Criminal Legislation Research Articles

Application of criminal law measures as a legal institution

The article highlights the issues of application of criminal law measures as an independent regulatory and legal institution which has a cross-sectoral nature. This institute is complex, since it includes two sub-institutes – criminal law and criminal procedure, and is characterized by its subject matter and method of legal regulation, and is intended to regulate social relations which arose in connection with the introduction in Ukraine of the institute of quasi-criminal liability of legal entities for the fulfillment of Ukraine’s international obligations. The author suggests that a regulatory legal institution should be set out in a standardized manner in various legal acts. Unlike the criminal law sub-institution of application of criminal law measures, criminal procedural rules are «scattered» throughout the text of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine, which impedes the effective application of the relevant rules. The analysis of the few verdicts that have imposed criminal legal measures on legal entities indicates that, given both the normative shortcomings in the presentation of criminal procedural rules of the institution of application of criminal legal measures and the actual lack of training of interested parties (investigators, prosecutors, judges, lawyers) in specialized educational institutions, this leads to shortcomings in law enforcement and the actual ineffectiveness of the institution as a whole. The author finds that when applying criminal law measures to a legal entity, courts made the following mistakes: they did so independently, without following the procedure for initiating proceedings against a legal entity regulated by criminal procedure legislation; in criminal proceedings against an individual, they approved a plea agreement with a criminal law measure against a legal entity when it was prohibited to do so. The author proposes to conduct specialized training on criminal law and criminal procedural features of quasi-criminal liability of legal entities in Ukraine for investigators, prosecutors, attorneys and judges.

Separate elements of the event of a criminal offense to be ascertained at the initial stage of the investigation of murders committed with particular cruelty

In the article, on the basis of a systematic analysis of the norms of current criminal, civil and criminal procedural legislation, scientific sources on criminology, criminal and criminal procedural law, forensic medicine and other sciences, as well as on the basis of a systematic analysis of investigative and judicial practice of investigation and trial of criminal proceedings on murders committed with extreme cruelty, the circumstances to be proven in the above-mentioned criminal proceedings, as well as circumstances related to the event of a criminal offense, which must be clarified at the initial stage of the investigation of murders with extreme cruelty, are determined. It was determined that such circumstances, in addition to the method of committing the crime in the broad sense, which includes the preparation, mechanism and concealment of the traces of the crime, are the time of the commission of the crime, its duration, the place of the commission of the crime, circumstances indicating that the criminal was aware that he inflicts special physical suffering on the victim by inflicting a large number of bodily injuries, torture, mutilation, torture, including using fire, electricity, acid, alkali, radioactive substances, poison that causes excruciating pain, etc.), and must also be ascertained and proven fact of awareness by the guilty person (criminal) that he is causing mental or moral suffering to the victim. In the article, an attempt was made to reveal the meaning of the above-mentioned concepts, namely, a large number of bodily injuries, torture, mutilation, torture, mental and moral suffering. Proposed procedural measures (investigative (research) actions, forensic examinations), and forensic methods that should be carried out at the initial stage of the investigation and as a result of which these circumstances can be clarified with a high degree of probability. It was concluded that since we are talking about a particularly serious crime, all the qualifying features of this act should be clearly defined and established in the law on criminal responsibility.

Regarding the question of usage of open-source evidence in criminal proceedings

The article is devoted to the study of the issue of using open-source evidence in criminal proceedings. Attention is drawn to the lack of a universally recognized definition of the term “open-source information”, a list of fundamental features of this type of information is provided, among which are: 1) accessibility of the information to the general public; 2) the author of the information may not be determined; 3) access to information can be provided both on a paid and free basis. The lack of an adequate volume of legislation aimed at regulating the procedure for usage of open-source evidence is emphasized. A study of the Berkeley Protocol, which was created jointly by the University of California, Berkeley School of Law and representatives of the United Nations, was carried out. In particular, the following is outlined: a list of the principles enshrined in the Berkeley Protocol, divided into professional, methodological and ethical, their content; the investigation process put forward in the Berkeley Protocol, that consists of the following stages: 1) online inquiries; 2) preliminary assessment; 3) collection of information; 4) preservation of information; 5) verification of information; 6) investigative analysis. Problems that may arise in the process of using open-source evidence are emphasized. The requirements of propriety, admissibility and reliability of open-source evidence are studied. The state of legal regulation of the issue of the usage of open-source evidence in national legislation is considered. The specific features of electronic (digital) evidence are singled out, which distinguish them from other types of evidence and determine the need to separate them in the criminal procedural legislation as a different type of evidence. The practice of national and international judicial institutions related to the use of open-source evidence is considered. The special role of this type of evidence for establishing the corpus delicti or circumstances of crimes against the foundations of national security, especially since the beginning of full-scale Russian aggression against Ukraine, is emphasized.

The rule of law as a constitutional principle of criminal legislation and justice

Consideration of the principles of criminal law is of paramount importance for understanding the grounds for bringing a person to criminal responsibility. Of course, the problem of principles cannot find its solution only within criminal law or any other field of law, until the conceptual apparatus of legal principles in the general theory of law is defined. According to the article of Art. 3 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, the legislation of Ukraine on criminal responsibility constitutes the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which is based on the Constitution of Ukraine and generally recognized principles and norms of international law. Article eight of the Constitution of Ukraine declares that it has the highest legal force; laws and other normative legal acts are adopted on the basis of the Constitution of Ukraine and must comply with it. Taking into account the proposals of scientists on the normative settlement of the problem of principles of law, as well as the existing developments of the Working Group on the preparation of the new Criminal Code of Ukraine, each of the principles known in legal science requires a separate study. Since the title of Article 8 of the Constitution of Ukraine explicitly stipulates that the principle of the rule of law is recognized and applies in Ukraine, and Article 129 states that a judge is independent and guided by the rule of law when administering justice, it is obvious that it is unique in the system of domestic law and each of its branches. Among the constitutional principles of criminal justice, the principle of the rule of law is the leading one. A positive feature of the Project of the Criminal Code of Ukraine is the priority place of the rule of law as the basis on which relations arising from the commission of a criminal offense are regulated. Regarding the relationship between the rule of law and legality, there is a well-founded position: the rule of law is a fundamental goal of the criminal justice system, while legality is an important, but not the only, principle that promotes the implementation of the rule of law. The principles of the rule of law and legality may come into conflict. When it comes to the principle of the rule of law, the imperative is its priority and leading role in the paradigm of the principles of law. The principle of the rule of law cannot be excessive, it is always dominant, since its implementation ensures the achievement of the goal of justice — the restoration of justice, and the effective operation of the criminal justice system. Justice is a category of a higher order than any principle, including the rule of law. The scientific position on the existence of three supremacy — law, legality and constitution — has been criticized. There can be not only three supremacy, but also two. The rule of law is the only principle that occupies the highest level in the hierarchy of legal principles. Key words: justice, fairness, principles of criminal law, principles, constitutional principles, rule of law, case law, natural law, legality, criminal justice, constitution, judge.

International experience in criminalizing interference with the judiciary

The study of international experience helps to unify approaches to criminalizing interference in judicial activities, which contributes to the harmonization of national legislation with international norms. Moreover, such an analysis of best practices from different countries allows us to identify effective practices for protecting courts from external pressure and interference, which is key to ensuring fair justice. The study of legislative initiatives and their consequences in different jurisdictions helps to identify the shortcomings and advantages of existing legal norms, which contributes to the improvement of national laws. The article analyzes the international experience of criminalizing interference with the judiciary. The study covers legal mechanisms and legislative initiatives aimed at protecting the independence of the judiciary in different countries of the world, namely: The United States of America, Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Poland. It is established that liability for obstruction of justice and pre- trial investigation is criminalized in the following countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan. The author examines different approaches to determining criminal liability for such actions and compares the effectiveness of the measures applied. The article emphasizes the need to adapt national legislation to international norms in order to ensure the effective functioning of the judicial system and protect it from external interference. It is concluded that national legislation on protection of the judiciary from interference is in line with the main trends in criminal legislation of European countries. However, having studied the international practice of criminalizing interference with the judiciary, it can be concluded that the US experience can be a useful example for national legislation, since the transparency and detail with which the US legislator approached the regulation of such a sensitive matter as interference with the judiciary require attention and are worthy of borrowing.

Ecocide under the Criminal Code of Ukraine and criminal legislations of foreign countries

The article exameans the foreign experience of regulating criminal responsibility for ecocide or an environmental crime similar in signs of characteristics and severity. Three models of the criminal law norms on causing damage to the natural environment, the nature and extent of which reaches the threshold of ecocide, are highlighted: 1) ecocide as a serious/ particularly serious crime against the international legal order, the signs of which are determined by an open list of acts (mass destruction, poisoning, other actions that led to an ecological disaster), a comprehensive list of objects of encroachment - flora and fauna, atmosphere, soil and water resources, signs of damage are defined as «ecological catastrophe». This model is represented by post-Soviet states of East Europe and Asia and it is based on prescriptions of the Model Criminal code of the CIS states, which recommended unified list of signs of ecocide for all CIS states; 2) ecocide as a qualified kind of the crime against the environment (pollution of ecosystems, violation of waste management rules, invasion of territories defined by law), which is characterized by an intentional form of guilt and serious and lasting damage, which definitions are based on the prescriptions of Protocol I relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts but also they are defined in the articles of the domestic criminal code (France, Ecuador); 3) ecocide as a crime against humanity without revealing the features of this term (Vietnam). It was concluded that in order to determine those examples of foreign experience, the borrowing of which would contribute to the improvement of the criminal legislation of Ukraine, it is firstly necessary to define the vision of ecocide as a crime against the environment, a crime against the international order, or humanity. The directive of the European Parliament and the European Council on the criminal law protection of the environment No. 2008/99/EC with further amendments to it in terms of the regulation of ecocide can serve as a reference point in this sphere. Key words: ecocide, environment, mass destruction, environmental damage, serious and lasting damage.

Criminal law policy of Ukraine in the field of combating violence and aggression in the context of war

Anti-criminal policy has its components, among which criminal law policy is the main one, because it is the criminal law that is the legal basis for countering crime. The evolution of the Russian-Ukrainian war from the so-called «hybrid» to «aggressive» was predictable and natural. The concept of aggressive war should occupy a prominent place in the criminal legislation of Ukraine, taking into account the various forms of waging modern wars, in particular those that Ukraine has faced — in a hybrid format. Hybrid warfare is a covert form of aggression. In the context of the war in Ukraine, it should be noted that aggression is not a concept synonymous with aggressive behavior (in the draft Criminal Code of Ukraine). Aggressive behavior at its core contains a biological factor, while aggression can be the result of purposeful actions aimed at inciting it in society and spreading hatred towards other social groups or states. Violence and aggression are one of the most dangerous manifestations of violation of human rights, the provision of which is an imperative in the policy of every state that positions itself as a legal and social state. An act of violence is often associated with the manifestation of such a character trait as aggression. Establishing criminal responsibility for stalking is a promising direction of criminal law policy of Ukraine. Such a norm is contained in the criminal codes of many states, and in the conditions of globalization and European aspirations, Ukraine should adopt the positive experience of European countries. Domestic developers of the Criminal Code of Ukraine propose normalizing persecution as a crime against humanity. Whereas in the legislation of foreign countries, this is primarily an offense against personal freedom. Such a problem requires further scientific research. Currently, the wording of the article «Obsessive persecution of a person» is proposed, which should be placed in the current Criminal Code of Ukraine in Chapter II of the Special Part «Criminal Offenses Against the Life and Health of a Person», and in the future — according to the current Draft of the Criminal Code of Ukraine in Chapter 4.4 «Criminal offenses against personal freedom and human dignity». Key words: criminal law policy, violence, aggression, aggressive war, persecution, personal freedom, tribunal, international law, criminalization, war, crimes against humanity, physical influence and psychological influence, threat, hybrid war, crimes against peace.

Differentiation of responsibility for crimes against the person: evolution in Russian criminal legislation

The subject of the study is to consider the issues of the evolution of Russian criminal legislation in terms of the differentiation of responsibility for crimes against the person. As the materials of the study, criminal law monuments of national history were selected, in the content of which the differentiation of responsibility for crimes against the person was carried out. The article presents a historical and legal review of the main sources of criminal law of the X-XX centuries in terms of the approach reflected in them to the differentiation of responsibility for crimes against the person and analyzes the formation of an appropriate mechanism of criminal law protection. Using the example of the monuments of Russian criminal law of the X–XX centuries, the features of the construction of qualified and privileged elements of crimes against the person, the ways of their construction and presentation in the text of the criminal law are considered. To conduct an objective and comprehensive review of the chosen topic, the article used such general scientific and private scientific methods as analysis, generalization, historical, formal legal, comparative legal. The novelty of the study lies in the fact that, taking into account the retrospective approach, the historical experience of the formation of the institution of differentiation of criminal liability for attacks on life, health, freedom, honor, dignity and other protected values is traced and the process of consistent regulatory and legal registration of differentiating criminal liability features is reflected. In conclusion, the author concludes that the process of constructing differentiating criminal liability features dates back to the legislation of Ancient Russia, and their subsequent regulation maintained a certain continuity throughout the development of Russian criminal legislation. The differentiation of responsibility, despite its long history, currently remains the main method of criminal law policy, the application of which, including to the crimes under consideration, requires further reflection and improvement.

Peculiarities of criminal liability for intentional destruction or damage to someone else’s property

The article reveals the specifics of criminal liability for intentional destruction or damage to someone else’s property provided for in Article 194 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The problematic issues of the composition of the criminal offense of intentional destruction or damage to someone else’s property are analyzed, the difference between this composition and the intentional destruction or damage to property that has special features (objects of the electric power industry, nature reserve fund, archaeological heritage, weapons, military supplies, official documents, military property, etc.). Intentional destruction or damage to someone else’s property, which has special features to be qualified according to the special norms provided for by articles: 113, 1941, 252, 258, 292, 298, 338, 357, 360, 378, 399, 411, 437, 433, 438 of the Criminal Code, is proposed. of Ukraine. On the basis of the analysis of judicial practice, it was proposed that in the case of using an explosive device, for the intentional destruction or damage of someone else’s property, such actions of the perpetrator must be additionally qualified under Part 1 of Art. 263 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The imperfection of the provisions of the current criminal legislation in terms of the formulation of the qualifying signs of intentional destruction or damage to property was revealed. It has been established that the current legislation of Ukraine on criminal responsibility does not include the concept of a generally dangerous method, arson, explosion, the content of the death of people, serious consequences is not disclosed. The concept of a generally dangerous method and its varieties is proposed. The concept of a generally dangerous method and its varieties is proposed. A generally dangerous method of intentional destruction or damage to property is a method that causes property, non-property, physical damage to an individual or legal entity or creates a real danger of causing such damage to two or more people. In order to avoid unnecessary differentiation of criminal law norms, it is proposed to exclude from the Criminal Code of Ukraine articles 347, 3471, 352, and part 2 of Art. 194 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine to add the sign of intentional destruction or damage to someone else’s property in connection with the person’s performance of official powers or professional duties.

형사실체법에서 법익개념과 피해자의 지위 - 해악의 원칙: 형사입법의 제한에 피해자는 기여하는가?

The principle that there is no crime without legal interest to protect serves to set the limits of criminal legislation. In such a theory centered on the legal interest, it is not known what function the victim performs in the criminal law. However, in the criminal law regulations protecting individuals, the victim's traces appear in that the person attributing legal interests is the victim, and it is not an active marker of the criminal law. Here is looked at whether the areas that are difficult to solve with the theory of legal interest can be supplemented with the principles of common law system. The “Harm to Others Principle,” which the state sees as the most legitimate purpose of restricting individual freedom to prevent acts of harm to others, presupposes the existence of the victim. Next, Offense theory is a theory that the state's penal intervention becomes possible when the infringement of an individual's special feelings is accepted as a serious infringement beyond the subjective tendency, unlike the moral or ethical violation as a common behavior of a community. While debating whether personal legal interests and ecological or functional- human-centered legal interests should interpret legal interests centered on human interests or expand them beyond that, it was confirmed that the principle of harm and its derivative principle could be solved simply but more clearly. If the principle of harm is accepted, the victim can be determined in any way and the criminal substance law can be restricted centered on the victim, because it can have the effect of limiting the area of crime through crimes of harming interests by determining the category of harm. On the other hand, it was also examined that while the existence of the victim may perform a systematic critical function of restricting criminal legislation on the one hand, there is a concern that excessive crime may be expanded by interpreting and expanding the existing criminal constituent requirements in interpretation centered on the victim. Of course, even if the principle of harm is accepted, judgment based on an individual's subjective emotion of pleasure or displeasure still cannot be a complete solution in that there is a concern of arbitrary interpretation. This paper would be liked to terminate without concluding what is reasonable. Instead, would like to replace the conclusion with the effect that it is necessary to rethink the basis of “what” criminal law should be legislated clearly.

Issues of Determining the Systematicity in the Qualification of Crimes

The article analyzes the issues of determining the systematicity in the qualification of criminal offenses. Based on the conducted research, the author concludes that there are no uniform criteria for determining the evaluation feature — systematicity, quantitative and temporal characteristics. The author shows that the systematicity is determined differently in different types of crimes, in particular in the article, in the note to the article or in the explanations of the Resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The examples given in the paper show striking differences in criteria. So, systematic can be suitable: at least once, more than twice, or three or more times. By time, this may be at least once a quarter, during the year, during the period of the prescribed measures, or there are no specific time limits. The use of analogy according to the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is prohibited, and there are not always norms defining the criteria for the qualification of evaluative concepts. The conducted research allows us to conclude that it is necessary to develop unified approaches to the interpretation of the norms of legislation on systematization and their consolidation in criminal legislation.

Нарушения на транспорте по Уголовному уложению России 1903 г.

Purpose. Criminal legislation has the task of protecting the state system and social system, their individual structures and institutions. The peculiarity of the Criminal Code of 1903, regarding these tasks, is that it was adopted in an exceptional and special historical period of time. First of all, this circumstance is associated with the period of time that covered the development of criminal legislation during the 19th century, which was reflected in its system, structure and criminal law norms. Secondly, as noted in the preamble of the Criminal Code of 1903, it is adopted in the context of the ongoing state and social transformations, taking into account the requirements of new decisions. Significant changes related to the formation of criminal law provisions providing for liability for violation of the rules of management, use, maintenance and disposal of transport. It should also be noted that the Criminal Code of 1903 represented and was the basis for the development of criminal legislation of the new century, including criminal liability for transport crimes. Methodology: dialectics, abstraction, analysis, synthesis, deduction, — formal legal method, comparative law method. Conclusions. Firstly, the second half of the nineteenth century is characterized by the active construction of the transport system and its infrastructure; secondly, the need arose to form special governing bodies that were not previously provided for in the structure of government bodies of the Russian Empire; thirdly, the safety of traffic and operation of transport required full legal support for the management of the transport system; fourthly, the organization of transport traffic required the formation of institutions and employees for the training of specialized specialists; fifthly, the task of uninterrupted operation of the transport system and the movement of vehicles predetermined the need for systematic maintenance and repair of vehicles and transport infrastructure, sixthly, points/ stations for the formation of trains, loading/reloading of goods and boarding/transfer of passengers deserved to be formed and provided; seventhly, the need arose to form transport teams, determine for them the place and time of meals, rest and interchangeability, and then, as a necessary component of any activity, the function of monitoring the movement of vehicles, especially their technical equipment, was predetermined in order exclusion of accidents. Scientific and practical relevance. To specify the categories of the Criminal Code of 1903 under consideration in order to determine their meaning and place in the current national criminal legislation and in the science of criminal law. Use the results in the preparation of regulations providing for liability for encroachment on the safety of traffic and operation of vehicles, in a complex modern management system in the field of organization and operation of transport, especially in international and related areas, as well as in the educational process when training specialists in the field law enforcement.

Ensuring Confidentiality and Privacy in Criminal Proceedings: A Comparative Legal Analysis of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan Experience

The paper examines the limitations of personal rights in criminal proceedings, as well as the risks associated with the lack of compliance with security measures due to the unlawful disclosure of preliminary investigation data. During the research, scientific methods such as analysis, comparison, and expert assessment were used. The study resulted in the identification of significant problems in the current criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan in the area of observing the personal rights of a person and citizen, as well as ensuring the confidentiality of criminal case materials. Among these are lack of differentiation of principles establishing inviolability in various spheres of life; lack of a clear mechanism and tools for ensuring confidentiality in criminal proceedings; the optional nature of Article 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, which determines the inadmissibility of disclosing preliminary investigation materials, etc. In studying these problems, possible ways and means of solving them were developed, such as: introducing a special chapter in the Criminal Procedure Code regulating issues of ensuring confidentiality in criminal proceedings; giving an imperative nature to Article 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation; differentiation of the principles of criminal procedure in accordance with various spheres of life.

Procedure for Consideration of Criminal Cases Committed by Minors

The article focuses on the study of the procedure for committing crimes by minors. A number of circumstances are revealed that should be taken into account when committing crimes by juvenile offenders, as provided for by criminal procedural legislation. Formal-logical, systemic, structural, comparative methods were used. The provisions and conclusions contained in the article are aimed at ensuring the implementation of legislation on crimes committed by minors.

ПУБЛИЧНОСТЬ КАК ДОКАЗАТЕЛЬСТВО РАСПРОСТРАНЕНИЯ ИНФОРМАЦИИ, НЕ СООТВЕТСТВУЮЩЕЙ ДЕЙСТВИТЕЛЬНОСТИ, ВЛЕКУЩЕЙ ЗА СОБОЙ ЮРИДИЧЕСКУЮ ОТВЕТСТВЕННОСТЬ

. In the Russian Federation, the dissemination of information is carried out freely in compliance with the requirements established by law. The criminal, administrative and civil legislation of the Russian Federation ensures the protection of the rights, honor and dignity of a citizen, and, in particular, the business reputation of internal affairs bodies. The considered factor of publicity of information dissemination is a qualifying feature in the organ-ization of the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation of employees of the internal affairs bodies of the Russian Federation. The article provides an analysis of law enforcement practice in this area, examines ways to determine whether the information reported about a person is defamatory, analyzes the content of statements, the communicative situation, the form of assessment and the fact of orientation to public dissemination to other persons. The dissemination of deliberately false information violates the interests of individuals, society and the state. The authors note the need for the correct qualification of the act as defamatory and the development of dispute resolution measures.

The Improvement of the Criminal Procedure Mechanism for Selecting and Applying a Measure of Restraint in the Form of Prohibition of Certain Actions

Introduction: the court’s choice to prohibit certain actions corresponds to the general trend of humanization and liberalization of criminal procedure legislation and the more active application of measures of restraint not related to the detention of a person. The relevance of the issue of imposing prohibitions on certain actions in accordance with Art. 105.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is also determined by the need to restrict the constitutionally significant rights and freedoms of citizens suspected or accused of crimes in order to create conditions for unhindered judicial proceedings, which are ensured by judicial control and other legal guarantees of fairness and proportionality of the chosen prohibitions. The purpose of the study is to eliminate doubts and ambiguities that arise when selecting and applying a prohibition on certain actions and to formulate proposals for improving the legal regulation of the measure of restraint in question. In the course of the study, such methods of cognition as formal legal in the form of studying the norms of law, specifically sociological and comparative law, were applied. Results: the paper formulates proposals to improve the criminal procedure mechanism for selecting and applying a prohibition on certain actions. Conclusions: the recommendations set out in the paper are aimed at developing uniform investigative and judicial practice and can be used in the educational process when teaching criminal procedure sciences, as well as in the practical activities of preliminary investigation officers, prosecutors, and courts.

ПОНЯТИЕ ГРАЖДАНСТВЕННОСТИ КАК ТРАДИЦИОННОЙ ДУХОВНО-НРАВСТВЕННОЙ ЦЕННОСТИ И ЕЕ МЕСТО В УГОЛОВНОМ ЗАКОНОДАТЕЛЬСТВЕ РОССИЙСКОЙ ФЕДЕРАЦИИ

The article is devoted to the analysis of the concept of citizenship in order to admit its presence as a traditional spiritual and moral value in the legal system. Based on the analysis of the concept of citizenship prevailing in branch sciences, as well as in legislation in the field of strategic planning, the author comes to the conclusion that it is permissible to consider this element of traditional values in the format "citizenship – civil identity – citizenship of the Russian Federation". Such a construction is justified when applying the norms of criminal legislation providing for liability in the form of termination of citizenship, such a decision of the legislator is justified from the position of civil identity.

Развитие законодательства об ответственности за преступления экстремистской направленности в период Российской империи (с 1846 по 1917 г.)

In the article on the basis of the analysis of criminal legislation of the period of the Russian Empire from 1846 to the moment of its collapse in 1917 the main regularities of the development of norms on counteraction to acts of extremist orientation (including obstruction of the functioning of banned communities) are outlined. The measures taken by the legislator to prevent the activities of secret societies, as well as to personalize the responsibility of their members are given. At the same time, the analyzed period of development of domestic legislation on criminal liability for extremist crimes is conditionally divided into two stages.

LEGAL LIABILITY OF A PHYSICIAN FOR PROVIDING INADEQUATE MEDICAL CARE TO A PATIENT: ANALYSIS OF APPROACHES BASED ON THE EXAMPLES OF KAZAKHSTAN AND THE UNITED STATES

Background: This research focuses on the determination of liability for medical professionals causing harm to patients, using the criminal legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan as a foundation. Criminal liability for medical offences is stipulated in Chapter 12 of the Criminal Code. By identifying the mandatory characteristics or elements of a medical criminal offence according to the criminal legislation of Kazakhstan, parallels are drawn with the types of culpability provided for in developed countries worldwide. The authors reviewed scholarly works examining the effectiveness of handling cases involving harm to patients and decisions regarding the satisfaction or dismissal of the patient's claims in Kazakhstan. Attention has been given to empirical data collected within the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The results of sociological research conducted by the authors over a period of 3 months among healthcare professionals from different regions of the country have been utilised. Special attention has been devoted to international experiences in implementing measures to improve patient safety, reducing citizen complaints regarding the quality of healthcare services, and enhancing the legal protection of medical personnel. The research selects provisions from scholarly works that reduce the risk of harm to patients and thereby contribute to reducing medical crime levels. Methods: In this research, the authors employed a number of methods of scientific research to achieve their goals and solve their tasks, in particular legal analysis, comparative legal analysis, survey, questionnaire, and interviewing. Legal analysis of the Criminal Legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, including Chapter 12 of the Criminal Code, was conducted to identify the specifics of criminal liability for medical offences, exemplified by Article 317. This analysis highlighted the nuances of criminal liability for medical offences in Kazakhstan. Comparative legal analysis made it possible to compare the responsibilities of doctors in the USA and Kazakhstan. Attention was drawn to the similarity of the concepts of guilt in the form of negligence, with a specific emphasis on the American approach, which offers valuable insights for Kazakhstan. These aspects could be adapted to improve Kazakhstan's legal system. The specific cases of harm to patients considered by the courts of the Republic of Kazakhstan were studied, and court decisions concerning the satisfaction of patients' claims and their rejection were analysed, which allowed the authors to identify the main arguments and trends in judicial practice. Surveys and questionnaires were conducted among medical workers from various regions of Kazakhstan to gather empirical data on their perceptions of duties and responsibilities. Additionally, in-depth interviews were also conducted with experts in the field of medicine and law, as well as patients, and representatives of health authorities, providing high-quality data on the problems and challenges faced by medical workers. Statistical data collected during sociological research were processed and analysed. This included data on citizen complaints about the quality of medical care, cases of harm to patients and other relevant statistical indicators. The study of the problem at various levels revealed the level of patient safety and legal protection of medical personnel. Results and Conclusion: Creating conditions for medicine and ensuring effective social and professional medical insurance are some factors that provide opportunities for medical practice as a whole and the healthcare system. These facts also facilitate a proper legal assessment of a doctor's performance

Право на защиту в уголовном судопроизводстве: проблемы пробелов законодательной регламентации

The author of the article is subjected to a problematic analysis of some gaps in the criminal procedure legislation and the practice of its application in terms of ensuring the right to protection of a person, without granting him the status of a participant in the defense (suspect/accused). The study focuses on the fact that the law enforcement positions of the Constitutional and Supreme Courts of the Russian Federation, which clarified in 2000, 2015 and 2016 the right of an investigative body to criminal prosecution, without making a special procedural decision, have not so far brought any clarity to the mechanism of its implementation. This issue has not been worked out in the current legislation either. According to the author, the lack of legislation in this part significantly detracts from the constitutional right of an individual to protection in criminal proceedings. According to the results of the study, the author makes some suggestions for improving legislation.