Abstract
The emergence of criminal liability for forgery is a rare case when it stems from the subject of the crime, and not from its object. This is natural for Russian legislation, since for a long time there was no clear division into branches of law. Purpose. The purpose is to show the development of criminal liability for forgery in Russian criminal law. Methodology. The methodology includes the use of comparative historical, formal logical and statistical methods. Results. The following types of forgeries were distinguished in the criminal legislation of Russia: political, official, judicial, military, managerial, outrageous (rebellious), quarantine, religious. Of particular interest is identity forgery (imposture). Conclusion. A historical overview of the responsibility for forgery in pre-Soviet Russia allows us to take a fresh look at the existing practice of protecting individuals, society and the state from creating false documents for their socially dangerous use in public relations.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
