Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Law and Politics
Reference:

Ivochkin A.B. On the notion of “low significance” during qualification of actions according to Article 305 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

Abstract: This article is dedicated to the issue of definition of the notion of “low significance” during qualification of actions in accordance with the Article 305 of the CCRF. The work presents the main scientific approaches towards the definition of the notion of low significance, and offers the analysis of the objective and subjective criteria of low significance. In this research the criteria of low significance is being reviewed in relation to criminal acts of judges in rendering an a priori unjust judgements. Such criteria do not have legislative framework, allowing the law enforcement to resolve the issue of whether or not a crime has been committed on a case-by-case basis, which in turn creates controversial situations and ambiguity of the practice. The scientific novelty consists in the author’s attempt to define precise criminal legal criteria that would allow distinguishing between commission of a crime by a judge, which manifest in rendering an a priori unjust court decision, from instances when similar actions are not criminal, and will result only in disciplinary measures. The relevance of this research consists in the possibility of using the results of this work by law enforcement in discovering latent crimes by judges (rendering the a priori unjust rulings).


Keywords:

Russian Criminal Code, justice, criteria, crime, act, definition, low significance, criminal law, judge, public danger


This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article


References
1. Yakimenko N. M. Maloznachitel'nost' deyaniya v sovetskom ugolovnom prave: Avtoref. dis.... kand. yurid. nauk: Yakimenko Natal'ya Mikhaylovna – Moskva. 1982. – 23 c.
2. «Prestupleniya protiv pravosudiya» (pod red. A.V. Galakhovoy) («NORMA, 2005») // SPS Konsul'tant Plyus [Elektronnyy resurs] URL: http://www.consultant.ru (data obrashcheniya 29.01.2013).
3. Milyukov S.F. Prestupleniya protiv pravosudiya: Nauchno-praktich. posobie /SPb IVESEP, O-vo “Znanie” SPb. i Len. obl. – SPb, 1999. – 67 s.
4. Metel'skiy P.S. Vynesenie zavedomo nepravosudnykh prigovora, resheniya ili inogo sudebnogo akta: voprosy ugolovno-pravovoy otsenki i otvetstvennosti // Vestnik Novosibirskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Pravo. ¹ 2, T. 3-2007.-S. 43-51.
5. Mal'tsev V.V. Maloznachitel'nost' deyaniya v ugolovnom prave // Zakonnost'.-¹ 1, 1999 // Elektronnaya yuridicheskaya biblioteka «YuristLib» [Elektronnyy resurs] URL: http://www.juristlib.ru/book_573.html (data obrashcheniya 11.02.2015).
6. Koshaeva T.O. Voprosy teorii i praktiki primeneniya ugolovnogo zakona ob otvetstvennosti za prestupleniya protiv pravosudiya // SPS Konsul'tant Plyus [Elektronnyy resurs] URL: http://www.consultant.ru (data obrashcheniya 01.06.2013).
7. Koshaeva T.O. Ugolovnaya otvetstvennost' za vynesenie zavedomo nepravosudnykh prigovora, resheniya ili inogo sudebnogo akta // Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava. ¹ 3-2007.-S. 81-86.
8. Gorelik A.S., Lobanova L.V. Prestupleniya protiv pravosudiya /A.S. Gorelik, L.V.Lobanova.-SPb. : Yuridicheskiy tsentr Press, 2005.-491 s.
9. Bagirov Ch.M. Maloznachitel'nost' deyaniya i ee ugolovno-pravovoe znachenie: Avtoref. dis. … kand. yur. nauk: Bagirov Chingiz Mamedshakh ogly.-Tyumen'. 2005. – 18 s.
10. Volzhenkin B.V. Sluzhebnye prestupleniya: Kommentariy zakonodatel'stva i sudebnoy praktiki. – SPb: Izdatel'stvo «Yuridicheskiy tsentr Press», 2005. – 560 s.
11. Gorelova O.A. Problemy privlecheniya sudey k distsiplinarnoy otvetstvennosti v sovremennom zakonodatel'stve i praktike kvalifikatsionnykh kollegiy sudey // Politika i Obshchestvo.-2014.-2.-C. 190-196. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2014.2.11179.