Abstract
One of the modern trends in the development of criminal legislation in Russia is manifested in an increase in the number of norms with administrative prejudicial effect. Such norms are enshrined in most chapters of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which emphasizes their importance for the legislator. In these conditions, there is no doubt that for the correct application of these norms it is necessary, first, to correctly interpret the essence of administrative prejudicial effect, to understand its main purpose and characteristics. Today in criminal law there is no legal interpretation of this term, which leads to the emergence of ever new approaches to the definition of administrative prejudice in criminal law. However, they do not fully reveal its essence, but only touch on its individual features. A particularly fundamental point that emphasizes the importance of identifying the legal nature of administrative prejudicial effect is that in science there are ongoing debates regarding the admissibility of such norms in criminal law in principle. In the absence of unity in the terminology used, the legislator also proposes different ways to consolidate administrative prejudicial effect in criminal law. The logical result of such an ambiguous approach to the formulation of crimes with administrative prejudicial effect is the difficulty in interpreting the elements of such crimes. At the same time, it is obvious that these criminal law norms, due to the unity of their legal purpose, must be established uniformly. Uniformity should be manifested both in the use of uniform terminology and in the application of the same approach to the construction of such crimes. In this regard, it is relevant to search for an integrated approach to establishing the essence of administrative prejudicial effect as a special criminal legal phenomenon.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have