Current Criminal Law Research Articles

Institute for Returning of a Criminal Case by the Prosecutor to the Investigator as Implementation of the Processive Function of the Prosecutor

The article deals with issues related to the adoption of a procedural decision on the return of the criminal case by the prosecutor to the investigator for additional investigation. The analysis of the provisions of the current criminal procedure law allowed the authors to analyze the existing problems in the implementation of the procedural function of the prosecutor to return the criminal case to the investigator for additional production.It has been proved that the return of a criminal case for additional investigation acts as a means of correcting the violations committed by the investigators in the course of their additional investigation. The meaning of this institution is formed by the powers of the prosecutor to return criminal cases for additional investigation in cases when the criminal case cannot be sent to court.One of the main goals of the additional investigation is to establish the truth, which, as a result, contributes to the protection of the rights and freedoms of the participants in criminal proceedings, the adoption by the court of a legal and well-grounded decision.The authors substantiated the conclusion that criminal prosecution and supervision over the execution of laws are two independently existing state-power functions of the prosecutor's office, with their own tasks, goals, content and subject of legal regulation.

The Problems of Implementing the Procedural Relationship Between the Prosecutor and the Investigator on Applying a Measure of Restraint in Judicial Control Proceedings (Through the Example of Detention)

Introduction: the paper examines the problems of implementing the procedural relationship between the prosecutor and the investigator in the course of judicial control proceedings when applying the measures of procedural coercion in the form of detention. In the doctrine of criminal procedure, there are different positions of processualist scientists on improving the criminal procedure activities of the prosecutor and the investigator at the stage of deciding on applying a measure of restraint in the form of detention. The authors took a keen interest in the lack of a legitimate determination of the prosecutor’s opinion on the validity and legality of the request of the preliminary investigation bodies to choose detention in the course of judicial control proceedings. It is the written opinion of the prosecutor as a form of intervention at the pre-trial stages, especially in the course of judicial control proceedings when investigating the issue of choosing detention that contributes to the court’s taking a legitimate and reasoned decision. In this context, the authors set the goal of finding and improving the efficiency of the procedural model of relations between the prosecutor and the investigator on the issue of resolving a preventive measure in the form of detention in the course of judicial control proceedings. Methods: the methodological framework for the study is a set of methods of scientific cognition, among which the main ones are the methods of cognition, comparative law and historical analysis. Results: the authors analyzed the provisions of the criminal procedure norms of the Soviet period on this issue which helped to identify a number of shortcomings in that period and in the present one, which were inherited from the past. Conclusions: the existing procedural model of interaction between the prosecutor and the investigator in a detailed study of the problem of preventive measures in the form of detention, regulated by the current criminal procedure law, does not correspond to the current state policy in relation to the Russian prosecutor, who acts on behalf of the state at all stages of criminal proceedings. In this regard, the authors, based on the analysis of numerous positions of processalist scientists, as well as the judicial and investigative practice, proposed a procedural model of interaction between the prosecutor and the investigator during the judicial control proceedings, which can be applied in regulating the relationship between the prosecutor and the investigator when considering the issue of applying a measure of restraint in the form of detention.

Direction for the program for abusers or probation program: a practical aspect

Introduction. Restrictive measures applied to perpetrators of domestic violence are a relatively new type of criminal law measure provided for in current criminal law. The legislative and scientific novelty of these measures, the inconsistency norms of legislative acts, which regulate the procedure for their appointment and implementation, cause problems and difficulties in their practical application. Purpose. Analysis of the practice of restrictive measures provided for in paragraph 5 of Part 1 of Art. 91-1 of the Criminal code of Ukraine, revealing of problems and difficulties of their appointment and performance and statement of offers concerning possible overcoming of these problems, by elimination of legislative gaps and contradictions. Results. The article analyzes the practice of prescribing and implementing such restrictive measures applicable to perpetrators of domestic violence as "direction for program for abusers" and "direction for probation program". Problems and difficulties that arise due to the ambiguity of the wording of criminal law, the inconsistency of regulations governing the appointment and implementation of relevant measures, as well as the lack of professionalism of the judges. In particular, it was established that the judges did not specify which restrictive measure provided for in paragraph 5 of Part 1 of Article 91-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine should be applied to the convict, because it contains two different in content and procedure. This makes it impossible to enforce the sentence. Also, the lack of a mechanism for interaction of probation authorities with local state administrations and local self-government authorities makes it impossible for probation authorities to exercise control over convicts who are sent to undergo a program for abusers. Conclusion. It is proposed to amend Art. 91-1 of the Criminal code of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine "About probation" and other regulatory legal acts, for the purpose of elimination of the analyzed problems of application of restrictive measures.

ЮРИДИЧНА ТЕХНІКА ФОРМУВАННЯ НОРМ КРИМІНАЛЬНОГО ПРАВА

The purpose of the study is to reveal the features of the legal technique of criminal law rules formation. In our study, the principles and techniques of formal-logical methodology are used, as well as the structural-functional approach is applied. Identifying cross-sectoral links in lawmaking is based on the functional nature of law in general and regulatory means in particular. In addition, dialectical, system-structural and functional methods, the method of interpretation (applied to the current criminal law rules) are used in the paper. Using the formal-legal method, the relationship between the content and form of criminal law rules with the use of legal techniques is traced. Scientific novelty lies in the theoretical understanding and delineation of legal techniques for the formation of criminal law. It is shown that in addition to defects in legal definitions and constructions, there are often conflicts between textually enshrined rules of law. The coordination of actions on the part of law-making bodies adopting by-laws and on the part of the parliament, which should take into account the needs of development and concretization of the provisions of the law in the future, is substantiated. In fact, outside of scientific knowledge at this stage, there is a huge area of legal technology, associated with its features in various fields of law. Obviously, the legal technique in each area has its own specifics. Identification and analysis of factors that cause technical and legal shortcomings improves the quality and efficiency of lawmaking. This does not seem to be enough, because there is no single systematic understanding of the situation in lawmaking in general as well as in criminal law field in particular. It is necessary to direct the technical and legal assessment to eliminate specific shortcomings of system-forming factors in particular. The imperfection of legal acts is a constant source of insufficiently thought-out law-making decisions. As a result of the research, it is argued that in the process of adopting a law-making decision in the field of criminal law, it is necessary to proceed, first of all, from their expediency, objective necessity. It is necessary to take into account the assessment of the consequences arising from the implementation of the rule of law, in particular, how they will affect such processes as latency, corruption, recidivism, as well as the disclosure of their crimes. It is argued that from a technical and legal point of view, it is necessary to make a scientific foresight of the expected positive and negative consequences that arise as a result of issuing a certain law-making decision. The results of the study can be used in lawmaking to improve the quality and effectiveness of criminal law, as well as to reform the Criminal Code of Ukraine.

ON THE QUESTION OF THE DEFINITION AND ESSENCE OF THE PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL EXECUTIVE LAW

The article is devoted to defining the concept and essence of the principles of criminal executive law. The article analyzes the general theoretical concepts for defining the term “principles of law”. The author’s positions of the compilers of explanatory, etymological and other dictionaries on the definition of the principles of law are considered. The positions of domestic scholars in the field of criminal executive law on this issue are studied. It is noted that most definitions of the principles of criminal executive law are based solely on one aspect of criminal executive reality, which is the activity of execution of punishments. Based on this area of criminal executive activity, an idea of the current, basic provisions of the current criminal procedure law has been formed. The article emphasizes the mandatory consideration of such a direction as serving a sentence when determining the key, fundamental provisions of criminal executive law, taking into account the category of principles. This direction actually embodies the subjective composition, which according to the specifics of criminal-executive relations belongs to the sphere of serving sentences. First of all, this direction is related to the person of the convict, as well as other persons involved in this process. This category of persons also includes representatives of local authorities, self-government, public and religious organizations, etc. The article focuses on and expresses the author’s position on the definition of the principles of criminal executive law and mandatory consideration of key elements that fully reflect their essence. Such elements include the perception of principles as: 1) fundamental, conceptual ideas of the relevant branch of law; 2) criteria of subjective, human perception of events, phenomena within certain legal relations; 3) key elements of the structure and functioning of legal mechanisms. Given this, the principles of criminal executive law have the following meanings: a) doctrinal; b) perceptual; c) regulatory. The proposed elements fully reflect the substantive component of the principles of criminal executive law.

The origins of criminal liability for misleading in ancient world culture

Naturally, both religious and philosophical and moral and ethical ideas of worldview are based on the concept of the origin ofthe world, which is set out in the world’s religious scriptures. Any science does not invent anything, but only reveals the phenomena,phenomena, their laws and essence that exist first in nature, in the life of the human community. Jurisprudence, if it claims to be a truescience, should do the same: to identify those legal relations that were originally the basis of the functioning of man and humanity.The article presents the origins of criminal liability under Article 384 of the Criminal Code, which have their source in the worldreligious systems. Most of the main provisions of the current criminal law of all world countries are based on basic religious canons.Responsibility for false testimony was provided by the laws of all times and peoples. The criminal law of European nations originatesdirectly from the Bible, the ninth commandment emphasizes: «Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor». The ninth commandmentwas recorded on stone tablets and meant a prohibition to make false denunciations, testify falsely in court, slander, slander,and so on.The fourth commandment of the Buddhist canon mentions: «I accept the rule of teaching to refrain from false words». The mainprovision of the Buddhist commandment «renunciation of lies» is accompanied by virtue: honesty and reliability, and in the field ofhuman rights: the right to human dignity.In Muslim countries, whose laws are based on the norms of Islam (Sharia), criminal law is inseparable from religious ones. InIslam, perjury is a great sin, as it contributes to the punishment of the innocent and the impunity of the guilty. The Qur’an says, «Avoidfalse witness». «On the Day of Judgment, a false witness will not move from his place».Examining the depths of centuries of civilization and the basic foundations of world law, it is clear that the main content can beformulated as a reminder that, no matter how legal thought develops, the origins of law remain intact and go back to human birth, tothe foundations open to humanity at the dawn of its formation and presented in sacred books and the first written monuments.

ОКРЕМІ ПРОЦЕСУАЛЬНІ АСПЕКТИ ПОЧАТКУ КРИМІНАЛЬНОГО ПРОВАДЖЕННЯ

The article analyzes the features of the beginning of criminal proceedings defined by the current criminal procedure law of Ukraine. The criminal procedural norms which define an initial stage in criminal proceedings are investigated. The provisions of the norms of the legislation which determine the legal fact of the beginning of proceedings in the case are analyzed. The positions of scientists in this regard are considered. In particular, the scientific concepts concerning the implementation in the norms of the current law of the provision that existed in the content of the Criminal Procedure Code of 1960, namely the decision to initiate a criminal case. The analysis of the practice of application of the current norms of the criminal procedural law in this regard for the author's point of view on the expediency of such a step is analyzed. The author's position on the preservation of the existing law within the existing provisions, on the commencement of criminal proceedings from the moment of entering information into the unified register of pre-trial investigations. This position is fully correlated with the provisions of the concept of criminal justice reform. There are also examples from the practical activities of law enforcement agencies, which were the basis for this conclusion. The article also examines the issue of determining the time limits for the start of pre-trial investigation in criminal proceedings and entering information into a single register of pre-trial investigations. The positions of scientists on this issue, which are quite different and sometimes polar, are analyzed. The author's attention is focused on certain difficulties that arise in law enforcement agencies during the proper initiation of criminal proceedings. It is emphasized that the term available in the current law for twenty-four hours is extremely insignificant for the correct determination of the qualification of the offense and its composition. It is proposed to increase the period to three days during which the investigator must enter information into the unified register of pre-trial investigations and initiate criminal proceedings. It is these time limits that must be sufficient for the investigator or prosecutor to properly comply with the requirements of the applicable criminal procedure law.

Research on criminal responsibility of juvenile delinquency based on the Analysis of Big Data

In recent years, juvenile crime has shown an upward trend according to the presentation of data. Juvenile crime has become a global concern. Minors are not yet fully developed because of their mental and physical physiology. Therefore, the criminal responsibility of juvenile delinquency must be treated differently from adults. As the crimes of minors continue to grow, it is practical to study the criminal responsibility of minors. This paper introduces the concept of juvenile delinquency, and through the combing of the relevant theories of juvenile criminal liability system, to study the problems existing in the current criminal law of juvenile criminal liability in juvenile delinquency, and proposes to improve our country based on the big data. Recommendations on the criminal liability system for adult crime.

Судебная юрисдикция в сфере применения меры пресечения в виде заключения под стражу

The article deals with a set of problems related to judicial jurisdiction in the application of preventive measures in the form of detention. A number of additions to existing legislation on the use of preventive measures in the form of detention are proposed. This article deals with the peculiarities of the application of a preventive measure, such as detention. The main features of its use were established. The procedural characteristics of such a type of preventive measures as detention are studied, the procedural measures related to the detention of a suspect/ accused/defendant are analyzed, the provisions of the current criminal procedure law are analyzed. It is stated that ensuring the rights of suspects accused when choosing and applying a preventive measure in the form of detention against them is faced with difficulties, primarily due to the fundamental problems of the entire Russian criminal proceedings: the excessive length of the proceedings, its excessive bureaucratization, formalism, the hypertrophied role of the preliminary investigation before the trial, poor conditions of detention and others. Materials of St. Petersburg, Arkhangelsk region are used.

ВИКОРИСТАННЯ СПЕЦІАЛЬНИХ ЗНАНЬ ПІД ЧАС ПРОВЕДЕННЯ ОГЛЯДУ МІСЦЯ ПОДІЇ В ПОРЯДКУ Ч. 3 СТ. 214 КПК УКРАЇНИ

The article deals with the problem of specialist’s participation in the scene examination, which is carried out before entering information into the Unified Register of the pre-trial investigations. The essence of the problem is that the current criminal procedural law of Ukraine recognizes the specialist’s participation only in the pre-trial investigation, the litigation and the proceedings in the case of the commission of an unlawful act under the law of Ukraine on criminal liability. Part 1 of Article 71 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine states that a specialist in criminal proceedings is a person who has special knowledge and skills and can provide advice and conclusions during the pre-trial investigation and trial on issues that require appropriate special knowledge and skills. In other cases, the specialist has no procedural status. In addition, Part 1 of Article 237 of the CPC of Ukraine «Examination» states that the examination is conducted to identify and record information on the circumstances of the offense commitment. It is an act provided by the law of Ukraine on criminal liability. However, there are the cases in the investigation, when a report is received, for example, about a person's death, other events with formal signs of the offense, which must first be checked for signs of a crime, and only then the act can be considered as offense. In this case, a specialist takes part in the scene examination. However, the current criminal procedure law in accordance with Part 1, Article 71 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine determines the legal status of a specialist only as the participant in criminal proceedings. The paragraph 10, part 1 of Article 3 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine defines the criminal proceedings as pre-trial investigation and court proceedings or procedural actions in the case of the commission of an unlawful act. Therefore, when the inspection of the scene is based on the uncertain status of the event (there is no clear information that the event contains signs of an offense), the specialist’s participation is not regulated by law. The authors propose to consider the specialists as «experienced persons» in cases mentioned above and to include their advices to the protocol of the scene examination, as the advices of other scene examination participants.

Общественная опасность экологических преступлений в динамике социальных отношений

The transformation of public danger of environmentally hazardous acts is considered. It has been established that in the process of historical development, the approach to determining their harmfulness has changed: previously it was associated with the violation of ownership rights to natural resources, and now it is associated with the possibility of complete destruction or change of nature. It is stated that the nature of the public danger of environmental crimes has greatly changed. The main actions that have a negative impact on the natural environment have been identified. It has been established that the degree of social danger of these acts has greatly increased. It is noted that the transformation of the public danger of the analyzed acts occurred in a very short period of time, and the current criminal law does not take into account the changes in full. Special measures are proposed to improve the criminal law protection of the environment and natural resources: taking into account the selfish motive when committing them, the formation of elements of environmental crimes as compounds of real danger

ВЗАЄМОДІЯ КРИМІНАЛЬНОГО ТА КРИМІНАЛЬНОГО ПРОЦЕСУАЛЬНОГО ПРАВА ЩОДО ЗВІЛЬНЕННЯ ВІД ВІДПОВІДАЛЬНОСТІ

In modern conditions, the implementation of the principle of inevitability of criminal liability and punishment is rationally modified. The mechanism of criminal law regulation involves means based on the encouragement and stimulation of lawful, socially useful behavior. The purpose of the article is to establish the interaction of criminal substantive and procedural law on the release of the perpetrator from criminal liability. Realization of the set purpose provides the decision of such tasks, as: 1) definition of the legal nature of release from criminal liability; 2) outlining the preconditions, grounds and conditions of the procedural procedure for exemption from criminal liability; 3) to disclose the interaction of criminal and criminal procedural law on exemption from criminal liability. The scientific novelty of the article is that it comprehensively addresses the main issues of interaction of material and procedural criminal law aspects of exemption from criminal liability. Proposals were made to improve the current criminal and criminal procedural laws, taking into account the position of the victim on the possibility of release from criminal liability. It was concluded that the victim's position on the influence on the release from criminal liability was unreasonably limited both on the grounds of the General and Special Parts of the Criminal Law of Ukraine. Proposals are made to correct this situation by a new version of the relevant provisions of the Criminal and Criminal Procedure Codes of Ukraine.

Общие и специальные теории уголовного процесса

The relevance of the article can be determined on the basis of research on general theories of criminal procedure. The main theoretical provisions of the criminal procedure of continental Europe began to be developed in 1864, after the adoption of the Charter of the Criminal Proceedings of Russia. Theoretical developments included a conceptual approach that defined guarantees for the rights, freedoms and interests of participants in the procedure, basic principles, forms of evidence and proving, the procedure for investigative and judicial actions. The aim of the article is to reveal the theoretical content of the general theory of the procedure and to determine new special theories enshrined in the current legislation. If general theories of the procedure have been considered at the level of monographic research, special ones have remained outside the scope of studies. The novelty of the research consists in the disclosure of theoretical and practical aspects of general and special theories of criminal procedure on the basis of existing legislation and the practice of its application by criminal justice authorities and the collegiate court. The article considers the theoretical aspects of a special theory. Issues of the optimization and procedural economy of criminal procedure based on benchmark theory are related to the release of a person from criminal liability and the use of alternative measures. New legal definitions are proposed that establish a clear mechanism for procedural, investigative (search), judicial actions in establishing, securing, evaluating evidence of guilt or innocence of a person. The existing legal constructions of general theories provide an impetus for the application of special theories of criminal procedure, which are associated with solving the problems of criminal proceedings, its optimization, and procedural economy of applying criminal procedural repression. The current criminal procedural law does not fully define the concept of general and special theories of the procedure. The article proposes theoretical aspects and practical solutions to these emerging problematic issues. The basic concept of the article includes the analysis of general and special theories of criminal procedure, the determination of the provisions for its optimization and procedural economy on the basis of the unified content of criminal and procedural rules in establishing circumstances related to the closure of criminal proceedings, and the release of a person from criminal liability. Based on the analysis of the current criminal procedural legislation, the content of procedural repressions, which are determined on the basis of the procedural status of prosecution and the mechanism of their application with respect to a particular category of participants in criminal proceedings, is revealed.

ПЕРЕСМОТР ДЕЛ ПО ВНОВЬ ОТКРЫВШИМСЯ И НОВЫМ ОБСТОЯТЕЛЬСТВАМ: НЕВЫГОДНЫЕ ОТЛИЧИЯ УГОЛОВНОГО ПРОЦЕССА

The article deals with the comparative analysis of the procedure and grounds for reviewing court cases under new and newly discovered circumstances in criminal and arbitration, civil and administrative proceedings. The author proceeds from the idea of common fundamental beginnings of justice in general, and therefore, all types of judicial activities - including an extraordinary review of judicial decisions, which have entered into legal force. The branch specifics of specific procedural institutions should have a special explanation based on the specifics of the branch itself. The author thinks that there is no key basis for reviewing the case on the newly discovered circumstances in the criminal trial and attempts to replace it with one of the new circumstances. In this part, the current criminal procedure law differs unfavourably from the Soviet Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) of the RSFSR of 1960 - among the newly discovered circumstances, there are no those that could indicate a miscarriage of justice made out of direct connection with someone's criminal actions. In the current CPC of the Russian Federation, the list of newly discovered circumstances is closed, and the list of new circumstances that entail the review of the court decisions is, on the contrary, open. Examples of academic papers and administrative enactments justifying such a replacement are given. The author gives his arguments against it and proposes to change the list of grounds for revision, referring to the regulation in other procedural branches, historical and foreign experience. A significant procedural difference of the considered type of extraordinary review of cases in criminal proceedings from other types of proceedings is found. It is the need for applicants to request a review from the prosecutor, not from the court. The greatest objection is the non-alternative procedure: the prosecutor is a participant in the criminal proceedings on the part of the prosecution, he is responsible for the undoubted proof of the charge, which is the basis of the sentence, the abolition of which is requested by another interested person. The negative impact of the prosecutor's mediation between the complainant and the court on access to justice and its quality is argued. It is pointed out that there is no need for prosecutorial checks to resolve the issue of judicial review of the case. The analysis of judicial statistics in different branches of justice shows that criminal proceedings differ sharply by the negligible number of judicial review cases due to newly discovered and new circumstances. The article calls into question the ability to explain this fact by a higher quality of sentences in criminal cases in comparison with other court decisions in other court cases.

ПРОЦЕСУАЛЬНИЙ СТАТУС СЛІДЧОГО: ПРОБЛЕМНІ ПИТАННЯ

The article examines the problematic issues of the procedural status of the investigator, the debatable question of the relationship between the terms «procedural status of the investigator» and «competency of the investigator». The purpose of the article is to study certain problematic issues of the investigator’s procedural status and make proposals for their solution. It is substantiated that the criminal procedural competence of the investigator is the legal envelope of his criminal procedural activity, which determines his criminal procedural status, which is defined by the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. Components of the investigator’s procedural status are the investigator’s functions, the investigator’s subject matter, and the investigator’s powers. The specified elements in their totality make up the content of the concept of «criminal procedural competence of the investigator». It is proven that the scope of criminal procedural competence means its substantive and quantitative content. The limits of the investigator’s competence only outline the circle of its elements, taken together or separately from each other. At the same time, each structural element of its competence has its limit. The investigator has no right to go beyond the procedural function of prosecution. The boundary of the investigator’s authority is the circle of his rights and duties, which the investigator is entitled to use to fulfill the tasks of his criminal procedural activity. The author gives arguments for introducing in all law enforcement agencies instead of the institute of investigators, the institute of detectives. The necessity in the current criminal procedural legislation and laws of Ukraine, which determine the competence of law enforcement agencies, to combine the functions of pre-trial investigation and operational-search activity into a single function of detective activity is substantiated, which will eliminate the problems of interaction between pre-trial investigation bodies and operational units and at the same time increase the effectiveness of law enforcement agencies in implementation of pretrial investigation of criminal offenses, strengthening of guarantees of the rights of all participants in criminal proceedings.

CURRENT ISSUES OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MINORS IN THE CONTEXT OF MODERN REALITY

This article examines the current theoretical and practical issues of criminal proceedings against minors in the light of recent changes in the criminal procedure legislation. The research was conducted using formal-logical and dialectic methods, as well as the comparative-legal method when analyzing criminal and legal proceedings against minors. The authors conclude that a number of existing criminal procedure norms regulating the preliminary investigation and consideration of criminal cases in court against minors do not meet international standards and require further improvement. This article draws attention to the procedural errors of investigators (inquirers) and judges that are allowed in the process of investigation and consideration of criminal cases in court in relation to minor suspects, accused persons, defendants. The lack of sufficient legal regulation in the criminal procedure law is called the main reason for the mistakes made in the criminal proceedings against minors. In order to solve the identified problems, the authors propose to make appropriate additions to the current criminal procedure law.

The institute of criminal misdemeanor as a form of criminal offense

The article defined the concept of criminal misconduct, its components, as well as related to its commission of criminal legal consequences; legal analysis of legislative amendments to the Criminal and Criminal Procedural Codes of Ukraine; the legislative acts of Ukraine establishing criminal liability for criminal misconduct are analyzed. The purpose of the research is to conduct a comprehensive doctrinal analysis of the theoretical and legal basis for the introduction of the institute of criminal offenses and criminal liability for their commission, as well as legal analysis of legislative changes due to the latest form of criminal offenses. Thus, the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine in 2012 introduced the institution of criminal offenses, but this institution required the adoption of the Law of Ukraine "On Criminal Offenses" to enter into force. Numerous bills on criminal offenses, which were considered for eight years, had different meanings and visions about the essence of the institution of criminal offense and its place in criminal law, so only on 01.07.2020 the concept of criminal offense was introduced into current criminal law of Ukraine. Regarding the definition of the concept of criminal misconduct according to Part 1 of Article 12 of the Criminal Code Criminal offenses are divided into criminal misdemeanors and crimes. Part 1 of Article 11 of the Criminal Code indicates that a criminal offense is a socially dangerous criminal act (action or omission) provided by this Code, committed by the subject of the criminal offense. Thus, a criminal offense is one of the forms of a criminal offense The introduction of these substitutions is essentially a change in the classification of criminal offenses, where an act involving a punishment less severe than imprisonment or a fine of up to three thousand tax-free minimum incomes is called a criminal offense, and moderate crimes are renamed minor. It should be noted that the lack of terminology of criminal misconduct in the relevant provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine hinders the introduction of the institution of criminal misconduct in full.

Sexual harassment: criminological grounds and criminal law powers

The objective reality of social interaction demonstrates the further development of social relations in various aspects of human existence, which gives rise to new contradictions that require resolution, including legal regulation by the norms of various law branches. There is a need to establish the limits for the subject’s legally acceptable behaviour, upon reaching which the area of deviations begins. Sexual harassment is one of such problems emerged at the end of the 20th century. Many foreign countries faced with this social phenomenon have recognized the criminality of sexual harassment in continuation of the chosen political trend towards liberalization of sexual relations. Similar trends are also observed in Russian society. They are practiced both at the level of discussions within the doctrinal environment and at the legislative level. Concerned about the seriousness of the problem and armed with the results of sociological research, Russian forensic scientists are engaged in developing a concept for the criminalization of harassment. The purpose of this work is to study the criminological grounds for recognizing the wrongfulness of sexual harassment and to consider the current criminal law powers against harassment in order to confirm the need to criminalize this phenomenon or to deny it. To achieve this purpose, the opinions of domestic and foreign researchers were studied, a rather-legal analysis of the domestic policy tendencies in Russia and foreign states regarding the liberalization of sexual relations was carried out. The conditions of the modern Russian legislation in combating sexual harassment were studied. Applied are such general scientific research methods as analysis, synthesis, generalization, as well as such specific scientific methods as statistical method, content analysis, formal logical method, and rather-legal method. As a result, the authors come to the conclusion that there is a recognized unlawfulness of sexual harassment in the norms of the current Russian legislation and that it is inexpedient to criminalize this phenomenon as an independent crime in view of the sufficiency of powers available within the framework of the modern criminal law.

Improvement of legislation in the field of countering organized forms of crime: illusions and reality

Introduction. The state of crime in modern Ukraine is characterized by a significant spread of organized crime. Given the absence for many years of a state strategy to combat organized crime and the failure of state policy to minimize corruption, organized crime has reached such proportions that have become a threat to national security. Significant changes took place in Section IX "Criminal Offenses against Public Safety" with the entry into force of the Law "On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine on Liability for Crimes Committed by the Criminal Community" № 671-IX of 04.06.2020. The aim of the article. Has the legislator's goal been achieved to strengthen the criminal law framework for combating organized crime? The purpose of this scientific article is to find an answer to this question. Finding out the answer to the question: "How will the introduced short stories affect the fight against organized crime?" is also important in terms of ensuring the unity of case law. Conclusions. Legislative novelties do not agree with other norms and current criminal law terminology, contradict the systemic structure of criminal law, do not comply with the rules of the Ukrainian language. It is not logical to make changes to the "body" of the Law of Ukraine "On Organizational and Legal Basis of Combating Organized Crime" of June 30, 1993, which requires changes in each of its articles. It is necessary and important to adopt a new Law (conditional title - "On the principles of combating organized crime in Ukraine"), which should be based on current legislation of Ukraine and take into account the current state and trends of organized crime in the world, especially its transnational nature and symbiosis with corruption, as well as the specifics of domestic organized forms of terrorism, separatism and collaborationism. Therefore, a promising area of further research on the analyzed problem is the development of scientifically sound proposals for a new law on combating organized crime in Ukraine.

Opšta obeležja instituta saučesništva u anglosaksonskom krivičnom pravu

Complicity in the common law system has been subject of different practices in different countries for many years. It is unlike the practice in the majority of continental criminal justice systems. However, the court practice and principles established over time in certain countries have had greater effects than in some other countries using the same system. English common law practice is an example. It is the common law system with the strongest influence. Its practice regarding complicity was established a long time ago in 1861 Accessories and Abbettors Act that was the main law regulating this issue for over a hundred years. Besides very well-established actus rea elements, the main mens rea condition for complicity was a perpetrator's purpose or knowledge of the main criminal act. During 1985, the complicity concept was changed with the final judgment in the case "R v Jogee (Appellant) and Ruddock (Appellant) v The Queen (Respondent) (Jamaica)." The point of this reform was the "joint criminal enterprise" concept that was based on the "foreseeability standard" that made an accomplice responsible even for crime acts that were outside the "common plan or the purpose". After 30 years of implementation, the case of Privy Council Chang Wing-Siu v The Queen reset the complicity doctrine again and got it back to its traditional principles claiming "foreseeability standard" unconstitutional. Due to the importance of the common law system in Great Britain for other countries applying the same system, some of them, including Australia and Jordan, accepted the same complicity principles as Great Britain. Both of the mentioned systems adopted the "joint criminal enterprise" concept, but they developed it within their national criminal laws demanding extra responsibility claims for the accomplice. Unlike them, the US common law is characterized by other elements. Among them, the main ones are its inconsistency in terms of different practices at the state and at the federal level, as well as the lack of codification relating to many criminal law principles, including the complicity doctrine itself. These issues and problems have been a subject of interest of many scholars and practitioners in the common law system. The common denominator of their remarks regarding the problem is the need for a comprehensive reform of the current criminal law regulations and practices. Model Penal Code was a partially successful attempt of such needs but with limited effects. Taking in consideration all problems that exist regarding the complicity doctrine in the common law system, it seems further reforms and codifications of the complicity doctrine are the best way out of the current confusion where this doctrine seems to be stuck.