Issue page

Akinina N.

Return to the Institute of Administrative Prejudice in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

Keywords: administrative prejudice, administrative offence, effectiveness of a criminal law

The article gives analyses of reasons for the return of administrative prejudice institute in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The given institute evokes a controversial opinion among researchers. There are opinions of scientists that repetition of an offense is not able to turn it into a qualitatively new phenomenon. And this phenomenon cannot require its criminal-legal regulation. However, social practice faced with the following. It is often rather difficult to establish the distinction between social danger of a crime and harmfulness of an administrative offence. This is particularly manifested in offences with crime-forming signs of evaluative character. For this reason, in recent times the range of such acts according to the rule of administrative preclusion has been growing. According to supporters of administrative prejudice, it could contribute to the effectiveness of the criminal law through clearer differentiation of crimes and administrative offences. In addition, introduction of compounds with these essential elements was motivated by the desire of the legislator to pursue a liberal policy of the criminal law. This structure allows to bring initially to administrative responsibility, and only then – to criminal one.

References

  1. Bezverkhov A.G. Vozvrashchenie administrativnoi preyuditsii v ugolovnoe zakonodatel’stvo Rossii [Return of administrative prejudgement in criminal law of Russia]. Rossiiskaya yustitsiya [Russian justice], 2012, no. 1, рр. 48–53.
  2. Borzenkov G.N. Tendentsii i perspektivy razvitiya ugolovnogo zakonodatel’stva v XXI veke (opyt sravnitel’no-vremennogo analiza) [Trends and prospects of development of criminal law in the 21st century (comparative temporal analysis)]. Ugolovnoe pravo v XXI veke: materialy mezhdunar. nauch. konf. [Proc. of Int. Sci. Conf. «Criminal law in the 21st century»]. Moscow, 2002, pp. 110–114.
  3. Gogin A. A. Otvetstvennost’ za narushenie Federal’nogo zakona «O reklame» [Liability for violation of the Federal law «On advertising»]. Pravo i politika [Law and politics], 2004, no. 5, pp. 27–31.
  4. Gravina A.A. Tendentsii razvitiya ugolovnogo zakonodatel’stva na sovremennom etape [Tendencies of development of criminal legislation at the present stage]. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava [Journal of Russian law], 2016, no. 11, pp. 96–106.
  5. Gulko A.L. Istoriya ugolovnoi otvetstvennosti za khuliganstvo v Rossii The [History of criminal responsibility for hooliganism in Russia]. Advokatskaya praktika [Law practice], 2006, no. 5, pp. 36–43.
  6. Dvoretskii I.Kh. Latinsko-russkii slovar’. 2-e izd. [Latin-Russian dictionary. 2nd ed]. Moscow, Russkii yazyk Publ., 1976, 1096 p.
  7. Kovalev M.I. Prestuplenie i prostupok [The Crime and misconduct]. Problemy sovershenstvovaniya zakonodatel’stva po ukrepleniyu pravoporyadka i usilenie bor’by s pravonarusheniyami: mezhvuz. sb. nauch. tr [Problems of improving the legislation by strengthening the rule of law and strengthening the fight against offences]. Sverdlovsk, 1982, pp. 3–14.
  8. Korobeev A.I. Sovetskaya ugolovno-pravovaya politika: problemy kriminalizatsii i penalizatsii [Soviet criminal and legal policy: problems of criminalization and penalization]. Vladivostok, 1987, 268 p.
  9. Kuznetsova N.F. Tseli i mekhanizm reformy Ugolovnogo kodeksa [The Goals and mechanism of the reform of the Criminal code]. Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo [Soviet state and law], 1992, no. 6, pp. 78–86.
  10. Lopashenko N.A. Administrativnoi preyuditsii v ugolovnom prave – net! [Administrative prejudgement in criminal law – no!]. Vestnik Akademii General’noi prokuratury Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Bulletin of the Academy of the Prosecutor General’s of the Russian Federation], 2011, no. 3, pp. 64–71.
  11. Malkov V.P. Mnozhestvennost’ prestuplenii i ee formy po sovetskomu ugolovnomu pravu [Multiplicity of offences and its form in the Soviet criminal law]. Kazan, Kazan State University Publ., 1982, 172 p.
  12. Onokolov Yu.P. Rasshirenie primeneniya administrativnoi preyuditsii povysit preventivnoe vozdeistvie Kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii ob administrativnykh pravonarusheniyakh i Ugolovnogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Extension of the application of administrative prejudgement will enhance the preventive effect of the Russian Federation code of administrative offences and the Criminal code of the Russian Federation]. Migratsionnoe pravo [Migration law], 2013, no. 3, pp. 11–15.
  13. Tarbagaev A.N. Administrativnaya otvetstvennost’ v ugolovnom prave [Administrative liability in criminal law]. Pravovedenie [Jurisprudence], 1992, no. 2, pp. 62–68.
  14. Ustinova T.D. Rasshirenie ugolovnoi otvetstvennosti za nezakonnoe predprinimatel’stvo [Expansion of criminal liability for illegal business]. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava [Journal of Russian law], 2003, no. 5, pp. 97–103.
  15. Frizen P.D. Administrativno-pravovoe preduprezhdenie otdel’nykh vidov prestuplenii: dis. … kand. yurid. nauk [Administrative-legal prevention of certain types of crimes. Doct. Diss.]. Barnaul, 2004, 208 p.
  16. Filimonov V.D. Obshchestvennaya opasnost’ lichnosti otdel’nykh kategorii prestupnikov i ee ugolovno-pravovoe znachenie [Public danger of the identity of the individual categories of offenders and its criminally-legal value]. Tomsk, Tomsk University Publ., 1973, 153 p.

About authors

Akinina Nataliya
candidate of law, constitutional, administrative, municipal law department head, Ugra State University, Russia, Khanty-Mansyisk (anu8671@mail.ru)

Article link

Akinina N. Return to the Institute of Administrative Prejudice in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation [Electronic resource] // Oeconomia et Jus. – 2017. – №4. P. 1-6. – URL: http://oecomia-et-jus.ru/en/single/2017/4/1/.