Pub Date : 2023-09-18DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).383-391
L.A. Petryakova
The author uses the conducted research to formulate suggestions on preventing fraud in the banking sector. The goal of the study is to develop practical recommendations on improving the existing system of preventing fraud and enhancing its effectiveness. Within organizational and managerial measures, it is recommended to improve the inter-agency cooperation between law enforcement bodies and banks and other credit organizations; to carry out a thorough selection, training and adaptation of employees for the financial-credit supervision bodies, as the usefulness of a well-trained bank employee is difficult to overestimate. Special attention is paid to the necessity of counteracting “leaks” of bank clients’ personal data. As technical measures make it possible to solve most problems of counteracting bank fraud, the systems capable of adaptation to the new fraud schemes should be designed and improved. Within criminal law measures, it is suggested that special crimes of Art. 159.1 and 159.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be excluded from criminal law, and liability for them should be transferred to the general crime of fraud. To improve the protection level for victims of bank fraud, it is recommended to conduct preventive work with persons characterized by age and role victimity; to raise the level of digital, financial and technical literacy of potential and actual victims in order to prevent repeat victimity; to provide information about new ways of committing crimes. It is stressed that both physical and juridical persons could be victims of bank fraud, so the specific features of the victim should be considered in the development of prevention measures. It is pointed out that active work in these directions is, according to the author, an important step towards effective identification and prevention of fraud in the banking sector.
{"title":"Prevention of Fraud in the Banking Sector","authors":"L.A. Petryakova","doi":"10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).383-391","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).383-391","url":null,"abstract":"The author uses the conducted research to formulate suggestions on preventing fraud in the banking sector. The goal of the study is to develop practical recommendations on improving the existing system of preventing fraud and enhancing its effectiveness. Within organizational and managerial measures, it is recommended to improve the inter-agency cooperation between law enforcement bodies and banks and other credit organizations; to carry out a thorough selection, training and adaptation of employees for the financial-credit supervision bodies, as the usefulness of a well-trained bank employee is difficult to overestimate. Special attention is paid to the necessity of counteracting “leaks” of bank clients’ personal data. As technical measures make it possible to solve most problems of counteracting bank fraud, the systems capable of adaptation to the new fraud schemes should be designed and improved. Within criminal law measures, it is suggested that special crimes of Art. 159.1 and 159.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be excluded from criminal law, and liability for them should be transferred to the general crime of fraud. To improve the protection level for victims of bank fraud, it is recommended to conduct preventive work with persons characterized by age and role victimity; to raise the level of digital, financial and technical literacy of potential and actual victims in order to prevent repeat victimity; to provide information about new ways of committing crimes. It is stressed that both physical and juridical persons could be victims of bank fraud, so the specific features of the victim should be considered in the development of prevention measures. It is pointed out that active work in these directions is, according to the author, an important step towards effective identification and prevention of fraud in the banking sector.","PeriodicalId":43975,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139338987","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-18DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).352-360
Elena Antonova
Lawmaking should avoid being scientifically ungrounded, unsystematic or chaotic. The lawmakers’ active use of the theory of the dangerous state of the individual in the construction of criminal law norms often results in violating norms of legislative technique and is assessed in different ways in the doctrine of criminal law. The article presents an overview of Russian criminal law norms based on this theory. The legislators classify as dangerous condition the condition of intoxication in cases of traffic rules’ violations resulting in consequences, as well as committing crimes in the situations of criminal or administrative prejustice. In these situations, although the “dangerous” subject commits a criminal offence prohibited by law, establishing liability for it cannot always be seen as a justified action of the lawmaker. These norms often lack a balance between the degree of public danger of an act and the severity of the penalty, which results in the violation of the principle of justice and an ungrounded use of measures of criminal law impact. There is no precedent for establishing liability for occupying the highest position in the criminal hierarchy. A number of questions connected with the legal consequences for a person renouncing the criminal status, and with determining the criteria for such a position have not been resolved at the legislative level. It is concluded that use of the theory of the dangerous state of the individual is justified for persons who violated criminal law prohibitions in the condition of diminished responsibility or have not reached the age of criminal liability. Measures applied to such persons are aimed at overcoming the state of their public danger. It is noted that it is inadmissible to establish criminal liability based on the dangerous state of the person alone, regardless of the specifics of publicly dangerous acts. The author points out that the danger of the person should only be taken into consideration when choosing the measure of criminal law impact and working out measures of preventing unlawful behavior.
{"title":"The Theory of the Dangerous State of the Individual and Its Impact on Criminal Lawmaking: Statement of the Problem","authors":"Elena Antonova","doi":"10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).352-360","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).352-360","url":null,"abstract":"Lawmaking should avoid being scientifically ungrounded, unsystematic or chaotic. The lawmakers’ active use of the theory of the dangerous state of the individual in the construction of criminal law norms often results in violating norms of legislative technique and is assessed in different ways in the doctrine of criminal law. The article presents an overview of Russian criminal law norms based on this theory. The legislators classify as dangerous condition the condition of intoxication in cases of traffic rules’ violations resulting in consequences, as well as committing crimes in the situations of criminal or administrative prejustice. In these situations, although the “dangerous” subject commits a criminal offence prohibited by law, establishing liability for it cannot always be seen as a justified action of the lawmaker. These norms often lack a balance between the degree of public danger of an act and the severity of the penalty, which results in the violation of the principle of justice and an ungrounded use of measures of criminal law impact. There is no precedent for establishing liability for occupying the highest position in the criminal hierarchy. A number of questions connected with the legal consequences for a person renouncing the criminal status, and with determining the criteria for such a position have not been resolved at the legislative level. It is concluded that use of the theory of the dangerous state of the individual is justified for persons who violated criminal law prohibitions in the condition of diminished responsibility or have not reached the age of criminal liability. Measures applied to such persons are aimed at overcoming the state of their public danger. It is noted that it is inadmissible to establish criminal liability based on the dangerous state of the person alone, regardless of the specifics of publicly dangerous acts. The author points out that the danger of the person should only be taken into consideration when choosing the measure of criminal law impact and working out measures of preventing unlawful behavior.","PeriodicalId":43975,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139338978","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-18DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).372-382
Nina Skripchenko
Russian legislators criminalized torture for the first time in 1993, and for a long time did not connect torture with the actions of state power representatives, ensuring the performance of international obligations through general prohibitions. The implementation of norms constituting the legal mechanism of counteracting torture revealed their technical legal drawbacks and lead to the introduction of amendments in Art. 117, 286 and 302 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in July 2022. The transformation of Russian normative definition of actions constituting torture made the Russian approach maximally close to the conventional one. However, the Russian definition of “torture” lacks a conventional feature — a special status of the subject and the deviation from the universal definition of the subject content of the norms providing for liability for torture — which leads to different qualification of similar actions and excludes the application of more serious sanctions towards officials who «sanction» torture outside the sphere of justice. The article argues for the suggestion to widen the subject content of Part 4, Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The revealed normative desynchronization of defining torture in relation to violence in the system of qualifying features of adjacent methods of committing crimes should not lead to differences in the legal assessment that evidently are outside the official powers of a public official, as the differences in the contents of violence and torture define the competing role of these methods of committing crimes in crime qualification. Unlike violence, encompassing harm to health, the harm specified in the legal definition of «torture» does not include bodily harm, raising the question of possible additional qualification on crimes against health. The consistency of law enforcement makes it necessary to clarify this question at the level of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The severity of sanctions of Part 4, Art. 286 and Part 3, Art. 302 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is the basis for a wider interpretation that does not require cumulative offences under articles in Chapter 16 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Exclusion of torture from the number of qualifying features did not lead to partial decriminalization due to a normative «conversion» by an objectively similar way, which does not only exclude the reconsideration of verdicts containing accusations under Item «д», Part 2, Art. 117 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the basis of Art. 10 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, but also makes it possible to use practice-based criteria when defining torture.
{"title":"Criminal Responsibility for Torture: Modern Regulation and Implementation Problems","authors":"Nina Skripchenko","doi":"10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).372-382","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).372-382","url":null,"abstract":"Russian legislators criminalized torture for the first time in 1993, and for a long time did not connect torture with the actions of state power representatives, ensuring the performance of international obligations through general prohibitions. The implementation of norms constituting the legal mechanism of counteracting torture revealed their technical legal drawbacks and lead to the introduction of amendments in Art. 117, 286 and 302 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in July 2022. The transformation of Russian normative definition of actions constituting torture made the Russian approach maximally close to the conventional one. However, the Russian definition of “torture” lacks a conventional feature — a special status of the subject and the deviation from the universal definition of the subject content of the norms providing for liability for torture — which leads to different qualification of similar actions and excludes the application of more serious sanctions towards officials who «sanction» torture outside the sphere of justice. The article argues for the suggestion to widen the subject content of Part 4, Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The revealed normative desynchronization of defining torture in relation to violence in the system of qualifying features of adjacent methods of committing crimes should not lead to differences in the legal assessment that evidently are outside the official powers of a public official, as the differences in the contents of violence and torture define the competing role of these methods of committing crimes in crime qualification. Unlike violence, encompassing harm to health, the harm specified in the legal definition of «torture» does not include bodily harm, raising the question of possible additional qualification on crimes against health. The consistency of law enforcement makes it necessary to clarify this question at the level of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The severity of sanctions of Part 4, Art. 286 and Part 3, Art. 302 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is the basis for a wider interpretation that does not require cumulative offences under articles in Chapter 16 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Exclusion of torture from the number of qualifying features did not lead to partial decriminalization due to a normative «conversion» by an objectively similar way, which does not only exclude the reconsideration of verdicts containing accusations under Item «д», Part 2, Art. 117 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the basis of Art. 10 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, but also makes it possible to use practice-based criteria when defining torture.","PeriodicalId":43975,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139339079","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-18DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).361-371
Alexey Morozov
The topic of the presented research is the features of the subject of crime under Part 4, Art. 210 and Art. 210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (person occupying the highest position in the criminal hierarchy). The research is based on the analysis of all guilty verdicts that entered into force and are executed by the institutions of the penal system under Part 4, Art. 210 of the CC of the RF and Art. 210.1 of the CC of the RF. The goal of the research consisted in identifying the currently relevant characteristics of criminal leaders, which are supported by the law enforcement materials rather than sociological studies, i.e. the characteristics of persons occupying the highest positions in the criminal hierarchy de-jure, and not de-facto. The research used the methods of analysis, synthesis, the formal legal method, and the statistical method. As a result, the author identified the currently relevant characteristics of persons occupying the highest positions in the criminal hierarchy, and pointed out how they changed due to the transformations of the criminal subculture’s norms. The obtained results can be used when studying (teaching) the discipline «Criminal Subculture», in the practical work of bodies of investigation when qualifying crimes under Part 4, Art. 210 of the CC of the RF and Art. 210.1 of the CC of the RF, and in the practice of penitentiary institutions to prevent crimes among persons on preventive registration for being leaders and active participants of dangerous groups. It is concluded that the criminological characteristics of a person occupying the highest position in the criminal hierarchy have undergone considerable changes: certain features that were taboo in the past (having a family, children, official residence registration, military service registration, official job, etc.) are no longer relevant.
{"title":"Criminological Portrait of a Person Occupying the Highest Position in the Criminal Hierarchy: Based on the Analysis of Verdicts that Entered Into Force Under Part 4, Article 210 and Article 210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation","authors":"Alexey Morozov","doi":"10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).361-371","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).361-371","url":null,"abstract":"The topic of the presented research is the features of the subject of crime under Part 4, Art. 210 and Art. 210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (person occupying the highest position in the criminal hierarchy). The research is based on the analysis of all guilty verdicts that entered into force and are executed by the institutions of the penal system under Part 4, Art. 210 of the CC of the RF and Art. 210.1 of the CC of the RF. The goal of the research consisted in identifying the currently relevant characteristics of criminal leaders, which are supported by the law enforcement materials rather than sociological studies, i.e. the characteristics of persons occupying the highest positions in the criminal hierarchy de-jure, and not de-facto. The research used the methods of analysis, synthesis, the formal legal method, and the statistical method. As a result, the author identified the currently relevant characteristics of persons occupying the highest positions in the criminal hierarchy, and pointed out how they changed due to the transformations of the criminal subculture’s norms. The obtained results can be used when studying (teaching) the discipline «Criminal Subculture», in the practical work of bodies of investigation when qualifying crimes under Part 4, Art. 210 of the CC of the RF and Art. 210.1 of the CC of the RF, and in the practice of penitentiary institutions to prevent crimes among persons on preventive registration for being leaders and active participants of dangerous groups. It is concluded that the criminological characteristics of a person occupying the highest position in the criminal hierarchy have undergone considerable changes: certain features that were taboo in the past (having a family, children, official residence registration, military service registration, official job, etc.) are no longer relevant.","PeriodicalId":43975,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139339154","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-18DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(3).333-339
L. Gotchina, Pavel Serdyuk
Based on the history of terrorism, its concept and methods of counteracting it in Russia, the authors research the problems of an active incorporation of modern information-telecommunication technologies in all spheres of social life, manifested in the emergence of considerable risks and threats to public safety. These technologies are analyzed as a means that provides terrorists with extra opportunities for involving new people in their criminal activities, for radicalization, illegal financing, creation of an attractive image of terrorism, new ways of committing, planning, organizing and coordinating terrorist groups in a remote mode, as well as for the collection and transfer of information, etc. These technologies are studied as a powerful instrument of manipulating public conscience and behavior that can effectively influence the public opinion and create a public image of the all-powerfulness of terror. The goal of this research is to study the concept of terrorism, its history in Russia, its causes and conditions, as well as to provide theoretical recommendations for its prevention. The method of content analysis of the works of Russian and foreign authors is used to achieve this goal. The key results of this work consist in identifying the causes of the emergence and spread of terrorism at different historical stages, as well as the system of informational counteraction to terrorism. The authors conclude that counteracting terrorism in the conditions of digitization through a prohibition of internet content with unlawful information is not fully possible and that such counteraction should be aimed at influencing the world view and legal conscience of people to eliminate the support for terrorism. The novelty of the work consists in the authors’ identification of the causes of terrorism, the development of suggestions aimed at counteracting terrorism in the conditions of the digitization of criminality and presented as various projects and actions that should be implemented on the territory of the whole country.
{"title":"The Origins of Terrorism in Russia and the Specifics of Its Prevention in the Conditions of the Digitization of the Society","authors":"L. Gotchina, Pavel Serdyuk","doi":"10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(3).333-339","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(3).333-339","url":null,"abstract":"Based on the history of terrorism, its concept and methods of counteracting it in Russia, the authors research the problems of an active incorporation of modern information-telecommunication technologies in all spheres of social life, manifested in the emergence of considerable risks and threats to public safety. These technologies are analyzed as a means that provides terrorists with extra opportunities for involving new people in their criminal activities, for radicalization, illegal financing, creation of an attractive image of terrorism, new ways of committing, planning, organizing and coordinating terrorist groups in a remote mode, as well as for the collection and transfer of information, etc. These technologies are studied as a powerful instrument of manipulating public conscience and behavior that can effectively influence the public opinion and create a public image of the all-powerfulness of terror. The goal of this research is to study the concept of terrorism, its history in Russia, its causes and conditions, as well as to provide theoretical recommendations for its prevention. The method of content analysis of the works of Russian and foreign authors is used to achieve this goal. The key results of this work consist in identifying the causes of the emergence and spread of terrorism at different historical stages, as well as the system of informational counteraction to terrorism. The authors conclude that counteracting terrorism in the conditions of digitization through a prohibition of internet content with unlawful information is not fully possible and that such counteraction should be aimed at influencing the world view and legal conscience of people to eliminate the support for terrorism. The novelty of the work consists in the authors’ identification of the causes of terrorism, the development of suggestions aimed at counteracting terrorism in the conditions of the digitization of criminality and presented as various projects and actions that should be implemented on the territory of the whole country.","PeriodicalId":43975,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139338968","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-18DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).312-322
Yuri Pudovochkin, M. Babaev
The connection between criminology and other sciences has always been viewed as a vital component of increasing scientific knowledge on crime and developing the methodology of criminological research. One of the areas of such connection is the interaction between criminology and history. Both sciences are moving towards each other. The principle of historicism, being an inalienable element of the methodology of modern criminology, stimulated criminologists to study the history of crime and its specific types, the history of preventive and law enforcement work, the history of criminological theories’ development. The diversification of the methodological basis for the historical science and the development of social history, in their turn, also turned the attention of historians to the problems of crime and its prevention. Meanwhile, the application of historical method in criminology and the inclusion of crime in the object of historical studies remain two relatively independent and unconnected processes. At the same time, the theoretical understanding of inter-disciplinary connections between criminology and history unjustifiably remains «a white spot». This is not a problem specific of Russia, in recent years it has been the object of attention for specialists all over the world. English-language research explains the absence of cooperation between criminology and history primarily though the goals and the organization of research. Historians study the past for the sake of uncovering the past itself, without stressing its connection to the present, while criminologists, on the contrary, are focused on the present and refer to the past only in the degree necessary for explaining the processes happening today. However, this autonomy, arising from the boundaries that are in many aspects artificial, is duly challenged. Research is consistently moving towards overcoming the isolation of criminology and history. The result of this shift is the development of historical criminology as a special approach to studying crimes and related problems. Special monographs, cooperative group discussions, theme-based issues of authoritative journals, the development of special educational programs are all aimed at ensuring the full-scale inclusion of the historical component in the science of criminology by stimulating historical thinking and abolition of no longer relevant historical-philosophical ideas on the interconnection between the past, the present and the future.
{"title":"Criminology and History: Towards Interdisciplinary Convergence","authors":"Yuri Pudovochkin, M. Babaev","doi":"10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).312-322","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).312-322","url":null,"abstract":"The connection between criminology and other sciences has always been viewed as a vital component of increasing scientific knowledge on crime and developing the methodology of criminological research. One of the areas of such connection is the interaction between criminology and history. Both sciences are moving towards each other. The principle of historicism, being an inalienable element of the methodology of modern criminology, stimulated criminologists to study the history of crime and its specific types, the history of preventive and law enforcement work, the history of criminological theories’ development. The diversification of the methodological basis for the historical science and the development of social history, in their turn, also turned the attention of historians to the problems of crime and its prevention. Meanwhile, the application of historical method in criminology and the inclusion of crime in the object of historical studies remain two relatively independent and unconnected processes. At the same time, the theoretical understanding of inter-disciplinary connections between criminology and history unjustifiably remains «a white spot». This is not a problem specific of Russia, in recent years it has been the object of attention for specialists all over the world. English-language research explains the absence of cooperation between criminology and history primarily though the goals and the organization of research. Historians study the past for the sake of uncovering the past itself, without stressing its connection to the present, while criminologists, on the contrary, are focused on the present and refer to the past only in the degree necessary for explaining the processes happening today. However, this autonomy, arising from the boundaries that are in many aspects artificial, is duly challenged. Research is consistently moving towards overcoming the isolation of criminology and history. The result of this shift is the development of historical criminology as a special approach to studying crimes and related problems. Special monographs, cooperative group discussions, theme-based issues of authoritative journals, the development of special educational programs are all aimed at ensuring the full-scale inclusion of the historical component in the science of criminology by stimulating historical thinking and abolition of no longer relevant historical-philosophical ideas on the interconnection between the past, the present and the future.","PeriodicalId":43975,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139339111","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-18DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).340-351
Maksim Bavsun, Elena Stebeneva
The authors describe the specifics of the transformation of criminal personality while taking into consideration the modern realities of the post-industrial society, and trace the connection between the criminalization of a person and the social prerequisites of forming a criminal motivation. The authors note that the hierarchy of values in the society has been condirably influenced by a distorted material ideology, by self-interest and an egoistic attitude of a person to the community and its members, which resulted in the substitution of spiritual bonds, a deterioration of morality and the contraposition of the individual and the interests of the society. This lead to the transformation of crimes and the emergence their new forms, a tolerance to criminal acts, and the increased public danger of criminal acts. The authors attempt to analyze the comparative-temporal transformation of the moral-motivational sphere of personality on the basis of a negative-positive approach to assessing the changes in personal behavior against the background of social processes. At the same time, the authors’ empirical research proves the shift in the moral-ethical codes for different categories of respondents, including convicts and ex-convicts as well as those who, due to their activities, may fall within one of these categories. The transformation of public relations that happened during the special military operation lead to changes in the conscience of persons previously convicted for committing publicly dangerous acts. This in itself is a subject of research that requires understanding on the level of criminal law doctrine and criminology, and became the basis of the current research. The authors present examples of positive personal transformations of ex-convicts who later devoted their lives to religious service, or persons, specifically law enforcement officers, who reconsidered their views, convictions and attitude to crimes of corruption under the influence, among other things, of anti-corruption education. The article proves the need for developing an ideological basis with the goal of returning spiritual and moral fundamentals to the society, building the hierarchy of values of each individual without separation from the society, which will act as special prevention. The authors note a demand for forming a unified ideological basis in crime counteracton, and for the de-criminalization of society in order to ensure criminological security at both the individual and the general social levels.
{"title":"Transformation of a Criminal Personality in the Post-Industrial Society","authors":"Maksim Bavsun, Elena Stebeneva","doi":"10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).340-351","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).340-351","url":null,"abstract":"The authors describe the specifics of the transformation of criminal personality while taking into consideration the modern realities of the post-industrial society, and trace the connection between the criminalization of a person and the social prerequisites of forming a criminal motivation. The authors note that the hierarchy of values in the society has been condirably influenced by a distorted material ideology, by self-interest and an egoistic attitude of a person to the community and its members, which resulted in the substitution of spiritual bonds, a deterioration of morality and the contraposition of the individual and the interests of the society. This lead to the transformation of crimes and the emergence their new forms, a tolerance to criminal acts, and the increased public danger of criminal acts. The authors attempt to analyze the comparative-temporal transformation of the moral-motivational sphere of personality on the basis of a negative-positive approach to assessing the changes in personal behavior against the background of social processes. At the same time, the authors’ empirical research proves the shift in the moral-ethical codes for different categories of respondents, including convicts and ex-convicts as well as those who, due to their activities, may fall within one of these categories. The transformation of public relations that happened during the special military operation lead to changes in the conscience of persons previously convicted for committing publicly dangerous acts. This in itself is a subject of research that requires understanding on the level of criminal law doctrine and criminology, and became the basis of the current research. The authors present examples of positive personal transformations of ex-convicts who later devoted their lives to religious service, or persons, specifically law enforcement officers, who reconsidered their views, convictions and attitude to crimes of corruption under the influence, among other things, of anti-corruption education. The article proves the need for developing an ideological basis with the goal of returning spiritual and moral fundamentals to the society, building the hierarchy of values of each individual without separation from the society, which will act as special prevention. The authors note a demand for forming a unified ideological basis in crime counteracton, and for the de-criminalization of society in order to ensure criminological security at both the individual and the general social levels.","PeriodicalId":43975,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139339214","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-18DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).323-332
M. Kleymenov, Ekaterina Sabol
Freedom of conscience is currently understood as the right to profess any (not only religious) worldview, as a freedom of views, assessments and beliefs, which is associated with the loss of religiosity in developed civilizations. There is a possibility for abusing this right, which is expressed in the implementation of religious, extremist and terrorist activities related to the worldview; inducement to suicide; damage to the morality and health of citizens; the use of narcotic and psychotropic drugs, hypnosis; the commission of depraved and other illegal actions. The most dangerous are those teachings that clearly claim to replace the «old» religions with the new ones. Currently, they are promoted by pseudo-religious organizations of a destructive nature, which are also called totalitarian sects. The exponential growth of such organizations is characteristic during periods of social upheaval and turmoil. On the one hand, their multiplication is a kind of symptom of a serious disease of the state organism. On the other hand, this organism becomes an object of social influence by external forces and new religious teachings are often nothing more than the embodiment of these social projects. In this regard, it is important to highlight the main feature of destructive pseudo-religious organizations — they threaten national security in the near or long term. In terms of immediate goals, the use of pseudo-religious organizations as agents of Western intelligence community should be pointed out. From the long-term perspective, the goal is the indoctrination of a considerable number of Russian citizens with a zombie consciousness ranging from active adherents of pseudo-religious ideas to obedient executors of someone else's will. The authors use empirical research to analyze the destructive organizations most known to the citizens of Russia, and to show the dynamics of their development: from pseudo-religious to extremist and further to terrorist. This is especially clearly seen in the example of the totalitarian sect «White Brotherhood», whose experience was later used for the nazification of Ukraine.
{"title":"Freedom of Conscience and National Security","authors":"M. Kleymenov, Ekaterina Sabol","doi":"10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).323-332","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).323-332","url":null,"abstract":"Freedom of conscience is currently understood as the right to profess any (not only religious) worldview, as a freedom of views, assessments and beliefs, which is associated with the loss of religiosity in developed civilizations. There is a possibility for abusing this right, which is expressed in the implementation of religious, extremist and terrorist activities related to the worldview; inducement to suicide; damage to the morality and health of citizens; the use of narcotic and psychotropic drugs, hypnosis; the commission of depraved and other illegal actions. The most dangerous are those teachings that clearly claim to replace the «old» religions with the new ones. Currently, they are promoted by pseudo-religious organizations of a destructive nature, which are also called totalitarian sects. The exponential growth of such organizations is characteristic during periods of social upheaval and turmoil. On the one hand, their multiplication is a kind of symptom of a serious disease of the state organism. On the other hand, this organism becomes an object of social influence by external forces and new religious teachings are often nothing more than the embodiment of these social projects. In this regard, it is important to highlight the main feature of destructive pseudo-religious organizations — they threaten national security in the near or long term. In terms of immediate goals, the use of pseudo-religious organizations as agents of Western intelligence community should be pointed out. From the long-term perspective, the goal is the indoctrination of a considerable number of Russian citizens with a zombie consciousness ranging from active adherents of pseudo-religious ideas to obedient executors of someone else's will. The authors use empirical research to analyze the destructive organizations most known to the citizens of Russia, and to show the dynamics of their development: from pseudo-religious to extremist and further to terrorist. This is especially clearly seen in the example of the totalitarian sect «White Brotherhood», whose experience was later used for the nazification of Ukraine.","PeriodicalId":43975,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139339064","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}
Pub Date : 2023-09-18DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).301-311
Oleg Gribunov
June 28, 2023 was the 75th birthday anniversary of an outstanding scholar, a leading figure in criminal procedure science, Honored Researcher of the Russian Federation, Honored Lawyer of the Russian Federation, Doctor of Law, Professor, Major General (in retirement) of Justice Boris Jakovlevich Gavrilov. He made his way from a Police Investigator to Deputy Head of the Investigation Committee under the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs, became Head of the Department of Crime Investigation Bodies’ Management in the Academy of Management of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs, and is currently the Leading Professor of the same Department. One of the key topics that has been the focus of B.Ya. Gavrilov’s attention for many years is the stage of initiating a criminal case within the context of its reform. Undoubtedly, the sphere of the Professor’s research interests is not limited to the topic of initiating a criminal case: he also pays attention to other aspects of criminal proceedings, including the touchpoints between criminal proceedings and other areas, primarily, criminal law, penal enforcement law, criminalistics, operative search activities. The article presents an analysis of research publications on the topic «the stage of initiating a criminal case» as a main institute of criminal proceedings, and presents an overview of the research progress and achievements of Professor B.Ya. Gavrilov. The strengths of his research works and their interdisciplinary character in highlighting the corresponding problems at the stage of initiating a criminal case are presented.
{"title":"«The Institute of Criminal Case Initiation» in the Works of Professor B.Ya. Gavrilov and Their Influence on the Theory of Criminal Procedure and the Practice of Law Enforcement","authors":"Oleg Gribunov","doi":"10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).301-311","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(4).301-311","url":null,"abstract":"June 28, 2023 was the 75th birthday anniversary of an outstanding scholar, a leading figure in criminal procedure science, Honored Researcher of the Russian Federation, Honored Lawyer of the Russian Federation, Doctor of Law, Professor, Major General (in retirement) of Justice Boris Jakovlevich Gavrilov. He made his way from a Police Investigator to Deputy Head of the Investigation Committee under the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs, became Head of the Department of Crime Investigation Bodies’ Management in the Academy of Management of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs, and is currently the Leading Professor of the same Department. One of the key topics that has been the focus of B.Ya. Gavrilov’s attention for many years is the stage of initiating a criminal case within the context of its reform. Undoubtedly, the sphere of the Professor’s research interests is not limited to the topic of initiating a criminal case: he also pays attention to other aspects of criminal proceedings, including the touchpoints between criminal proceedings and other areas, primarily, criminal law, penal enforcement law, criminalistics, operative search activities. The article presents an analysis of research publications on the topic «the stage of initiating a criminal case» as a main institute of criminal proceedings, and presents an overview of the research progress and achievements of Professor B.Ya. Gavrilov. The strengths of his research works and their interdisciplinary character in highlighting the corresponding problems at the stage of initiating a criminal case are presented.","PeriodicalId":43975,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139339171","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}
Pub Date : 2023-07-18DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(3).243-253
S. Kornakova
The author examines an issue that is still debatable in the science of criminal procedure law — the correlation between the concepts of «cognition» and «criminal procedural proof». There is no unity of views among scholars regarding this point. The goal of the research is the critical assessment of arguments presented by those researchers who equate cognition and criminal procedure proof, as well as the presentation of reasons proving that these concepts are in a generic-specific relation. The author also argues for the necessity of differentiating between such concepts as cognition, cognition in a criminal case, criminal procedural cognition and proof, and presents her own opinion regarding their content and correlation. The author used the general scientific methods of theoretical analysis, synthesis, formal logic legal interpretation, generalization and systematization of research data. The logical analysis identified some drawbacks and contradictions in the argumentation of scholars regarding the issues discussed in the article. It is concluded that criminal procedural cognition, and such its important part as proof, is a particular, specific type of cognition which cannot but demonstrate regularities common for any cognition. Besides, cognition is impossible without proof, but not vice versa. Disagreeing with the scholars who understand proving only as an activity carried out by the proceedings’ participants in order to justify conclusions, the author states that cognition and justification are two aspects of proof in the criminal proceedings. According to the legislative definition of proving it should be understood as the process of obtaining criminal procedural evidence and using it as arguments to substantiate the presence or absence of circumstances enumerated in Art. 74 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.
{"title":"Cognition and Proof in Criminal Proceedings: Problems of the Correlation of Concepts","authors":"S. Kornakova","doi":"10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(3).243-253","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17150/2500-4255.2023.17(3).243-253","url":null,"abstract":"The author examines an issue that is still debatable in the science of criminal procedure law — the correlation between the concepts of «cognition» and «criminal procedural proof». There is no unity of views among scholars regarding this point. The goal of the research is the critical assessment of arguments presented by those researchers who equate cognition and criminal procedure proof, as well as the presentation of reasons proving that these concepts are in a generic-specific relation. The author also argues for the necessity of differentiating between such concepts as cognition, cognition in a criminal case, criminal procedural cognition and proof, and presents her own opinion regarding their content and correlation. The author used the general scientific methods of theoretical analysis, synthesis, formal logic legal interpretation, generalization and systematization of research data. The logical analysis identified some drawbacks and contradictions in the argumentation of scholars regarding the issues discussed in the article. It is concluded that criminal procedural cognition, and such its important part as proof, is a particular, specific type of cognition which cannot but demonstrate regularities common for any cognition. Besides, cognition is impossible without proof, but not vice versa. Disagreeing with the scholars who understand proving only as an activity carried out by the proceedings’ participants in order to justify conclusions, the author states that cognition and justification are two aspects of proof in the criminal proceedings. According to the legislative definition of proving it should be understood as the process of obtaining criminal procedural evidence and using it as arguments to substantiate the presence or absence of circumstances enumerated in Art. 74 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.","PeriodicalId":43975,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2023-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139358030","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：