Abstract

Introduction. May and June 2018 saw intensi­fied discussions in Russia around the issue of confis­cation of property obtained by criminal means. These discussions arose after several initiatives of legisla­tors who advocated the strengthening of the role of this institution of criminal law in the legal practice in Russia and after the Supreme Court of the Rus­sian Federation summarized the experience of the use of confiscation in the practice of Russian courts and formulated some recommendations for the courts in the decision of the plenary session of June the 14th . Materials and methods. The article uses a number of research methods and techniques to ana­lyze the problem such as analysis that allows isolat­ing the trends in the development of the institution of confiscation; comparison which allows evaluating homogeneous processes at different stages of the in­stitute of confiscation of property acquired by crimi­nal means, and generalization which is necessary to summarize the results of the research. Research results. The use of the institution of confiscation of property obtained by criminal means in the legal practice of Russia has passed several stages. The modern stage began after the institution was restored in the criminal code of the Russian Fed­eration by the Federal law of July 27, 2006 № 153FZ and section VI of the Criminal Code was supple­mented by Chapter 15.1 “Confiscation of property”. This Chapter contains the legislative definition of the confiscation of property (article 104.1 of the Crimi­nal Code) and an indication of the subject of confis­cation, its types and conditions. Based on the decisions of the plenums of the Su­preme Court of the Russian Federation the article analyzes the practice of this institution in the activi­ties of Russian courts. 12 years of experience in the application of Chapter 15.1 of the Criminal Code, showed that, despite the repeated explanations of the Supreme Court, which dealt with individual crimes, some of the controversial issues remained unre­solved. In this regard the Plenum of the Supreme Court introduced a number of proposals to improve the legal framework of this institution in the draft Resolution. On June 14th , 2018 the next plenary Session of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation ad­opted a new detailed resolution on the practice of application of Chapter 15.1 of the Criminal Code and proposed detailed recommendations to improve the application of the institution of confiscation of property obtained by criminal means in the Russian Federation, which are considered and commented on in the article. Discussion and conclusion. Legal literature discussed the innovations in the Russian legislation related to the institution of confiscation of property obtained by criminal means caused in a very active mode. The views of the authors of articles on this is­sue can be divided into two parts with each havinga lot of supporters. According to the first of them the new place of confiscation of property among the mea­sures of criminal law is justified. Supporters of the opposite point of view sup­port the exclusion confiscation of property from the system of measures of criminal law as they believe that the legal nature of the confiscation of property belongs to a form of criminal punishment. This is the opinion of the judges. Two-thirds of the judges believe that the confiscation of property should be considered as an additional form of punishment.

Highlights

  • May and June 2018 saw intensified discussions in Russia around the issue of confiscation of property obtained by criminal means

  • These discussions arose after several initiatives of legislators who advocated the strengthening of the role of this institution of criminal law in the legal practice in Russia and after the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation summarized the experience of the use of confiscation in the practice of Russian courts and formulated some recommendations for the courts in the decision of the plenary session of June the 14th

  • The article uses a number of research methods and techniques to analyze the problem such as analysis that allows isolating the trends in the development of the institution of confiscation; comparison which allows evaluating homogeneous processes at different stages of the institute of confiscation of property acquired by criminal means, and generalization which is necessary to summarize the results of the research

Read more

Summary

Юрий Краснов*

В частности, в проекте Постановления Пленума Верховного Суда предлагается норма, согласно которой «в целях обеспечения возможной конфискации суд может наложить арест на имущество, находящееся не только у подозреваемого, обвиняемого или лиц, несущих по закону материальную ответственность за их действия, но и у неопределенного круга лиц, если есть достаточные основания полагать, что оно получено в результате преступных действий либо предназначалось для экстремистской или террористической деятельности». В соответствии с частью 3 статьи 115 УПК РФ в целях обеспечения возможной конфискации, говорится в Постановлении Верховного Суда, арест может быть наложен судом на имущество, указанное в части 1 статьи 104.1 УК РФ, «находящееся не только у подозреваемого, обвиняемого или лиц, несущих по закону материальную ответственность за их действия, но и у других лиц, если есть достаточные основания полагать, что оно получено в результате преступных действий либо использовалось или предназначалось для использования в качестве орудия, оборудования или иного средства совершения преступления либо для финансирования терроризма, экстремистской деятельности (экстремизма), организованной группы, незаконного вооруженного формирования, преступного сообщества (преступной организации).

Introduction
Materials and methods
Discussion and conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call