To the question of the subject of hooliganism determination in the criminal legislation of Russian Federation

Journal Issue:

Author Information: 

Associate Professor at the Department of Criminal Law of the Moscow University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, Ph.D. (Law).

Abstract: 

According to the majority of scientists, bearing of criminal responsibility starting from age of 14 years old is connected with the ability of violator to realize public danger of concrete acts and its social value. Increase of the criminal liability age for hooliganism isn't fully socially caused and scientifically reasonable. Above approach doesn't meet requirements of fight against crime and criminal situation, which has developed in Russia better. Current age of criminal liability border, established by Russian legislator, is estimated ambiguously by scientists. Some psychologists, proceeding from the characteristic of an intellectual, strong-willed, minors personal level of development, agree with the legislator, believing true establishment of criminal liability age from 14 and 16 years, thus noting that for a number of crimes the age of criminal liability can be lowered. In the above article this concept is explained and supported by expert opinion.

Keywords: 

hooliganism, criminal liability for hooliganism, armed hooliganism, criminological justification, minimum age of criminal liability, Russia, Russian Federation.

REFERENCES: 

[1] Borovyx N.V. Problema vozrasta v mexanizme ugolovno-pravovogo regulirovaniya: Avtoref. diss. … kand. yurid. nauk. Ekaterinburg, 1993. S. 13.Kurs ugolovnogo prava / Pod red. N.F. Kuznecovoj i I.M. Tyazhkovoj. M.: IKD «Zercalo-M», 2002. S. 265.
[2] Grudcyna L.Yu. Gosudarstvenno-pravovoj mexanizm formirovaniya i podderzhki institutov grazhdanskogo obshhestva v Rossii / Diss… dokt. yurid. nauk. – M.: RUDN, 2009.
[3] Grudcyna L.Yu. Grazhdanskoe obshhestvo i sfera chastnyx interesov // Obrazovanie i pravo. 2012. № 12(40).
[4] Grudcyna L.Yu. Svoboda i grazhdanskoe obshhestvo // Obrazovanie i pravo. 2011. № 1(17). S. 22-30.
[5] Kurs ugolovnogo prava. Obshhaya chast' / Pod red. N.F. Kuznecovoj i I.M. Tyazhko-voj. M.: IKD «Zercalo-M», 2002. T. 1. S. 279.
[6] Lazarev A.M. Sub"ekt prestupleniya. M., 1981. S. 4.
[7] Pavlov V.G. Sub"ekt prestupleniya i ugolovnaya otvetstvennost'. SPb., 2000. S. 35.
[8] Sitkovskaya O.D. Psixologiya ugolovnoj otvetstvennosti. M., 1998. S. 25.
[9] Ugolovnoe pravo. Obshhaya i Osobennaya chasti. Intensivnyj polnyj kurs / Pod red. L.D. Gauxmana, A.A. E'ngel'gardta. 2-e izd., ispr. i dop. M.: Centr YurInfoR, 2002. S. 10.
[10] Ugolovnoe pravo Rossijskoj Federacii. Obshhaya chast' / Pod red. R.R. Galiakbarova. Saratov, 1997. S. 154.
[11] Postanovlenie Plenuma Verxovnogo Suda RF ot 24 dekabrya 1991 g. № 5 «O sudebnoj praktike po delam o xuliganstve», p. 2 // Sbornik postanovlenij Plenuma Verxovnogo suda Rossijskoj Federacii. M.: Spark, 1999. S. 450–456
[12] Statisticheskie sborniki «Prestupnost' i pravonarusheniya» za 1998–2004 gody.
[13] Batyukova V.E. Problemy sovershenstvovaniya zakonodatel'stva ob otvetstvennosti za xuliganstvo i praktiki ego primeneniya. // Obrazovanie i pravo. 2012. № 9/2012. S. 138.