<<
>>

§ 1. Methodological aspects of ordering of ecological crimes


The majority of researchers agrees in opinion, that the legislation in ecological sphere should be uniform, purposeful, complex and internally logically sustained, i.e. should represent to a certain extent system ekologo-legal норм1.
Allocation in UK the Russian Federation the separate chapter devoted to ecological crimes, in a certain measure promotes advancement in this direction, however really process of a legislative regulation of ecologically dangerous acts is still rather far from завершения2.
1 See: Romanov NL. Concept and system of ecological crimes: Dis.... kand. jurid. Sciences. Irkutsk, 2000. With. 101.
2 See, for example: Kljukanova L.G. About the concept of ordering of the ecological legislation//the Ecological right. 2002. № 5. With. 35.
3 See: ZHevlakov E.N.ecological crimes and ecological criminality. M, 1996. With. 27.

In the modern legal literature the opinion according to which all structures of crimes of the ecological character, containing in UK the Russian Federation, it is possible to divide into three categories dominates: special ecological structures, adjacent and additional. To the special carry, as a rule, all structures of the crimes fixed in gl. 26 UK the Russian Federation, and also a number of the structures provided by articles from other heads which can be carried to экологическим3. So for example, M.M.Brinchuk carries to special two kinds of ecological crimes: the crimes encroaching on the ecological law and order as a whole and the crimes encroaching 10 times of use and protection of separate natural resources. He understands as adjacent structures of crimes those from them which get ecological value only when as a result of wrongful acts rules of wildlife management are broken and is damnified to environment, and to the additional carries the structures characterising degree of responsibility of officials, which the actions (or inactivity) promoted injury surrounding среде1. However at such approach it is necessary to agree with opinion of those authors which believe, that thus it is possible to carry to ecological structures practically and those criminal actions which encroach on the public relations, not being object ecological преступлений2.
O.L.Dubovik notices, that in narrow sense a complete file of the criminally-ecological legislation of the Russian Federation articles operating UK constitute the Russian Federation which establish responsibility for ecological crimes, however actually the general file of the criminally-ecological legislation more широк3. Besides the norms allocated gl. 26 UK, the author carries to them and the norms establishing responsibility for ecological crimes, but the Russian Federations placed in another heads UK containing signs of structures of crimes, harming environment along with consequences of other sort, and also a number of other special ecological and nature protection acts containing in the norms of the description of structures of ecological crimes or, at least, of separate elements of structure.
In a sense, as believes the L Island. Dubovik, the file of the criminally-ecological legislation is adjoined also by group of the norms establishing responsibility for administrative ecological проступки4.
1 See: Brinchuk M.M.Ekologicheskoe the right. M., 1998. With. 488.
2 See, for example: Romanov NL. The decree. Work. With. 100.
3 Dubovik OL. Ecological crimes: the Comment to chapter 26 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. M, 1998. With. 27.
4 See in detail: Dubovik OL. The decree. Work. With. 27-28.

From a position of problems of a legislative regulation of ecological crimes, apparently, it makes sense to designate the term "file" only all cumulative offences, having the direct relation to ecological criminality. Then specificity of structures of the crimes provided gl. 26 UK the Russian Federation, gets character of specific difference of ecological crimes from other crimes and offences.
It is necessary to consider also the real-life system of "priorities" built and fixed by the legislator in ch.І Items 2 UK the Russian Federation from which, in particular, follows, that criminal law problems are: «... Protection of the rights and freedom of the person and the citizen, the property, a public order and the public safety and environment...» . However often enough some authors ignore "hierarchy" of priorities of problems established by the legislator criminally-legal protection. So for example, excepting aspect of ecological safety from structure of object of ecological crimes, N.L.Romanov approves, that the question on purposefulness of the criminal legislation in the given sphere is already decided «by inclusion in the general object of protection (item 2 UK) relations in environment sphere that means and a surrounding environment» 1. However, as the public safety means ecological safety of a society by analogy it is possible to approve, that the premise the legislator of chapter 26 in section IX «against the public safety and a public order» provides Crimes prioritetnost protection of public relations on maintenance of ecological safety.
Some problems arising in the course of the decision of problems of a legislative regulation of ecological crimes, are caused by especially methodological disagreements. In some cases, for example, there is a substitution of the semantic maintenance of the concepts characterising specificity in some aspects similar, but basically excellent from each other of logic operations (classification, division, ordering, typology, taxonomy, a regulation, etc.). It is necessary to carry questions of a substantiation of expediency of application of those or other receptions of classification To number of the most debatable in construction of system of ecological crimes.
1 Romanov NL. The decree. Work. With. 99.

Classification (from an armour. classis - the category, a class and facio — I do, I display) - the major operation in scientific knowledge, a basis of process of streamlining of knowledge. Classification represents the division system, differing following properties: 1) sequence of the division made on the basis of signs, theoretical to decision theoretical or practical problems; 2) aiming at such distribution of subjects on groups that in a place in classification it was possible to judge their properties; 3) convenience to the further processes формализации1.
Long time was considered as a classification basis only taksonomicheskoe division - division on sign modification, i.e. allocation operation in volume of a dividend of concept of the subclasses which are in volumes new (specific in relation to initial) concepts from the point of view of the certain characteristic named the basis of division. In an end result members of division differed with degree of changes of the characteristic accepted for the basis of division.
Besides division on sign modification it is often applied and diho-tomicheskoe division (from grech. dicha - on two parts and tome - section). However it is not absolutely clear, why division of volume of concept into two parts on presence or absence at them the same sign forming the basis of division, does not admit experts a version taksonomicheskogo?
Widespread opinion, that the analysis - the mental partition whole on a part for the purpose of studying of its structure - is not procedure de-lenija. But if studied object - system research of its structure is impossible without such partitioning. Besides if the dichotomy (concept division into two parts) admits a division kind why division of concept into three or more parts should be spent only on sign modification? From this point of view it is represented proved to consider dichotomizing division as an "intermediate" kind of division, some kind of "link" between taksonomicheskim and other kinds of division.
1 See: Ivlev JU.V. Logic. M, 2001. With. 171-172; Malakhov V.P.Formalnaja of the logician. M., 2001. With. 45 and
Other
See, for example: Ivlev JU.V.decree. Work. With. 144-145. 3 See, for example: Malakhov V.P.Logika. The Uchebno-methodical grant. M, 2002. With. 28.

As division is understood as the logic operation opening volume of concept it is difficult to catch even terminologically that side which spend between logic operation of division of concept and the analysis-mental partitioning of concept. The main difference of these two similar procedures - in a choice of criteria of division. It is not proved, that only the criterion of modification of a sign can be a basis of correct division. Therefore in the modern logic attempts more extensive interpretation of logic procedure of division are even more often undertaken. Many experts consider receptions taksonomicheskogo and mereologicheskogo divisions as «original forms same, but already more the general cogitative operation» 1.
In the first quarter of XX century the Polish logician S.Lesnevsky has proved necessity mereologii - sciences about whole and parts, considering process of the mental analysis as a version of operation of division. Formed between results of such analysis and initial object the relation "whole-part" began to name mereologicheskim отношением2. Mereologichesky division characterises partitioning of value of concept about a subject on type "whole-part" in aspect of any characteristic of parts. Transition from concept about a subject (from a subject dividend) to concepts about parts of this subject (members of division) 3 is thus carried out. Having taken into consideration logic validity of a recognition of the analysis (mental partitioning of the whole concept on a part) one of versions of operation of division (the analysis as the general scientific method always existed and it was applied in scientific knowledge), it is possible to try to establish the reasons of variety of the methodological contradictions arising in the course of classification and ordering преступлений4.
1 Ivanov ate. Logic. M, 1996. With. 92.
2 See: Ivlev JU.V.in the same place. With. 144.
3 Examples mereologicheskogo divisions: the Constitution of the Russian Federation consists of sections, heads and articles; the Criminal code includes 12 sections, 34 heads, 360 articles.
4 For example, a basis of "placing" of ecological crimes in articles gl. 26 UK the Russian Federation is also mereologicheskoe division, as the legislator dismembers whole («Ecological crimes») on separate parts (article).
5 See, for example: Falin L.M.logic classification structure//Philosophical sciences. 1971. № 3.

The first attempts of ordering of knowledge were undertaken during an antique epoch, but many questions of the general theory of classification, uniform approaches to it and the general principles remain insufficiently developed and сегодня5.
Often classification identify with division, though it not always so. Division - is procedure of "crushing" of volume whole on a part whereas classification represents certain sequence of the such operations aimed at creation of hierarchical system which each element is fixed in strictly certain place and in strictly certain relation (subordination) with another is more often. Unfortunately, classification often is «ogrubleniem the valid state of affairs» and can not consider transitive forms of the phenomena: « ... The social phenomena (and not only they) develop, change. Eventually classification can cease to correspond to them to the full »1. Really, existing or arising distinctions in display of qualitative definiteness of a subject get practical or theoretical value for people when it is required to open not only essence of a subject, but also the form of its display and development; the sphere of application of this or that concept is unknown; there is a necessity for revealing of certain typology or классификации2.
1 Illev JU.V.decree. Work. With. 174.
2 See: Tchernikov V.V. Logika. M, 2000. With. 37-38.
3 poznyshev ST. Basic questions of the doctrine on punishment. M, 1904. With. 5.
4 See: science Methodology. Scientific knowledge: forms, methods, approaches. M, 2001. With. 56.

«As studying reception, classification has double value for scientific research: from external, is a reception which brings system and an order in studying; from internal, is a reception which predetermines completeness and correctness of conclusions of studying», - approved ST. On-znyshev. Classification procedure, as a rule, allows to reduce variety of structure of studied objects to rather small number of formations, to reveal initial units of the analysis and to develop system of corresponding concepts and terms; to find out the regularities, steady signs and relations, to open new communications and dependences between already known objects, fixing thereby natural communications between classes of objects for the purpose of definition of a place of object in system which specifies in it свойства4.
It is often possible to meet statements, that «ordering is only a classification outer side (therefore classification cannot be shown to simple ordering)» 1. Ordering really pursues a little bit other aims: this and logic substantiation of a way of streamlining of parts, and an establishment of their certain sequence and т.п.2 Though ordering is often carried out on the basis of classification, it is impossible to speak about identity of these procedures. It is natural, that the classification purpose is knowledge ordering, but not always it is reached. At the same time an ordering overall objective is construction of "optimum" model of streamlining of knowledge. Therefore ordering should be considered not so much external, how many supplementing and in qualitative other sense procedure "continuing" classification.
For formal classification the choice of the basis of division is not the basic gnoseological certificate though for a basis of natural classification the essential sign - «concept which concerns the majority of essential properties of a dividend whole» 3 gets out only. Complexity of procedure of classification of crimes is caused also by its "rigid" associativity to the existing legislation. In that case «problems of an explanation of operating systematisation for interpretation, explanations of sense of norms, revealings of lacks, developments of optimum model of construction of the criminal law dictate necessity of grouping of norms» 4.
1 Krivochenko L.N.classification of crimes. Kharkov, 1983. With. 11-12.
2 See: the Dictionary of foreign words. M., 1979. With. 470.
3 Formal logicians. L, 1971. With. 139.
4 See: Criminal law at the present stage: crime and punishment Problems / Under the editorship of N.A.Beljaeva, B.K. Glistina, V.V. Orehova. SPb., 1992. With. 236.
5 See: ZHevlakov E.N.ecological of a crime: concept, kinds, responsibility problems: Dis.... dokt. jurid. Sciences. M, 1991. With. 216.

Classification of ecological crimes is necessary for their codification and correct qualification. E.N.Zhevlakov notices also, that classification promotes understanding of social essence and the cumulative social danger of the given crimes and gives evident representation about kinds ecological преступлений5. However it as a whole the true statement demands some specification. Classification gives representation only about their specific variety more often, but to open specificity of their social danger system of ecological crimes only constructed by the legislator is capable.
It is necessary to notice, that in practice it is frequent enough at the heart of allocation of parts from volume whole lawyers use receptions mereologicheskogo divisions, and to results for some reason "attribute" properties of taxonomy. So, "splitting" of a file of ecological crimes spent by the legislator under articles, heads and sections UK the Russian Federation is based on mereologicheskom a way of division whereas problems of their legislative regulation demand other (taksonomicheskogo) the approach is more often. Visible ways of elimination of such contradictions a little. First, it is necessary to discriminate specificity of each applied kind of division. Secondly, it is necessary to aspire to "synchronisation" of processes of classification and ordering. Thirdly, it is necessary to exclude «internal logic discrepancy» among the criteria used at different stages of division, classification and ordering of ecological crimes. As marks L.I. Krivochenko, «construction of classification of crimes should follow from 1) internal communications of signs of the crimes giving to them certain integrity, forming this or that kind of a crime; 2) external relations of separate kinds of crimes among themselves; 3) communications and mutual relations of crimes with other offences» 1.
1 Krivochenko L.I.classification of crimes. Kharkov, 1983. With. 15.

It is considered, that any classification can be correct if the stable sign expressing qualitative property and an originality of the classified phenomena undertakes its basis. However many lawyers, referring to existing traditions in the theory of criminal law and lawmaking practice, believe, that for such basis of allocation from a standard file homogeneous obshchnostej the direct object of an encroachment which preferably consider in a close connection with a subject ecological преступлений1 should be put. From this position all ecological crimes gl. 26 UK the Russian Federations are usually grouped as follows:
Ecological crimes of the general character (item 246 item, 247, 253, 262 UK the Russian Federation);
Ecological crimes of special character (item 248 item, 249, 250, 251, 252, 254-258, 260, 261 UK the Russian Federation) 2.
O.L.Dubovik believes, that the important criterion of division of ecological crimes on groups is the object criminally-legal protection, its subject ecological expressiveness. By this criterion the author classifies only the crimes provided by chapter 26 UK the Russian Federation:
The crimes consisting in infringement of rules of ecologically significant activity which direct object is the activity order;
The crimes encroaching on separate elements of environment (water, atmosphere, soils, woods, bowels, a continental shelf, especially protected territories and objects);
The crimes encroaching on objects of flora and fauna as a component of environment, condition of a biological variety and preservation of biosphere of the Earth.
By E.N.Zhevlakov and N.V.Suslov's same criterion suggest to allocate:
1 See: the Russian criminal law: In 2 t. T. 2. The Special part/under the editorship of A.I.Raroga. M, 2001. With. 512-513.
2 See: In the same place. With. 513-514.
3 See: Criminal law of Russia. T. 2. The Special part / Under the editorship of A.I.Ignatov, JU-A. Krasikov. M, 1998. With. 482-483.

The crimes encroaching on a number of natural objects - item 246, 247, 248, 253 UK the Russian Federation;
The crimes encroaching on the relations on protection of the earth and its bowels of-item 254, 255 UK the Russian Federation;
The crimes encroaching on the relations on protection of fauna of-item 256, 257, 259, ch. 1 items 249 UK the Russian Federation;
The crimes encroaching on the relations on protection of flora - item 256, 259, 261, ch. 2 items 249 UK the Russian Federation;
The crimes encroaching on the relations on protection of waters and atmospheric air - item 250, 251, 252 UK the Russian Federation;
The crimes encroaching on the relations on protection of especially protected territories and objects - item 259, 262 UK РФ1.
The variant of classification depending on direct object and a subject of ecological crimes is offered by N.L.Romanov allocating:
Ecological crimes of the general character which direct object are public relations on maintenance of ecological safety of the population, and a crime subject - an environment in whole (item 246 - 248, 358 UK the Russian Federation);
The special ecological crimes which direct object are public relations in sphere of protection separate prirodoobrazujushchih components, and a subject - these components (waters, atmospheric air, etc.) (item 250 - 252, 254, 255 UK the Russian Federation);
The special ecological crimes encroaching on protection of secondary natural components: an animal (ch. 1 items 249, 256-258 UK the Russian Federation) and flora (ch. 2 items 249, 260, 261 UK the Russian Federation) and also natural "worlds" (biogeotsenozov) (item 253, 259, 262 UK) 2.
See: Zhevlakov E.N., Suslov N.V.ecological criminality in the Russian Federation in 1990-2000//Criminology. 2000, № 3. With. 68.
2 See: Romanov NL. The decree. Work. With. 10.

V.B.Stoljarov, having based on classification direct object (locally determined or generalised), considers expedient allocation in crimes of ecological character of following groups. With the generalised object it carries the crimes provided by item 250 to ecological crimes, 251, 252 UK the Russian Federation, and with the determined local object - the crimes provided by item 249 ч.2, 256, 260, 261
UK the Russian Federation (flora); ch. 1 items 249, item 256-259 UK the Russian Federation (fauna); item 253, 254, 255 UK the Russian Federation (the earth, a shelf, bowels) 1.
On character of criminal trespasses of E.N.Zhevlakov and N.V.Suslov discriminate:
The crimes connected with illegal use (capture) of natural resources (item 253, 256, 258, 260 UK the Russian Federation);
The crimes connected with negative influence on an environment, deterioration of its quality (item 246-252, 254, 255, 259, 261, 262 UK the Russian Federation) 2.
Versions of classification of the ecological crimes, based on allocation are offered:
The crimes encroaching on bases of integrity of the nature (item 246 248, 250-254, 262 UK the Russian Federation);
The crimes encroaching on bases of due safety of bowels (item 253,255 UK the Russian Federation);
The crimes encroaching on bases of integrity of an animal and flora (flora and fauna) (item 249, 256-261 UK the Russian Federation) 3.
One of possible variants is classification by ways of fulfilment of ecological crimes. In this case usually crimes subdivide into pollution, destruction, damage, illegal use surrounding среды4.
See: V.B.Ugolovno-pravovoj's Joiners the analysis of ecological crimes//the Ecological right. 2001, № 1. With. 12.
2 See: Zhevlakov E.N., Suslov N.V.decree. Work. With. 68.
3 See: Criminal law of the Russian Federation. The special part / Under the editorship of B.V.Zdravomyslova. M, 2000. S.305-306.
4 In the same place. With. 145-146.

V.V. Petrov suggested to use degree of definiteness of a disposition of norm according to which all articles operating UK could be subdivided on two big groups as one of criteria of classification. In the first basic elements of wrongful acts (illegal hunting, autocratic lov fishes, illegal felling of wood etc.) are defined. Norms of other group send to corresponding legislation
(Infringement of the legislation on a continental shelf) 1.
There are also other approaches to classification. For example, S.A.Agama-gomedova notices, that among 17 structures of the ecological crimes provided UK (item 246-262) practically all assume a straight line or eventual recklessness. Imprudence characterises only the relation to socially dangerous by an act consequence. The express intent is provided in item 253, 258, 262 UK the Russian Federation; indirect - in item 246, ch. And 2 items 247, ch. 1 items 248, item 249, ch. 1 and 2 items 250, ch. 1 and 2 items 251, ch. 1 and 2 items 252, ch. 1 and 2 items 254, item 255-261, ch. 1 items 262 UK the Russian Federation; the double form of fault - in ch. 3 items 247, ch. 2 items 248, ch. 3 items 250, ch. 3 items 251, ch. 3 items 252, ch. 3 items 254 UK РФ2.
V.V. Sverchkov suggests to divide ecological crimes on:
The crimes expressed in infringement of rules of the general ecological safety (item 246-248 UK the Russian Federation);
Crimes concerning base objects of an environment - waters, atmosphere, soil, bowels, a continental shelf (item 250-255 UK the Russian Federation);
Crimes concerning fish stocks, vegetative and other organic world (item 249, 257, 259-262 UK the Russian Federation) 3.
1 See: Petrov V.V. Ekologicheskie crimes: concept and system//the State and the right. 1993, № 8.
WITH. 91.
2 See: Agamagomedova S.A.Kriminologichesky aspect of concept and structure of an ecological crime//Actual problems of a policy and the right. Penza, 2001. With. 183.
3 See: V.V. Otvetstvennost's Crickets for ecological crimes under the Russian legislation. N.Novgorod, 1998. With. 10.
4 See: Criminality and reforms in Russia. M, 1998. With. 261-262.
5 See: Vinogradova SQ. Crimes against ecological safety: avtoref. dis.... dokt. jurid. Sciences. H. Novgorod, 2001. With. 10.
6 See: Anisimov A.P.ecological the right of Russia. M., 2003. With. 124.

V.D.Ermakov, E.N.Zhevlakov and G.I.Osipov in the variants of classifications use division on two bases: to object and character деяния4. E.V.Vinogradova discriminates crimes against ecological safety (item 250, 251, 252, 254 UK the Russian Federation) and crimes against the ecological law and order (other articles gl. 26 UK the Russian Federation) 5. The variant of classification by direct object of an encroachment is offered A.P.Anisimovym6. There are also schemes of classifications of ecological crimes on the subjective party and taking into account signs of the subject (mercenary, vandalistskie, official); on consequences (on sphere of their display) and другие1.
In N.A.Lopashenko's classification all ecological crimes are subdivided on two groups: 1) encroachments on public relations on realisation and common right protection on favorable environment (item 246-248 UK the Russian Federation); 2) encroachments on public relations on protection of stability of environment and its prirodno-resource potential (item 249-262 UK the Russian Federation). However in this case it is possible to speak about partial displacement of the purposes and means criminally-legal protection as the author sees the social danger of crimes of the second group in environment destabilization, instead of public relations whereas they should admit object criminally-legal protection, and means of achievement of the purpose - the statutory measures providing protection «stability of environment and its prirodno-resource potential». Unfortunately, to provide «stability of prirodno-resource potential» the person basically not in a condition - it consumes these resources. The problem of an exhaustion of many natural resources necessary for mankind obshchepriznanna, and all accruing deficiency of natural resources threatens the world unprecedented potrjase-nijami. Therefore speech can go only about protection of stability of those public relations which allow to provide relative ecological safety of a society and preservation of the environment in the conditions of global ecological crisis.
1 see More in detail: Dubovik O. L, Zhadinsky A.E.reason of ecological crimes. M, 1988.
2 See: Lopashenko N.A.ecological of a crime: the Comment to chapter 26 UK the Russian Federation. SPb., 2002. S.38-39.
3 see More in detail, for example: Forrester J. World dynamics. M., 1978; Hozin G. S. Global problems of present M., 1982, etc.

In each of considered above approaches to classification it is possible to reveal weak spots. Sometimes these lacks are a consequence of unjustified "optimism": authors search for signs of that orderliness which can and not exist at all. Probably therefore the modern criminal legislation in this area partly reminds analogue of the table of Mendeleyev, providently leaving "empty seats" for yet "not open" elements, i.e. those criminal actions which in the future can be carried to the ecological. Similar "foresight" of the legislator is marked by many authors, speaking about «ecological potential» big group of the crimes fixed and "scattered" by the legislator in many other things articles and sections UK РФ1. In particular, and some other experts specify O.L.Dubovik, M.A.Lapina, N.L.Romanov in presence, besides listed articles gl. 26, and other articles in UK the Russian Federation, anyhow connected with «elements of protection of a surrounding environment» (item 143 item, 205, 214, 215, 215, 216, 217, 219, 220, 224, 225, ch. 4 items 234, item 236-238 item, 243, 245, 355-358 UK РФ2) which on the consequences can be carried to ecological crimes.
O.L.Dubovik offers even a variant of classification of all file listed above crimes on two groups:
Crimes, responsibility for which fulfilment is established in articles gl. 26 UK the Russian Federation;
The ecological crimes, which structures are placed in other chapters UK the Russian Federation. The crimes connected with infringement of safety rules on objects of atomic engineering, in particular, concern them, at conducting mountain, building and other works, on explosive objects, and also with infringement of rules of the reference of radioactive materials, explosive, etc. substances and other 3
1 See, for example: Lapina M. A. Legal responsibility for ecological offences: the Article by article comment to the Russian legislation. M., 2003. With. 17; Dubovik OL. Ecological crimes: the Comment to chapter 26 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. M, 1998. With. 87-88, etc.
2 See, for example: Lapina M. A. The decree. Work. With. 18-19.
3 See: Dubovik OL. The decree. Work. With. 87-88.

Let's notice, that the given approach to a classification problem looks not especially convincing. Ecological "trace" can be found practically in all kinds of crimes, but it is necessary in Criminal to discriminate the code other crimes, except the ecological. A.M. Pleshakov, noticing, that the conceptual idea of reform of the Special part of the criminal legislation, consisting in ranging criminally-rules of law on "general" and "special" in one chapter UK, far is not faultless, fixs other essential lack: «...takaja the system has no most important - sistemoobrazujushchego an element» 1.
Unfortunately, quite often classification of objects in criminal law is spent on the different bases, and in this case by offered systems, as a rule, have no strict structurization (for example, objects the general, direct, group, patrimonial, specific mix up, special, etc.) 2. Often from classification the decision not also demand problems peculiar to it. Classification really is a basis of ordering of knowledge, but more often it only the first step to system construction. So, speaking about the general, patrimonial and direct objects of an encroachment, lawyers mean actual interrelation whole and parts or, more precisely, systems, a subsystem and an element. And only after that divisions from a position of interrelation of the given categories «... All set of objects of crimes should be considered not as a kind (general) of object of an encroachment, and as some subsystem (set, plurality) objects in which structure there can be you-deleny certain subsystems and elements (parts)».
1 Pleshakov A.M.criminally struggle against ecological crimes (theoretical and applied aspects): Dis.... dokt. jurid. Sciences. M, 1994. With. 258.
2 See about it in detail: V.B.Obshchy's Joiners the criminally-legal analysis of ecological crimes. With. 10; the Ecological right of Russia / Under the editorship of V.D.Ermakova, A.J.Suhareva. M, 1977. With. 422-423; Petrov V.V. Ekologicheskoe the right of Russia. M, 1996. With. 289, etc.
G.P.Uchenie's 3 New settlers about object of a crime. Methodological aspects. M, 2001. With. 20.
G.P.Ukaz's 4 New settlers. Work. With. 20.

G.P.Novoselov sees logic contradictions in positions and those scientists who are supporters trehchlennogo object divisions as corresponding to laws of logic and interrelation of philosophical categories of the general - especial - individual, and those who four members of division discriminate: the general object; patrimonial, specific and direct on the same basis. In its opinion, «exarticulation of different aspects of the analysis of system, its vertical communications as to a method of scientific knowledge has no relation to classification and basically cannot have...» 4. G.P.Novoselova's similar "phenomenological" approach is based on belief, that «... The crime always appears as the phenomenon (but not concept) concrete and cannot be« patrimonial "or" the general », its object is always concrete, there is no in a kind« patrimonial "or" the general »an object of an encroachment and, hence, in reality in an encroachment there is no other object, besides, which supporters of classification of objects of a crime on a vertical is called as direct» 1. However in the criticism the author is not absolutely consecutive. The abstraction - always is the form ogrublenija the validity. Certainly, each crime as act - is concrete, but the concept of a crime, as well as any other concept, is the form of simplification of a reality and consequently it is impossible to mix the concrete phenomena with their forms legal deskriptsii. In the given case there is also an identification of philosophical categories to general scientific terms, as further an of the Item New settlers approves, that «from positions of that interrelation (whole and parts, or systems, a subsystem and a system element) which actually means adherents of division of objects on a vertical, about any classification of objects of a crime go-vorit it is not necessary in general».
Possibility differently to classify the same objects — not weakness, and advantage of classification. Its gnoseological value increases with each new variant. Revealing expands divisions all new criteria and deepens our representations about specificity of interrelations between parts constituting object, creating thereby more objective basis for their further streamlining — ordering.
1 In the same place. With. 22.
2 In the same place. With. 20.

At the same time at a choice of classification criterion from crime signs (the social danger, illegality, guilt, punishability) it is necessary to be guided by following positions: first, the role of the basis for division of a crime into groups or classes can carry out only the basic essential sign; secondly, this sign should be objective, following of the internal nature of a crime as social phenomenon; thirdly, such sign should reflect not only the general, but also especial, i.e. not only similarity, but also distinction in separate crimes and groups of crimes; fourthly, the sign maintenance should be accurate and ясным1.
Ordering as informative procedure is aimed at the decision of problem closely interfaced to classification - constructions of the most preferable variant of system of hierarchy of interdictions ecologically criminal поведения2. The term "system" (from gr. systema - whole, constituted of parts, connection) is understood as the ordered set of the interconnected elements more often. The difficult system differs a certain hierarchical structure, and this property inseparably linked with potential divisibility of elements of system and presence in its structure of steady interrelations and relations. But as the system approach is aimed at the analysis of specificity of "difficult" systems, and the system of is social-ecological relations "difficult" already at least because works in a "feedback" mode (changes the condition under the influence of "external" influences) to the analysis of the problems connected with ecological criminality, it is necessary to consider its application proved and rational.
1 See: Ratkov A.N.legal effect of classification of crimes: avtoref. dis.... kand. jurid. Sciences. Rostov-n/D., 2002. With. 16.
2 See: Pleshakov A.M. The decree. Work. With. 259-263.
3 See: Romanov NL. The decree. Work. With. 111.
4 See: Kljukanova L.G. About the concept of ordering of the ecological legislation//the Ecological right. 2002. № 5. With. 36.

At the same time it is difficult to agree with those authors who consider, that from a position of certain law of an arrangement of structures in UK it is possible to draw a conclusion, that system of ecological crimes существует3. Such approach illustrates only aspiration to give out wished for the valid. Ordering needs to be understood not simply as a formal technique or legal process, but also as a basis of all mechanism of legal regulation of relations in the field of protection of an environment and maintenance ecological безопасности4.
Considering, that N.L.Romanov believes such criterion as size (scale) of a subject of encroachments, it is quite proved for construction of system, that is «... Not on« the place »only item 249» and only «without entering of updatings should not be placed norm of item 253 UK in 26 head» 1. Consideration of criterion of "scale" of a subject of an encroachment as the main identifying sign of ecological crimes is based on aspiration by the author to consider de facto existing in criminal law of the Russian Federation tradition of division of structures of ecological crimes on structures «general ecological character» and «special ecological crimes».
Not denying importance of the account of the quantitative party of ecological crimes, it is necessary to notice, that objective sistemoobrazujushchy the criterion should express not only features of a subject, but also essence of object of criminal trespasses. "Scale" of a subject of criminal trespasses - not the unique criterion opening specificity of ecological crimes. Though in a broad sense any way of comparison of alternatives but that optimisation by criteria promoted the maximum approach to the ordering purpose can be understood as criterion the choice of other, more "qualitative" критерия2 is necessary.
1 Romanov NL. The decree. Work. With. 112-113.
2 See: Peregudov F.I., Tarasenko F.P.introduction in the system analysis. M., 1989. With. 321.

Summing up to discussion of the given question, it is necessary to notice, that the "formal" approaches considering in bolshej degrees "quantitative" indicators of ecological crimes, still dominate among variants of decisions of problems of their classification offered in the legal literature and ordering.
<< | >>
A source: VEREVICHEVA MARINA IGOREVNA. CONCEPT And SYSTEM of ECOLOGICAL CRIMES (methodological aspects). The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Ulyanovsk -. 2004

More on topic § 1. Methodological aspects of ordering of ecological crimes:

  1. VEREVICHEVA MARINA IGOREVNA. CONCEPT And SYSTEM of ECOLOGICAL CRIMES (methodological aspects). The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Ulyanovsk -, 2004 2004
  2. § 2. Methodological problems of modelling of object of ecological crimes
  3. § 2. The crimes encroaching on is social-ecological relations on maintenance of ecological safety
  4. § 3. Object of ecological crimes as system of is social-ecological relations
  5. § 2. Specific and direct objects of the crimes directed against the child, as criterion of their ordering
  6. ordering of aspects of coverings on mechanisms of their formation
  7. § 2. Methodological problems of definition of concept «an ecological crime»
  8. § 1. Concept and value of object of a crime for ordering and structurization of crimes (general provisions)
  9. CHAPTER 2. ORDERING And STRUCTURIZATION of CRIMES AGAINST the CHILD In REPUBLICS Belarus UK
  10. § 3. Ecological crimes of complex character
  11. §1. Concept and system of structures of ecological crimes on UK the Russian Federation
  12. ecological aspects of land tenure
  13. § 1. The crimes encroaching on is social-ecological relations on protection of an environment
  14. the Chapter II SYSTEM of ECOLOGICAL CRIMES
  15. the Chapter III KINDS of ECOLOGICAL CRIMES