optimizing legal experiments” is to test using of new regulation applied to a large and complex object. The second group named “Progressive legal experiments” is intended to check whether the abandonment of old laws is beneficial in the innovation field. The result is creation of a smart regulation for economic and technological development. The third group named “Mobilization legal experiments” is aimed at maintaining of the existing level of resources, security, and infrastructure in the event of critical situations. It is being proved that the legal restrictions aimed at preventing of COVID-19 viral infection spreading can be classified as experimental legal regimes of mobilization type. The criterion for distinguishing of mobilization experimental legal regimes from others is the voluntary participation in the legal experiment and the goal of the experimental legal regime.Conclusions. The development of mobilization experimental legal regimes implies raising of their legality. It can be achieved by the provision of legal guarantees such as the goals of the legal experiment and the evaluation of their consequences. This will allow identify whether the consequences of the experiment correspond to the goals of the new legal regulation. There must be grounds for limitations to legal certainty caused by legal experimentation. Their manifestation is the goal and evaluation criteria, with the help of which it is possible to determine whether the consequences of the establishment of the experiment correspond to the goals of the new legal regulation. Otherwise, there is a risk of unjustified infringement of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens.Предлагается авторская классификация, предполагающая выделение оптимизирующих, прогрессивистских и мобилизационных экспериментальных правовых режимов по цели экспериментального законодательства. Обосновывается относимость ограничительных мер, установленных в целях недопущения распространения вирусной инфекции COVID-19, к экспериментальным правовым режимам мобилизационного вида. Выделяются направления развития экспериментального законодательства, предполагающие их легитимацию и повышение законности. Доказывается, что конституционность экспериментального законодательства возникает при ограничении принципа правовой определенности только при наличии правовых гарантий, к которым предлагается отнести цели правового эксперимента и оценку их последствий
Сложение наказаний
Get PDFIntroduction. They complete and specify the rules for assigning the final penalty for both single crimes and for the totality of crimes and sentences of the prescriptions of Articles 71-72.1 of the Criminal Code, the content of the provisions of which is much broader than the names of the articles themselves. The logical sequence of the presentation of regulatory requirements in these articles is flawed.The method and the basic algorithm for determining the final penalty when adding punishments. The final punishment for two types of plurality - the totality of crimes and sentences – is determined by the rules of Articles 69-72 of the Criminal Code, which establishes: (a) a method for determining the final punishment (absorption, full or partial addition); (b) a basic algorithm for determining the final penalty when adding punishments imposed for individual crimes; (c) differentiated limits of the final punishment.Rules for adding punishments. Article 71 of the Criminal Code details the rules for adding individual punishments, different in appearance: (a) by transferring to a single more severe type of punishment; (b) by their independent execution (thereby - only a complete addition).The proportions by which the replacement is made are chosen arbitrarily, and in some cases, contrary to the intention of the legislator, it is even possible to mitigate the punishment instead of tightening it. There is an obvious need for scientific substantiation of such coefficients, taking into account, at least, the political and social significance of deprivation and restrictions that determine the qualitative indicator of the repressiveness of punishment, their consequences (primarily legal and economic) both for the convict himself and for society, which is the subject of independent research. The legislator has not strictly observed the principle of the arrangement of types of punishments depending on their severity and severity. The problem lies in the fact that all the rules for the application of punishment (sentencing, replacement of punishment with a stricter one, release from serving a sentence) proceed from the presumption of an indisputable and accurate classification of punishments according to their severity. The above fully applies to the provisions of Articles 69-72 of the Criminal Code. Part 2 of Article 71 excludes the first stage of the addition of individual punishments, different in type, namely their transfer (recalculation) to another type of punishment. In such cases, independent execution of the relevant measures is provided. The legislator has avoided developing a set of rules defining the independent execution of punishments imposed by the court without bringing them to a single form. In fact, Part 2 of Article 71 of the Criminal Code presents only some special cases of this type of addition of punishments, but even they suffer from incompleteness.Addition of punishments with their independent execution. It would be preferable to reflect in Part 2 of Article 72 of the Criminal Code all the existing rules for the addition of individual punishments involving the independent execution of the measures-components: (1) additional punishments of different types; (2) basic and additional punishments of different types; (3) basic and additional punishments of the same type; (4) real for the execution of punishment and suspended sentence; real for the execution of punishment and punishment, the execution of which is postponed; two or more sentences with a suspended sentence; sentences with a suspended sentence and with a suspended sentence; (5) basic or additional punishments of the same type, if the characteristics of the repressiveness of the penalties determined by the court are fundamentally different, in particular, the consequences of evasion from serving the sentence.Conclusions. The current rules for adding and determining the final terms (sizes) of punishment are desystematized, fragmentary and do not always correspond to the elementary canons of legislative technique, their very presentation in the Criminal Code is rather chaotic. They do not fully take into account the peculiarities of the construction of the punishment system and its shortcomings, general and special rules for the appointment of punishments and other measures of criminal responsibility.Действующие правила сложения и определения окончательных сроков (размеров) наказания не соответствуют канонам законодательной техники, само их изложение в Уголовном кодексе (УК) РФ, скорее, хаотично. Логическая последовательность изложения нормативных предписаний в ней небезупречна. Названные правила нуждаются в совершенствовании. С этой целью выявляются основные направления развития правил сложения наказаний, поиск наиболее оптимальной их модели и разработка соответствующего законопроекта. Методологической основой исследования послужили философские воззрения о познаваемости и эволюции явлений, общенаучные и частнонаучные методы познания (анализ и синтез, формально-логический, формально-юридический, правового моделирования, лингвистический, системно-структурный и др.). В результате представлен критический анализ предписаний УК РФ о сложении наказаний, выявлены основные направления развития этих правил, коллизии и пробельности уголовно-правовых норм ст. 71–72 УК РФ, осуществлен поиск наиболее оптимальной модели сложения наказаний
О праве наследников на информацию о смерти репрессированных и впоследствии реабилитированных граждан
Get PDFThis paper discusses the question of how exactly the norms of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Law of the Russian Federation “On the rehabilitation of victims of political repressions” work, and what difficulties heirs face in practice in exercising the right to information about the death of repressed and subsequently rehabilitated citizens.The problem of obtaining objective information about the death of these citizens by relatives of repressed and subsequently rehabilitated citizens has a rather long and sad history. In this regard, using the historical method and the method of comparative legal analysis, the main stages in the development of these legal relations are determined, an analysis is made of the previously secret regulatory legal acts of the USSR of 1934-1988 in the field of providing relatives with information about the death of repressed and subsequently rehabilitated citizens.The paper concludes that for 54 years from 1934 to 1988, the heirs of the repressed and subsequently rehabilitated citizens were not provided with truthful information about the causes and date of death of the actually executed citizens, as well as about the places from the burial place. But at the same time, despite the abolition of all illegal legal acts and other documents on this issue, they still continue to be applied in practice without delay.The paper analyzes the current state of legal regulation in the field of exercising the right to information about the death of repressed and subsequently rehabilitated citizens, the practice of implementing these provisions of federal legislation by public authorities.As a result of abuses on the part of archival authorities, the practice of courts of general jurisdiction to protect the rights of heirs in the exercise of the right to information about the death of repressed and subsequently rehabilitated citizens has become widespread. In particular, it is noted that courts of general jurisdiction refuse to satisfy the requirements to establish an objective date and cause of death of repressed citizens as a result of execution (instead of fictitious dates and natural causes indicated in death certificates issued in 1955-1962), based on the fact that there is no reliable and proper evidence in the case files, testifying to the execution of the sentence to shoot the repressed citizen.Given the negative experience of the heirs in the exercise of the right to information about the death of repressed and subsequently rehabilitated citizens, this paper attempts to substantiate the prospects for filing a complaint with the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on this issue. In particular, the paper concludes that part five of Article 11 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Rehabilitation of Victims of Political Repressions”, which provides for the possibility of an arbitrary refusal by the archival authorities to inform the applicants of the time, causes of death and place of burial of the rehabilitated simply because of the lack of relevant information, without giving the reasons for the loss of documentation or evidence of such loss in conjunction with the provisions of parts 1 and 3 of Article 56 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation does not comply with the Constitution of the Russian Federation.In conclusion, attention is drawn to the fact that the cases of establishing the facts of the death of repressed and subsequently rehabilitated citizens on a certain date and under certain circumstances as a result of execution are not simple and not isolated. Such cases actually concern an indefinite circle of persons and are of particular public interest.Делается попытка анализа положений Конституции РФ и Закона РФ «О реабилитации жертв политических репрессий» в части реализации наследниками права на информацию о смерти репрессированных и впоследствии реабилитированных граждан. Проанализированы история вопроса, современное состояние правового регулирования в сфере реализации права на информацию о смерти репрессированных и впоследствии реабилитированных граждан, практика реализации указанных положений федерального законодательства со стороны органов государственной власти, а также практика судов общей юрисдикции в указанной сфере. Учитывая негативный опыт наследников при реализации вышеуказанного права, в настоящей работе сделана попытка обосновать перспективы подачи жалобы в Конституционный Суд РФ по указанному вопросу
Практика применения норм об ответственности за половые преступления (статьи 131–135 Уголовного кодекса РФ) и способы ее совершенствования
Get PDFThe subject. The article reflects the progress and results of the study of the practice of applying the norms on responsibility for crimes against sexual inviolability and sexual freedom of the individual (Chapter 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). There are a large number of general and specific law enforcement problems that do not allow us to effectively counteract such crimes.Purpose of the study. The purpose of the study is to confirm the scientific hypothesis about the presence of systemic problems in the practice of applying the norms of Chapter 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as to develop proposals for improving law enforcement.Methodology. The identification of law enforcement problems was carried out by analyzing published and unpublished materials of judicial practice and comparing them with the main categories and principles of criminal law. Access to the published materials was carried out through the legal reference systems and the State Automated System "Justice". Unpublished materials were obtained in the course of their own professional activities, as well as when studying the scientific works of other authors. The use of previously obtained results of their own scientific activities, the results of scientific research of modern criminologists and criminologists, as well as the study of the experience of foreign countries allowed us to formulate proposals for solving the identified problems.The main results. In the course of the study, the following systemic problems of law enforcement were identified. (1) The uncertainty of the content of other sexual actions. (2) The ambiguity of the legal assessment of the multiplicity of crimes against sexual inviolability and sexual freedom of the individual. (3) The blurring of the content and methods of committing depraved actions.These problems characterize the current state of the practice of applying the norms of Chapter 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.To solve these problems and improve law enforcement, the following proposals are justified and formulated.At the level of the resolution of the Plenum, it should be clarified that other actions of a sexual nature are contact forms of the perpetrator's influence on the victim's body that can satisfy sexual needs, with the exception of sexual intercourse, sodomy and lesbianism (for example, masturbation, fellatio, forced kisses, manual influence on the mammary glands or genitals and other ways of stimulating sexual arousal).On the issue of the qualification of continuing crimes, the Plenum of the Supreme Court should indicate that repeated sexual acts that form the objective side of one corpus delicti should be considered as a single continuing crime, if their commission was covered by a single intent. At the same time, such intent may be evidenced by the behavior of the perpetrator, in which he does not stop the violation of sexual freedom or sexual inviolability of a particular victim.The provisions of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court concerning the qualification of depraved acts should be changed, indicating that depraved acts are other sexual acts that are not covered by the dispositions of Article 134 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and actually depraved acts committed without direct physical contact in order to satisfy sexual needs or arouse the victim's interest in sexual acts. It is also important to emphasize that the acts provided for in the note to Article 131 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should include only other actions of a sexual nature.Conclusions. In conclusion, it should be noted that the proposals formulated to solve the identified problems of law enforcement cannot completely eliminate them. The solution to these problems should be found through legislative changes. In this activity, it seems correct to focus on the positive experience of European legislators, which provides for a more detailed differentiation of responsibility depending on the features that objectively affect the nature and degree of public danger of the act.Отражаются ход и результаты исследования практики применения норм об ответственности за преступления против половой неприкосновенности и половой свободы личности (гл. 18 Уголовного кодекса РФ). Установлены следующие системные правоприменительные проблемы: 1) неопределенность содержания иных действий сексуального характера; 2) неоднозначность правовой оценки множественности преступлений против половой неприкосновенности и половой свободы личности; 3) размытость содержания и способов совершения развратных действий.В качестве возможного решения сформулированы предложения о внесении изменений в действующие постановления Пленума Верховного Суда РФ, способные минимизировать негативный эффект от означенных проблем. Например, на уровне постановления Пленума предлагается разъяснить, что иными действиями сексуального характера являются контактные формы воздействия виновного на тело потерпевшего, способные удовлетворить сексуальную потребность, за исключением полового сношения, мужеложства и лесбиянства (например, мастурбация, фелляция, форсированные поцелуи, мануальное воздействие на молочные железы или половые органы и другие способы стимуляции сексуального возбуждения)
Институт цифровых прав в гражданском праве России
Get PDFThe subject of the study is the institution of digital rights, which has recently been enshrined in Russian legislation. This topic is relevant since the definition of digital rights causes numerous discussions and disputes. Practice on this issue has not yet developed, and there are conflicts in the current legislation. The purpose of the article is to consider the scope of digital rights and define the category "digital rights", given that there is a deep difference between its broad and narrow definitions. The following tasks have been solved to achieve this goal: (1) to consider the regulatory framework governing digital rights; (2) to analyze the main approaches to the definition of digital rights; (3) to study various definitions of digital objects; (4) to highlight the main characteristics of digital objects; (5) to propose original definitions of "digital rights" and "digital objects".Methodology. The authors use the general scientific dialectical method, as well as formallegal, system-structural, formal-logical methods and methods of cognition. The synergetic method is used to clarify the main features of digital rights. It allows isolating new rules and reality from the creative potential of chaos.The main results and the scope of the study. Considering law as a variable phenomenon, it has been proved that it is constantly changing. Analysis allows the authors to conclude that digital rights are an independent special type of rights that arise only in relation to digital objects created in digital form. The features of digital rights include: digital format, occurrence only in the cyber-physical space, consolidation in the form of software algorithms, the accounting system is carried out without an intermediary, the owner’s digital rights are realized with access to the Internet and a key in the form of login.The main qualitative characteristics of digital objects include the following: digital objects are not material; in some cases, they cannot be materialized and there is no need for that; digital objects are created using modern high-tech systems; it is possible to make transactions with digital objects only in the cyber-physical space; the right of inheritance for some digital objects is limited to inheritance by will due to the peculiarities of ownership of these objects; digital objects can be disposed of without the participation of third parties and intermediaries; transactions with digital assets are confidential.Conclusions. Based on the study results, original definitions of "digital rights" and "digital objects" have been proposed. Digital right is a digital algorithm that enshrines the powers of individuals and legal entities to own, use, and alienate digital objects of civil rights in hightech systems, given that technical means provide the owner with the opportunity to exercise their powers. Digital objects represent an independent legal category, which is a cryptographic code that gives the owner the right to perform any actions with it - to own, dispose of, alienate, make transactions, and other actions not prohibited by law. Legislative amendments to the current Russian legislation are developed.Предметом исследования является институт цифровых прав в гражданском праве России. Цель статьи – рассмотреть объем цифровых прав и дать определение категории «цифровые права», учитывая, что между широким и узкоспециальным определением существует глубокое различие. Для реализации поставленной цели решаются следующие задачи: 1) рассмотреть нормативную базу, регламентирующую цифровые права; 2) проанализировать основные подходы к определению цифровых прав; 3) изучить различные дефиниции определения «цифровые объекты»; 4) выделить основные характеристики цифровых объектов; 5) предложить авторские определения «цифровых прав» и «цифровых объектов». В исследовании использован общенаучный диалектический метод, а также формально-юридический, системно-структурный, формально-логический методы познания. Синергетический метод использовался для выяснения особенностей и основных признаков цифровых прав, он позволил из созидательного потенциала хаоса вычленить новые правила и новую реальность. Проведенный анализ позволил сделать вывод, что цифровые права являются самостоятельным особым видом прав, которые возникают только в отношении цифровых объектов, созданных в цифровой форме. К особенностям цифровых прав следует отнести: цифровой формат, возникновение только в киберфизическом пространстве, закрепление в виде программного алгоритма, осуществление системы учета без посредника, реализация цифровых прав собственника при наличии доступа к сети «Интернет» и ключа в виде логина. Авторы дали узкоспециальные опредления «цифровых прав» и «цифровых объектов», предложили законодательные поправки