• A
  • A
  • A
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
Regular version of the site
Menu
  • HSE University
  • Publications of HSE
  • Articles
  • Неклассическая экстерриториальность уголовного закона (в контексте Федерального закона от 05.05.2014 г. № 91-ФЗ)

Article

Неклассическая экстерриториальность уголовного закона (в контексте Федерального закона от 05.05.2014 г. № 91-ФЗ)

Цай К. А.

The paper studies the issue of widening Russian criminal law jurisdiction based on the Federal Law of May 5, 2014 № 91-FZ under the title On Applying the Provisions of Criminal Caw of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation on the territories of the Republic of Crimea and the City of Federal Status Sebastopol. Within the normative legal act, legislators rejected the traditional way of the differentiated fixture of the principles of criminal law in time and space by unifying them in the text of the conflict-of-law rule. Historically, both in Russian and foreign criminal law, the analogues of such a decision, which aggravated with incorrect legal mechanics regulation, has caused an ambiguous interpretation of the conflict-of-law rule produced by Article 2 of the Federal Law mentioned. Judicial practice applies the prescription in question only in terms of retrospective criminal law. Judicial opinions lack any traces of the aspect of territorial jurisdiction. This interpretation is seen incorrect due to the impossibility to apply it to the legal relations connected with the Federal Law mentioned and with rules Articles 11 and 12 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code. Hence, without the Federal Law mentioned, the Criminal Code of Russian Federation is not applied to the deeds committed on the territories of the Republic of Crimea and the City of Sebastopol before March 18th, 2014. Thus, the doctrinal interpretation of norm of Article 2 of Federal Law № 91-FZ as a dualistic time and space conflict-of-law rule is seen more realistic as it is based on the analysis of classical patterns of normative prescriptions. The author criticizes the legislative regulation in Article 2 of the Federal Law mentioned due to the lack of legal mechanics, material inner conceptual contradictions, inconsistency between the dualistic approach and the classical postulates of the Russian legal theory of criminal law. On the basis 111 Kyrill Tsay. Non-Classical Extraterritoriality of Criminal Law. Р. 103–111 of analysis of Russian and foreign legislation as well as judicial practice, the author proposes his own version of Article 2 for the Federal Law № 91-FZ.