Theory of justification of the criminal law: current status and problems of application

IF 0.1 Q4 LAW
Valentina I. Plokhova
{"title":"Theory of justification of the criminal law: current status and problems of application","authors":"Valentina I. Plokhova","doi":"10.17223/22253513/45/8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The relevance of the study is determined by the fact that the legislator and the law enforcement officer allow deviations from the social and legal foundations at all stages of the formation and application of the criminal law. Therefore, the subject of research is, on the one hand, incorrectly formulated norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, draft amendments to them, unjustified application of the law. On the other hand, there are theoretical and normative constructions existing for a given historical period, designed to prevent the emergence of such norms and their application. These include the theory of substantiation of criminal law, including its most developed part - the theory of criminalization of acts, regulations on the examination of laws and their application. In this regard, the purpose of the study is to identify the causes of failure, failure of these structures and to determine the way to solve the problem. The study was carried out using such general logical methods of cognition as systemic, comparative-legal; analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction. Analyzed: 4 laws and bills (No. 5, 8, 9, 18), 7 decisions of the Constitutional Court of the RF over the past 5 years (No. 1-4, 15, 17), which offer a different constitutional interpretation of the unjustified norms of the Criminal Code of the RF; materials of judicial practice on the norms incorrectly fixed in the Criminal Code or applied by the courts, carried out by the author and other researchers (No. 6, 12, 13, 14); monitoring data of the expertise of the law officially conducted in Russia and its application for compliance-inconsistency with the social and legal foundations of the criminal law (52). It has been carried out the analysis and synthesis of the authors' views on the components of the concept, the criteria for the criminalization of acts, the substantiation of the law, named in 18 studies (No. 19-21, 26-29, 31-41, 52 (monographs, dissertations, journal articles) its use in applied research, as well as 13 studies devoted to a broader substantiation of the law than criminalization (22-25, 30, 44-51). Sociological, philosophical and other studies have been analyzed (No. 7, 11, 42, 43). The system analysis made it possible to draw both intermediate and final conclusions obtained as a result of the study. As a result of the study, it was revealed that: 1. Criminalization is the most important stage in the process of substantiating a law, but it does not cover all the factors that must be taken into account for its substantiation. This is within the scope of the theory of the justification of the criminal law. 2. But neither the theory of criminalization of acts, nor the theory of justification are not fully developed as integral theories. 3. In this state, they are not fully used by researchers, legislators, law enforcement officials or experts. Therefore, the first block of the theory of justification - the criminalization of acts and all others (consolidation of the signs of an act in the main composition, qualified, norm, etc.) require systematization of existing knowledge, further research of social and legal factors of justification of the law in various aspects and generalization of their results. Such a study is within the capabilities of a large federal research center that unites the potential of researchers from different regions of Russia and other countries. The author declares no conflicts of interests.","PeriodicalId":41435,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Tomskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta-Pravo-Tomsk State University Journal of Law","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik Tomskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta-Pravo-Tomsk State University Journal of Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17223/22253513/45/8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The relevance of the study is determined by the fact that the legislator and the law enforcement officer allow deviations from the social and legal foundations at all stages of the formation and application of the criminal law. Therefore, the subject of research is, on the one hand, incorrectly formulated norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, draft amendments to them, unjustified application of the law. On the other hand, there are theoretical and normative constructions existing for a given historical period, designed to prevent the emergence of such norms and their application. These include the theory of substantiation of criminal law, including its most developed part - the theory of criminalization of acts, regulations on the examination of laws and their application. In this regard, the purpose of the study is to identify the causes of failure, failure of these structures and to determine the way to solve the problem. The study was carried out using such general logical methods of cognition as systemic, comparative-legal; analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction. Analyzed: 4 laws and bills (No. 5, 8, 9, 18), 7 decisions of the Constitutional Court of the RF over the past 5 years (No. 1-4, 15, 17), which offer a different constitutional interpretation of the unjustified norms of the Criminal Code of the RF; materials of judicial practice on the norms incorrectly fixed in the Criminal Code or applied by the courts, carried out by the author and other researchers (No. 6, 12, 13, 14); monitoring data of the expertise of the law officially conducted in Russia and its application for compliance-inconsistency with the social and legal foundations of the criminal law (52). It has been carried out the analysis and synthesis of the authors' views on the components of the concept, the criteria for the criminalization of acts, the substantiation of the law, named in 18 studies (No. 19-21, 26-29, 31-41, 52 (monographs, dissertations, journal articles) its use in applied research, as well as 13 studies devoted to a broader substantiation of the law than criminalization (22-25, 30, 44-51). Sociological, philosophical and other studies have been analyzed (No. 7, 11, 42, 43). The system analysis made it possible to draw both intermediate and final conclusions obtained as a result of the study. As a result of the study, it was revealed that: 1. Criminalization is the most important stage in the process of substantiating a law, but it does not cover all the factors that must be taken into account for its substantiation. This is within the scope of the theory of the justification of the criminal law. 2. But neither the theory of criminalization of acts, nor the theory of justification are not fully developed as integral theories. 3. In this state, they are not fully used by researchers, legislators, law enforcement officials or experts. Therefore, the first block of the theory of justification - the criminalization of acts and all others (consolidation of the signs of an act in the main composition, qualified, norm, etc.) require systematization of existing knowledge, further research of social and legal factors of justification of the law in various aspects and generalization of their results. Such a study is within the capabilities of a large federal research center that unites the potential of researchers from different regions of Russia and other countries. The author declares no conflicts of interests.
刑法正当性理论:现状与适用问题
这项研究的相关性取决于立法者和执法人员允许在刑法形成和适用的所有阶段偏离社会和法律基础这一事实。因此,研究的主题是,一方面,俄罗斯联邦刑法规范的不正确制定,对它们的修正草案,不合理的法律适用。另一方面,在特定的历史时期存在着理论和规范结构,旨在防止此类规范的出现及其应用。其中包括刑法的实体性理论,包括其最发达的部分- -行为定罪理论,关于法律审查及其适用的规定。在这方面,研究的目的是找出这些结构失效的原因,并确定解决问题的方法。研究采用了系统的、比较法律的;分析,综合,归纳,演绎。分析:4项法律和法案(第5、8、9、18号),过去5年RF宪法法院的7项判决(第1-4、15、17号),它们对RF刑法的不合理规范提供了不同的宪法解释;由作者和其他研究人员编写的关于《刑法》中错误确定的或法院适用的规范的司法实践材料(第6、12、13、14号);在俄罗斯正式开展的法律专门知识的监测数据及其适用情况的遵守情况- -不符合刑法的社会和法律基础(52)。本文分析和综合了作者对这一概念的组成部分、将行为定为犯罪的标准、法律的实证性的观点,这些观点在18项研究(第19-21号、26-29号、31-41号、52号(专著、论文、期刊文章)中提到,并在应用研究中使用,以及13项研究专门讨论比将法律定为犯罪更广泛的法律实证性(22-25号、30号、44-51号)。对社会学、哲学和其他研究进行了分析(第7、11、42、43号)。通过系统分析,可以得出研究结果的中间和最终结论。研究结果表明:1。刑事定罪是法律实体化过程中最重要的阶段,但它并没有涵盖法律实体化必须考虑的所有因素。这属于刑法正当性理论的范畴。2. 但是,行为定罪理论和正当性理论都没有作为一个完整的理论得到充分的发展。3.在这个州,它们没有被研究人员、立法者、执法官员或专家充分利用。因此,正当性理论的第一块——对行为和所有其他行为的罪刑化(在主要构成、合格、规范等方面巩固行为的标志)需要对现有知识进行系统化,进一步研究法律正当性的各个方面的社会和法律因素,并对其结果进行概括。这样的研究是在一个大型联邦研究中心的能力范围内进行的,该中心将来自俄罗斯不同地区和其他国家的研究人员的潜力结合在一起。作者声明没有利益冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信