On the Contradiction of Articles 35 and 282.1 of the Criminal Code of Russia in the Context of the Definition of a Criminal Community

Tyumen State University Herald. Social, Economic, and Law Research


Release:

2017, Vol. 3. №4

Title: 
On the Contradiction of Articles 35 and 282.1 of the Criminal Code of Russia in the Context of the Definition of a Criminal Community


For citation: Tarasevich I. A. 2017. “On the Contradiction of Articles 35 and 282.1 of the Criminal Code of Russia in the Context of the Definition of a Criminal Community”. Tyumen State University Herald. Social, Economic, and Law Research, vol. 3, no 4, pp. 168-181. DOI: 10.21684/2411-7897-2017-3-4-168-181

About the author:

Ivan A. Tarasevich, Senior Research Associate, Expert Scientific Center for Counteraction to Ideology of Extremism and Terrorism, University of Tyumen; ioann@ruweb.net

Abstract:

In this article, the author analyzes some issues of criminal legal means for combating extremist crimes. In particular, he mentions that the working criminal code of Russia has problems in the sphere of definitions. To this date, the Criminal Law has effectively lost the unity of terminology. In this context, the author draws attention to the article 282.1 “Organization of an extremist community” of the Criminal Code of Russia. The definition of an extremist community proposed in part 1 of this article contradicts the norms of the article 35 of the Criminal Code of Russia “Committing an offense by a group of individuals, a group of persons by prior agreement, an organized group or a criminal organization (criminal organization)”. This is the main problem field of research, which this article aims to solve.

The author provides a comprehensive solution to the problem, which includes the improvement of the definitions of the General Part of the Criminal Law, as well as the general structure of the Russian Criminal Code.

Accordingly, the author employs such methods as system and logical analysis. The article proposes formulations of the main criminal-right definitions, which has required such methods, as synthesis, abstraction and specification, analogy and modeling. Besides that, the author has also utilized the following empirical methods: formal legal analysis of normative acts and literature, study and generalization of scientific theory, among others.

In conclusion, the author proposes to add to the federal law “On Countering Extremist Activity” that the provisions of this law are not subject to broad interpretation, nor they can be used to qualify criminal acts. This will exclude methodological errors in the process of formulating criminal laws.

References:

  1. Belousov E. V., Sharyapov R. A. 2011. “Zakon o protivodeystvii ekstremizmu: slovo i delo” [Law on Counteraction to Extremism: Word and Deed]. Proceedings of the conference “Aktual'nye problemy formirovaniya i razvitiya sistemy nepreryvnogo obrazovaniya naseleniya v oblasti protivodeystviya politicheskomu ekstremizmu i terrorizmu na Severnom Kavkaze” (23-24 June 2011, Makhachkala), pp. 139-150. Makhachkala: Lotos. 
  2. Zagvyazinskaya O. A. 2016. Proceedings of the 3rd All-Russian Research Conference “Protivodeystvie ideologii terrorizma i ekstremizma v obrazovatel'noy sfere i molodezhnoy srede” [Counteraction to the Ideology of Terrorism and Extremism in the Educational Sphere and the Youth Environment] (27−28 September 2016, Moscow), pp. 92-100. Moscow: MGIMO-Universitet; Natsional'nyy antiterroristicheskiy komitet, Departament obrazovaniya g. Moskvy, Mosk. gos. in-t mezhdunar. otnosheniy (un-t).
  3. Kaufman M. A. 2016. “Pravotvorcheskie oshibki v ugolovnom prave” [Lawmaking Errors in Criminal Law]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, no 9, pp. 92-101.
  4. Klimenko Yu. A. 2016. “Organizatsiya ekstremistskogo soobshchestva (st. 282.1 UK RF): ob"ekt prestupleniya i ego znachenie dlya kvalifikatsii” [Organization of the Extremist Community (Article 282.1 of the Criminal Code): The Object of the Crime and Its Significance for Qualification]. Aktual'nye problemy rossiyskogo prava, no 3, pp. 123-129. 
  5. Kostrova M. B. 2003. “Definirovanie ponyatiy i terminov, ispol'zuemykh v UK RF” [Defining the Concepts and Terms Used in the Criminal Code]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, no 12, pp. 80-88.
  6. Makarov A. V., Chumachenko M. V. 2016. “Terrorizm i ekstremizm: sovremennoe ponimanie i aktual'nye problemy” [Terrorism and Extremism: Contemporary Understanding and Actual Problems]. Yuridicheskiy mir, no 2, pp. 49-53.
  7. Rossiyskaya gazeta. 2010. “Oshibki v Ugolovnom kodekse” [Errors in the Criminal Code]. Rossiyskaya gazeta, no 5205 (126).
  8. Pishina S. G. 2000. “Pravointerpretatsionnye oshibki: problemy teorii i praktiki” [Interpreting Errors: Problems of Theory and Practice]. Cand. SCi. (Jur.) diss. abstract. Nizhny Novgorod.
  9. Tarasevich I. A. 2014. “Konstitutsionno-pravovye osnovy religioznoy bezopasnosti Rossiyskoy Federatsii” [Constitutional and Legal Bases of Religious Security of the Russian Federation]. Dr. Sci. (Jur.) diss. Tyumen.
  10. Tikhonova S. S. 2009. “Definitsii v ugolovnom zakonodatel'stve Rossiyskoy Federatsii: sposoby postroeniya i pravila yuridiko-tekhnicheskogo oformleniya” [Definitions in the Criminal Legislation of the Russian Federation: Ways of Construction and Rules of Legal and Technical Design]. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. N. I. Lobachevskogo, no 2, pp. 194-200.
  11. Tikhonova S. S. 2013. “O kachestve sovremennogo ugolovnogo zakona: yuridiko-tekhnicheskiy aspektnovellizatsii UK RF” [On the Quality of Modern Criminal Law: The Legal and Technical Aspects of the Russian Revolutionary Federation]. Yuridicheskaya nauka i praktika, no 22, pp. 171-174.
  12. Fridinskiy S. N. “Protivodeystvie ekstremistskoy deyatel'nosti (ekstremizmu) v Rossii (sotsial'no-pravovoe i kriminologicheskoe issledovanie)” [Counteraction of Extremist Activity (Extremism) in Russia (Social, Legal and Criminological Research)].