{"title":"Contractual Model of Urban Agglomeration Management: Comparative Legal Aspect","authors":"Ismail D. Lukmanov","doi":"10.12737/jflcl.2022.016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12737/jflcl.2022.016","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":159173,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121909802","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
. The cross-border reorganization of corporations is a little-studied legal phenomenon in the domestic doctrine. At the same time, the procedures of merger, splitting up and transformation of corporations affecting several jurisdictions are regulated in detail in the latest European corporate law and are applied in practice. The study of this experience is useful for Russia, which is an active participant in international integration associations. The aim of the study is to analyze the legal specifics of stakeholder protection at different stages of cross-border reorganization of corporations within the EU. For this purpose, the following tasks are sequentially solved: the first part of the paper reveals the essence of cross-border reorganization and its main forms, the second part considers procedural aspects of cross-border reorganization in the EU, the third part of the article is devoted to the mechanisms of rights’ protection of key stakeholders: participants of the corporation, its creditors, and employees. The study is based on general scientific methods: analysis, synthesis, generalization and comparison. The comparative legal method and approaches of socio-economic analysis of law are also used. Directive the key directive for cross-border reorganization, which amended Directive 2017/1132 on cross-border transformations, mergers and separations, entered into force on January 1, The three forms of cross-border reorganization provided for in the new Directive have received detailed regulation, but only in relation to European legal entities in the form of a limited liability company. The reorganization of other organizational and legal forms of corporations remains illegalized. The great value of EU legislation in the field of cross-border corporate mobility lies in fixing a minimum standard for protecting the rights of stakeholders: the rights of participants, creditors and employees in cross-border reorganization should be consistent with their similar rights in domestic reorganization. The common legal foundation laid can be further developed and supplemented in the national legislation of the EU member States.
{"title":"Cross-Border Corporate Reorganisation in the European Union and Stakeholder Protection","authors":"O. Fonotova, Yana Tihonenkova","doi":"10.12737/jflcl.2021.069","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12737/jflcl.2021.069","url":null,"abstract":". The cross-border reorganization of corporations is a little-studied legal phenomenon in the domestic doctrine. At the same time, the procedures of merger, splitting up and transformation of corporations affecting several jurisdictions are regulated in detail in the latest European corporate law and are applied in practice. The study of this experience is useful for Russia, which is an active participant in international integration associations. The aim of the study is to analyze the legal specifics of stakeholder protection at different stages of cross-border reorganization of corporations within the EU. For this purpose, the following tasks are sequentially solved: the first part of the paper reveals the essence of cross-border reorganization and its main forms, the second part considers procedural aspects of cross-border reorganization in the EU, the third part of the article is devoted to the mechanisms of rights’ protection of key stakeholders: participants of the corporation, its creditors, and employees. The study is based on general scientific methods: analysis, synthesis, generalization and comparison. The comparative legal method and approaches of socio-economic analysis of law are also used. Directive the key directive for cross-border reorganization, which amended Directive 2017/1132 on cross-border transformations, mergers and separations, entered into force on January 1, The three forms of cross-border reorganization provided for in the new Directive have received detailed regulation, but only in relation to European legal entities in the form of a limited liability company. The reorganization of other organizational and legal forms of corporations remains illegalized. The great value of EU legislation in the field of cross-border corporate mobility lies in fixing a minimum standard for protecting the rights of stakeholders: the rights of participants, creditors and employees in cross-border reorganization should be consistent with their similar rights in domestic reorganization. The common legal foundation laid can be further developed and supplemented in the national legislation of the EU member States.","PeriodicalId":159173,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130648275","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
. The article is devoted to a comparative analysis of the official remembrance policy of modern states. The study aims to identify the general and unique aspects of foreign states’ legislation and judicial practice, reflecting the attitude to specific historical events and the historical process in general. Using the chronological method, the authors establish the sequence of adoption of regulatory legal acts in different states, which determine the main directions of the official remembrance policy. The descriptive method allows describing the reasons for mainstreaming history at the current stage and the legal forms of reflection of this process. The formal legal method is applied when analyzing the content of regulatory legal acts of different countries. The comparative legal method is used to identify common features and peculiarities concerning the content and forms of consolidation of the official remembrance policy in various states. The conclusion about the appropriate model of the legal implementation of the official remembrance policy is made based on legal modeling. As a result of studying the main directions of the official remembrance policy in different foreign countries, it is concluded that states legally recognize specific historical events in three cases: if the event belongs to those of a “state-forming” nature, it shapes a state ideology; if at the present stage the society — while “experiencing” this event or phenomenon — requires the state to consolidate the official position legally; if a significant historical event for the state and general public receives completely different interpretation at the international level or by another country. In the official remembrance policy of modern states, the primary attention is given to the issues of preserving the memory of world wars, prohibiting the revision of the results of World War II, overcoming the remnants of colonialism, racism and perceiving civil war as a tragedy.
{"title":"The Official Remembrance Policy: A Comparative Analysis of the Legislation and Judicial Practice of Modern States","authors":"A. Dorskaya, D. Pashentsev","doi":"10.12737/jflcl.2021.061","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12737/jflcl.2021.061","url":null,"abstract":". The article is devoted to a comparative analysis of the official remembrance policy of modern states. The study aims to identify the general and unique aspects of foreign states’ legislation and judicial practice, reflecting the attitude to specific historical events and the historical process in general. Using the chronological method, the authors establish the sequence of adoption of regulatory legal acts in different states, which determine the main directions of the official remembrance policy. The descriptive method allows describing the reasons for mainstreaming history at the current stage and the legal forms of reflection of this process. The formal legal method is applied when analyzing the content of regulatory legal acts of different countries. The comparative legal method is used to identify common features and peculiarities concerning the content and forms of consolidation of the official remembrance policy in various states. The conclusion about the appropriate model of the legal implementation of the official remembrance policy is made based on legal modeling. As a result of studying the main directions of the official remembrance policy in different foreign countries, it is concluded that states legally recognize specific historical events in three cases: if the event belongs to those of a “state-forming” nature, it shapes a state ideology; if at the present stage the society — while “experiencing” this event or phenomenon — requires the state to consolidate the official position legally; if a significant historical event for the state and general public receives completely different interpretation at the international level or by another country. In the official remembrance policy of modern states, the primary attention is given to the issues of preserving the memory of world wars, prohibiting the revision of the results of World War II, overcoming the remnants of colonialism, racism and perceiving civil war as a tragedy.","PeriodicalId":159173,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128434371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
. The article is devoted to the study of the role of the supervisory (control) commissions in the anti-corruption campaign in PRC. On March 11, 2018, the National People’s Congress of the PRC adopted an amendment to the PRC Constitution created a new State Control Commission (National Supervision Commission) in the system of the highest authorities and administrations of the PRC. The National Supervision Commission’s main task is fighting corruption in modern China. In March 2018, the Supervision Law (Law of Control) of the PRC was adopted. In accordance with this law, supervisory (control) commissions have many law-enforcement functions. They may bring criminal proceedings, conduct an investigation, interrogate the supervisory objects. Supervisory organs shall conduct supervision of the following public officials and relevant personnel: not only members of the Chinese Communist Party and other democratic parties, but also personnel engaged in management in public entities in education, scientific research, culture, health care, and sports and etc. The purpose and objectives of the study is to analyze the experience of the People’s Republic of China on the institutionalization of the anti-corruption mechanism, to study the features of the legal status of new control organs. The study uses formal legal, comparative legal,
{"title":"Constitutional Legal Bases of Institutionalization of Anti-Corruption in the PRC","authors":"P. Troshchinskiy","doi":"10.12737/jflcl.2021.067","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12737/jflcl.2021.067","url":null,"abstract":". The article is devoted to the study of the role of the supervisory (control) commissions in the anti-corruption campaign in PRC. On March 11, 2018, the National People’s Congress of the PRC adopted an amendment to the PRC Constitution created a new State Control Commission (National Supervision Commission) in the system of the highest authorities and administrations of the PRC. The National Supervision Commission’s main task is fighting corruption in modern China. In March 2018, the Supervision Law (Law of Control) of the PRC was adopted. In accordance with this law, supervisory (control) commissions have many law-enforcement functions. They may bring criminal proceedings, conduct an investigation, interrogate the supervisory objects. Supervisory organs shall conduct supervision of the following public officials and relevant personnel: not only members of the Chinese Communist Party and other democratic parties, but also personnel engaged in management in public entities in education, scientific research, culture, health care, and sports and etc. The purpose and objectives of the study is to analyze the experience of the People’s Republic of China on the institutionalization of the anti-corruption mechanism, to study the features of the legal status of new control organs. The study uses formal legal, comparative legal,","PeriodicalId":159173,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130264137","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article considers the legal regulation, content and algorithm for reviewing legality of an administrative act, taking into account that the illegality of an administrative act is one of the reasons for challenging an administrative act in court according to the law of the Federal Republic of Germany. The author, based on German legal literature and judicial practice, in particular reveals the principle of legality of public administration and describes the requirements of legality of an administrative act, stemming from this principle. The principle of legality in public administration contains two components: the principle of (1) priority of law, according to which public administration authorities must act in accordance with the law, and the principle of (2) proviso of law, according to which public administration authorities may only act if they have been authorised to do so by law. It follows that an administrative act is legal if it is based on a legal provision — authorizing administration to act this way — legal requirements regarding competence; procedure and form (formal legality) have been complied with, and the public administration body has duly considered legal preconditions for its application; as well as limitations as to the choice of legal consequences (material legality). As a legal consequence, the law may provide for a binding (bound) decision or give the public administration the freedom to choose between different courses of action (discretion). The discretion must be exercised in accordance with the purpose of the АДМИНИСТРАТИВНОЕ ПРАВО. ФИНАНСОВОЕ ПРАВО. ИНФОРМАЦИОННОЕ ПРАВО Журнал зарубежного законодательства и сравнительного правоведения. 2021. Т. 17. No 6 17 power granted and within the limits set by law, as well as those derived from the constitutional principles of proportionality, equal treatment and fundamental rights.
{"title":"Illegality of the Administrative Act as a Prerequisite for the Merits of the Administrative Action in German Law","authors":"D. Oleynik","doi":"10.12737/jflcl.2021.062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12737/jflcl.2021.062","url":null,"abstract":"The article considers the legal regulation, content and algorithm for reviewing legality of an administrative act, taking into account that the illegality of an administrative act is one of the reasons for challenging an administrative act in court according to the law of the Federal Republic of Germany. The author, based on German legal literature and judicial practice, in particular reveals the principle of legality of public administration and describes the requirements of legality of an administrative act, stemming from this principle. The principle of legality in public administration contains two components: the principle of (1) priority of law, according to which public administration authorities must act in accordance with the law, and the principle of (2) proviso of law, according to which public administration authorities may only act if they have been authorised to do so by law. It follows that an administrative act is legal if it is based on a legal provision — authorizing administration to act this way — legal requirements regarding competence; procedure and form (formal legality) have been complied with, and the public administration body has duly considered legal preconditions for its application; as well as limitations as to the choice of legal consequences (material legality). As a legal consequence, the law may provide for a binding (bound) decision or give the public administration the freedom to choose between different courses of action (discretion). The discretion must be exercised in accordance with the purpose of the АДМИНИСТРАТИВНОЕ ПРАВО. ФИНАНСОВОЕ ПРАВО. ИНФОРМАЦИОННОЕ ПРАВО Журнал зарубежного законодательства и сравнительного правоведения. 2021. Т. 17. No 6 17 power granted and within the limits set by law, as well as those derived from the constitutional principles of proportionality, equal treatment and fundamental rights.","PeriodicalId":159173,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121759102","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
. Many principles and basic concepts of modern patent law were laid down in the XV and XVII centuries with the adoption of the first patent laws and the issuance of the first patents. Thus, in the first Law of Venice on Patents of 1474, insufficiently studied in Russian science, the foundations of such phenomena as the inventive level, exemptions from the patent in the public interest, granting equal rights to foreigners with their citizens in respect of patenting, etc. were laid. The author refutes the thesis that patent law appeared only at the end of the XVIII century, i. e. later than copyright. The influence that the mentioned Venice Law and the Statute of England on Monopolies of 1623 had on modern patent law is described in detail. Contrary to popular opinion, this Statute had a significant impact on the patent legislation not only of Great Britain, but also of many other countries. This Statute has also become part of the modern legal system of Australia and New Zealand and is used in judicial practice today. The article also highlights the laws of the XVII century adopted in the United States in relation to patents, and tells about the origin of many modern concepts and principles of patent law in the XIX century, in particular about the emergence of such fundamental concepts for patent law as the formula of invention, pre-use, statutory damages, compulsory licenses, etc.
{"title":"The Main Provisions of Modern Patent Law: Prerequisites for the Formation and Development","authors":"D. Afanas’ev","doi":"10.12737/jflcl.2021.068","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12737/jflcl.2021.068","url":null,"abstract":". Many principles and basic concepts of modern patent law were laid down in the XV and XVII centuries with the adoption of the first patent laws and the issuance of the first patents. Thus, in the first Law of Venice on Patents of 1474, insufficiently studied in Russian science, the foundations of such phenomena as the inventive level, exemptions from the patent in the public interest, granting equal rights to foreigners with their citizens in respect of patenting, etc. were laid. The author refutes the thesis that patent law appeared only at the end of the XVIII century, i. e. later than copyright. The influence that the mentioned Venice Law and the Statute of England on Monopolies of 1623 had on modern patent law is described in detail. Contrary to popular opinion, this Statute had a significant impact on the patent legislation not only of Great Britain, but also of many other countries. This Statute has also become part of the modern legal system of Australia and New Zealand and is used in judicial practice today. The article also highlights the laws of the XVII century adopted in the United States in relation to patents, and tells about the origin of many modern concepts and principles of patent law in the XIX century, in particular about the emergence of such fundamental concepts for patent law as the formula of invention, pre-use, statutory damages, compulsory licenses, etc.","PeriodicalId":159173,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114745505","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights issued a much-anticipated judgments in the cases of Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom and Centrum För Rättvisa v. Sweden. These cases are certainly of vital importance for the Council of Europe member states increasingly relying on mass surveillance regimes because it justifies the expectations in their utility as a means of fighting serious cross-border crime and terrorism. The judgments under consideration is essentially the first on the issue of mass electronic surveillance and raises questions about the extent to which such surveillance is permissible and under what conditions. A particular problem is that surveillance has traditionally been considered from the point of view of individual surveillance, when a person may be subject to control if there are reasonable grounds for suspicion. The very nature of mass data collection and intelligence gathering means that such suspicions are unnecessary. In fact, the Court established the procedure for mass surveillance, and its conclusions correspond to the general practice of expanding surveillance МЕЖДУНАРОДНОЕ И ИНТЕГРАЦИОННОЕ ПРАВО. ЕВРОПЕйСКОЕ ПРАВО Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2021, vol. 17, no. 6 134 and data interception in many European States. It simultaneously raises many questions about the protection of human rights and freedoms that require further research.
欧洲人权法院大分庭在“老大哥观察和其他人”诉英国和Centrum För Rättvisa诉瑞典案中发布了备受期待的判决。对于日益依赖大规模监控制度的欧洲委员会(Council of Europe)成员国来说，这些案件当然至关重要，因为它证明了人们对监控制度作为打击严重跨境犯罪和恐怖主义手段的期望是合理的。正在审议的判决基本上是关于大规模电子监视问题的第一个判决，并提出了关于允许这种监视的程度和在什么条件下进行的问题。一个特别的问题是，监视传统上是从个人监视的角度来考虑的，当有合理的怀疑理由时，一个人可能受到控制。大规模数据收集和情报收集的本质意味着这种怀疑是不必要的。事实上，法院建立了大规模监视程序，其结论符合扩大监视的一般做法МЕЖДУНАРОДНОЕ И ИНТЕГРАЦИОННОЕ ПРАВО。ЕВРОПЕйСКОЕ ПРАВО《外国立法与比较法》2021年第17卷第1期。6 134和许多欧洲国家的数据拦截。它同时提出了许多关于保护人权和自由的问题，这些问题需要进一步研究。
{"title":"Commentary on the Judgments of the ECtHR Grand Chamber in the Cases “Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom” and “Centrum För Rättvisa v. Sweden”","authors":"D. Dedov, Hanlar Gadzhiev","doi":"10.12737/jflcl.2021.071","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12737/jflcl.2021.071","url":null,"abstract":"The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights issued a much-anticipated judgments in the cases of Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom and Centrum För Rättvisa v. Sweden. These cases are certainly of vital importance for the Council of Europe member states increasingly relying on mass surveillance regimes because it justifies the expectations in their utility as a means of fighting serious cross-border crime and terrorism. The judgments under consideration is essentially the first on the issue of mass electronic surveillance and raises questions about the extent to which such surveillance is permissible and under what conditions. A particular problem is that surveillance has traditionally been considered from the point of view of individual surveillance, when a person may be subject to control if there are reasonable grounds for suspicion. The very nature of mass data collection and intelligence gathering means that such suspicions are unnecessary. In fact, the Court established the procedure for mass surveillance, and its conclusions correspond to the general practice of expanding surveillance МЕЖДУНАРОДНОЕ И ИНТЕГРАЦИОННОЕ ПРАВО. ЕВРОПЕйСКОЕ ПРАВО Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2021, vol. 17, no. 6 134 and data interception in many European States. It simultaneously raises many questions about the protection of human rights and freedoms that require further research.","PeriodicalId":159173,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law","volume":"86 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124895717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The expansion of economic ties between Russia and Vietnam — as well as the maintenance of strong partnerships in the international arena — give rise to considerable interest in a comparative study of both countries’ laws. Over the past years, the Vietnamese criminal legislation concerning countering cybercrime repeatedly improves and currently demonstrates a special, in a sense, unique, approach to establishing and differentiating responsibility for crimes in the field of computer information. КОМПАРАТИВИСТСКИЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ УГОЛОВНОГО ПРАВА, КРИМИНОЛОГИИ И УГОЛОВНО-ИСПОЛНИТЕЛьНОГО ПРАВА Журнал зарубежного законодательства и сравнительного правоведения. 2021. Т. 17. No 6 39 The work aims to conduct a study of criminal responsibility for crimes in the field of computer information in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. The implementation of this goal is achieved by assessing the state of the criminal legislation of Vietnam in terms of regulating liability for encroachments on computer information, as well as the means of its automated processing, storage and
{"title":"Criminal Liability for Crimes in the Sphere of Computer Information Under the Legislation of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam","authors":"E. Russkevich, Vu Thi Huen, Nguen Tien Dat","doi":"10.12737/jflcl.2021.064","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12737/jflcl.2021.064","url":null,"abstract":"The expansion of economic ties between Russia and Vietnam — as well as the maintenance of strong partnerships in the international arena — give rise to considerable interest in a comparative study of both countries’ laws. Over the past years, the Vietnamese criminal legislation concerning countering cybercrime repeatedly improves and currently demonstrates a special, in a sense, unique, approach to establishing and differentiating responsibility for crimes in the field of computer information. КОМПАРАТИВИСТСКИЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ УГОЛОВНОГО ПРАВА, КРИМИНОЛОГИИ И УГОЛОВНО-ИСПОЛНИТЕЛьНОГО ПРАВА Журнал зарубежного законодательства и сравнительного правоведения. 2021. Т. 17. No 6 39 The work aims to conduct a study of criminal responsibility for crimes in the field of computer information in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. The implementation of this goal is achieved by assessing the state of the criminal legislation of Vietnam in terms of regulating liability for encroachments on computer information, as well as the means of its automated processing, storage and","PeriodicalId":159173,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122451894","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
. The content of the “information security” concept as an object of criminal law protection testifies to its complexity and multilevelness. It testifies integration of several relatively independent objects of criminal law protection of the rights and legitimate interests of subjects of information relations in it: information-technical and information-psychological security. The analysis of information- psychological security of subjects of information relations as a complex object of criminal law protection was not previously the subject of scientific criminal law research. Social realities require the definition of the boundaries of the safe communication interaction of actors in the information sphere, the subject and the mechanism of its legal support, including the use of criminal law means. The article analyzes the individual normative and doctrinal approaches to the segregation and definition of information-psychological security as an object of legal protection based on the analysis of scientific views of representatives of various social sciences on the problem of ensuring the security of the information and psychological components of the information sphere. The coordinated interaction of representatives of the social sciences in the implementation of a deep scientific analysis of the new phenomenon of the information society — “information-psychological security” — allows to develop a unified concept of its provision through the use of a system of organizational, technical, legal means; ensure the overcoming of legal (both narrow — criminal law, and broad — intersectoral legal) and intersectoral (within various branches of social sciences) contradictions, eliminate gaps and conflicts of legal regulation. The conducted research allows us to conclude that information-psychological security is recognized as an independent intergeneric object of criminal law protection, including the levels of personal, corporate, public, national and international information security. Recognition of information security as an object of legal protection (integratively uniting the personal, public, state and international levels) as a single integral system should become the basis for ensuring the consistency of criminal legislation, since it indicates that there is no need to combine the norms that ensure the protection of information-psychological security into a single section with the norms ensuring the protection of information and technical (computer) security, and also testifies to the impossibility of their conglomeration in a single chapter of the Criminal Code.
{"title":"Information-Psychological Security as an Intergeneric Object of Criminal Law Protection","authors":"R. Klyuchko","doi":"10.12737/jflcl.2021.065","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12737/jflcl.2021.065","url":null,"abstract":". The content of the “information security” concept as an object of criminal law protection testifies to its complexity and multilevelness. It testifies integration of several relatively independent objects of criminal law protection of the rights and legitimate interests of subjects of information relations in it: information-technical and information-psychological security. The analysis of information- psychological security of subjects of information relations as a complex object of criminal law protection was not previously the subject of scientific criminal law research. Social realities require the definition of the boundaries of the safe communication interaction of actors in the information sphere, the subject and the mechanism of its legal support, including the use of criminal law means. The article analyzes the individual normative and doctrinal approaches to the segregation and definition of information-psychological security as an object of legal protection based on the analysis of scientific views of representatives of various social sciences on the problem of ensuring the security of the information and psychological components of the information sphere. The coordinated interaction of representatives of the social sciences in the implementation of a deep scientific analysis of the new phenomenon of the information society — “information-psychological security” — allows to develop a unified concept of its provision through the use of a system of organizational, technical, legal means; ensure the overcoming of legal (both narrow — criminal law, and broad — intersectoral legal) and intersectoral (within various branches of social sciences) contradictions, eliminate gaps and conflicts of legal regulation. The conducted research allows us to conclude that information-psychological security is recognized as an independent intergeneric object of criminal law protection, including the levels of personal, corporate, public, national and international information security. Recognition of information security as an object of legal protection (integratively uniting the personal, public, state and international levels) as a single integral system should become the basis for ensuring the consistency of criminal legislation, since it indicates that there is no need to combine the norms that ensure the protection of information-psychological security into a single section with the norms ensuring the protection of information and technical (computer) security, and also testifies to the impossibility of their conglomeration in a single chapter of the Criminal Code.","PeriodicalId":159173,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law","volume":"135 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125060758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Features of the Interaction of Financial Monitoring Bodies with Law Enforcement Agencies in Relation to Money Laundering on the Example of the Kyrgyz Republic","authors":"V. Batyukova, Nurdaulet Asylbaev","doi":"10.12737/jflcl.2021.063","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12737/jflcl.2021.063","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":159173,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126937083","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：