<<
>>

the Conclusion

In end of research we will sum its cores up.

1. Absence kodifitsirovannogo the criminal legislation are a serious lack of English legal system. It leads to unsystematic character, a complexity and discrepancy criminally-rules of law, including in economic activities sphere.

Attempts to create specialised criminally-legal statutes in economic activities sphere have vague character as such certificates often are not free from positions inootraslevogo legislations, korrespondirujut with a large quantity of the operating normative acts accepted, at times in the last centuries.

2. Considering the opinions of English lawyers-jurists typical for England receptions of the legislative technics, feature of forming of objects ugolovnoyopravovoj protection under economic crimes it is necessary to understand the deliberate or careless acts encroaching on normal functioning of economic mechanisms, the rights and freedom of participants of the economic relations, violence made without application or other physical influence, but by means of roguish and other similar illegal ways.

Classification of economic crimes in criminal law of England provides their division into two big groups (and some subgroups):

1) crimes of the general character: 1.1) plunders and 1.2) swindle in economic activities sphere;

2) the special economic crimes made in separate narrow spheres of economic activities: 2.1) in taxation sphere, 2.2) a turn of monetary, trading and other official signs, symbols and documents, 2.3) against the general procedure of enterprise activity, 2.4) on a securities market, 2.5) credit and bank crimes.

3. The basic sources of criminal law of England are judicial precedents and statute law certificates. Except them international agreements, and also the doctrine of criminal law, legal custom, the right European Communities (EU), the christian law, delegated legislative power certificates are used.

It is historically right England huge impact on national criminally-legal systems of the former colonies and dominions of British Empire - the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, of some the African and Asian countries - carried to the states of system of the Anglo-Saxon (general) right has made.

The list of sources of the criminally-economic legislation a little already also includes: statute law certificates, judicial precedents, 3) international agreements, 4) the criminal law doctrine. In certain cases - the right of the European Community.

4. The modern English criminal legislation develops nowadays by means of a statute law priority, with reduction of a role of judicial precedents as sources of law, however the question about kodifitsirovannom the legislation yet does not cost.

5. Norms about economic crimes UK the Russian Federation in comparison with English analogues possess a number of advantages (they are systematised to signs of patrimonial and group object, are concentrated only in UK the Russian Federation, under the general rule have a sign characterising rather high degree of their social danger etc.), that allows to predict perception of some of aforementioned features in the course of the further development of the English legislation.

6. In the English right the maintenance of legislative technics, a set of its elements essentially differs from domestic understanding of this phenomenon.

First, the system of juridiko-technical requirements of the English legislator basically concerns language (linguistic) means and does not provide
Presence of many receptions and means, characteristic for domestic criminal law.

7. The Normative and technical condition of English statutes substantially is based on judicial precedents and doktrinalnyh positions, characteristic for general law system. Conservative traditions in many respects define terminology and structure of statutes. Absence kodifitsirovannogo legislations leads "sbrasyvaniju" standard instructions from various branches of law in the uniform interbranch legal act and to washing out of borders in application of technical elements of designing.

8. Despite attempts to systematise, unify elements of legislative technics to develop the general approaches to designing of statutes, the situation with a complexity, bulkiness and discrepancy of the English criminal legislation practically does not vary. Such state of affairs is favourable to a figure of the lawyer applying the right, becoming at times the central and irreplaceable element of English legal system

For overcoming of the specified negative tendency are necessary: development of the adequate, consecutive and effective criminal policy in sphere of criminally-legal regulation of economic activities; standard fastening of the account in pravotvorcheskom process of requirements of legislative technics at designing of norms of criminal law, returning to practice of a high-grade expert estimation from scientific and practical community of projects of changes and additions of the criminal legislation, the deep analysis pravoprimenitelnoj experts, an exception of elements of politicisation of legislative process, decrease in its dependence on lobbying elements.

9. Traditionally norms of English criminal law, and first of all economic structures, are designed with prevalence of lacking general rules reception. Despite attempts to generalise, unify a criminally-economic standard material to make its more economical, lack of general rules
Continues to reflect character of the English criminal legislation. Even statutes of last decade are not laconic enough, transparent and system.

10. The domestic legislator cautiously enough approaches to saturation gl. 22 UK the Russian Federation definitions. We believe, that use of English experience on active saturation ugolovnoyoekonomicheskogo legislations legal definitions will be useful. It will allow to simplify substantially processes of interpretation and pravoprimenenija, in bolshej degrees to use abstract concepts, will relieve dispositions of norms of a significant amount special inootraslevyh terms.

11. Use blanketnogo reception of designing of norms about economic crimes in the English and Russian right is a positive and necessary condition pravotvorcheskogo process. However application of such way of a regulation of the criminal trespass in domestic criminal law suffers essential blanks. First, the legislator on occasion, referring on inootraslevoe the legislation, needlessly transfers great volume of such legislation then the norm becomes bulky and difficultly perceived to the criminal law. Secondly, use blanketnogo reception demands elimination of any contradictions, strong "coordination" of the criminal and branch legislation, that not always occurs.

12. Casuistic loading in "economic" structures entirely lays down on such linguistic element as offers which are used at obrisovke the corpus delicti in gl. 22 UK the Russian Federation. Traditionally elements essential to the offence, the definitions, special kinds of clearing, the sanction etc. in Special part UK the Russian Federation are described in one offer. Hence, obviously overloaded offers in volume in 130 words (ch. 1 items 1701 UK the Russian Federation) or 164 words (ch. 1 items 193 UK the Russian Federation) are not perceived adequately, are very difficult for interpretation and confuse pravoprimenitelja. Besides, such
Offers contain set "blanketnyh" the terms, requiring an additional estimation, an explanation, interpretation.

Result of it is that such articles UK the Russian Federations are practically inapplicable and concern to obviously "dead". On the contrary the English legislator practically all criminally-legal instructions and, first of all, norms about economic crimes, subjects to such structurization, dividing the text on parts, points and subparagraphs. In rare instances such structure is applied in UK the Russian Federation (item 213, 256, 258). We believe necessary to apply such experience in a regulation of "bulky" structures of crimes in gl. 22 UK the Russian Federation.

13. It is necessary to carry out the deep analysis of use of material and formal designs in gl 22 UK the Russian Federation. Separate formal structures should be reformatted in material (item 169, 170, 180, etc.). Some designs of the crimes which are obviously "not finished loading", it is necessary to add with signs (kriminoobrazujushchimi and differentiating thresholds), characterising scope of criminal activity (item 174, 1741, 190, 1931 UK the Russian Federation). On the other hand, considering English experience of struggle against highly latent economic crimes, it is necessary to exclude in the basic structures of separate acts (item 171 2 UK the Russian Federation) quantitative signs (kriminoobrazujushchie thresholds). Such legislative decisions it will be doubtless to correspond to requirements of legislative technics, interbranch differentiation and requirements pravoprimenitelnoj experts.

14. It is necessary to consider positive English experience of use of numerous special economic terms not in dispositions criminally-rules of law (as it is done often by the domestic legislator), and in special definitivnyh or interpretatsionnyh sections of normative acts. Such way allows not to overload the criminal law with difficult concepts, to optimise and systematise process of interpretation and pravoprimenenija.

15. It is necessary to understand division by the legislator of the criminal liability into forms and an establishment as differentiation of the criminal liability
Volume of each of these forms on the basis of the circumstances specified in the criminal law. Means of differentiation of the criminal liability probably to differentiate on provided in the General part and the criminal law Special part.

16. The technics of differentiation of responsibility for economic crimes in UK the Russian Federation has reserves for improvement. So, in the General part, the circle of crimes designated by the legislator in the item "and" ch is represented incomplete. 1 items 104.1 UK into which only separate economic crimes (is felt requirement for addition of the specified list, in particular, item 199-1992 UK the Russian Federation) enter. In special part UK the Russian Federation, including gl. 22, the heavy use of differentiating signs, both used in the Code, and not involved (for example, a sign «with use created for this purpose lzhepredprinimatelskoj is necessary more for the organisation»). Besides, use by the legislator of the qualifying signs with the same name (especially for cognate offences) requires should become more consecutive and system.

17. Regarding differentiation of the criminal liability by means of tools of the General part of criminal law the English legal system contains many interesting positions. An another matter, that many of them for whatever reasons can be hardly built harmoniously in the Russian criminally-legal model (for example, 10-year-old age of the criminal liability). But in any case the comparative analysis even such positions allows to answer the debatable questions which are taking place in the domestic theory or judicial-investigatory practice and (or) forces on - new to look at some problems and the settled institutes of a science of criminal law. At last, some decisions of the British legislator are represented rather verified and suitable, including, and for the Russian validity. It concerns, first of all, English experience of bringing to criminal liability of legal bodies (as argument in the discussion tightened in a domestic science) and multiple penalties,
Which advantage in sphere of counteraction of economic criminality is rather notable.

18. The differentiation of responsibility for economic crimes by means of the criminal law Special part in England has few advantages in comparison with the Russian criminal law (there there is no practice of use of qualifying circumstances for gradation of responsibility, at times it is groundless are divided active and passive forms of criminal behaviour or are consolidated in one structure the acts made with the different form of fault, etc.) . At the same time, separate decisions of the English legislator, in our opinion, are worthy also loans in reasonable limits. It concerns, in particular, wider use of special provisions about economic crimes for differentiation of responsibility. So, in our country has ripened, as it is represented, necessity of addition UK the Russian Federation article 1597 about the criminal liability of the credit organisation for swindle, that is plunder of money resources by bank or other credit organisation by granting to the borrower false and (or) doubtful data or by abusing its trust.

<< | >>
A source: Geshelin Michael Ilich. Legislative technics and differentiation of responsibility for economic crimes under the criminal legislation of Russia and England (rather-legal research). The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Yaroslavl - 2015. 2015

More on topic the Conclusion:

  1. the Conclusion
  2. THE CONCLUSION
  3. THE CONCLUSION
  4. the Conclusion
  5. the Conclusion
  6. THE CONCLUSION
  7. the Pathomorphologic conclusion
  8. THE CONCLUSION
  9. THE CONCLUSION
  10. THE CONCLUSION
  11. THE CONCLUSION
  12. THE CONCLUSION
  13. the Conclusion
  14. THE CONCLUSION
  15. the Conclusion
  16. THE CONCLUSION
  17. THE CONCLUSION