Lobbying in the Legislative Process

The article discusses the content of the term “extremism”. The introduction argues the importance of developing a conceptual framework in legal science. In the research part, the authors address different points of view. A narrow approach to defining the content of this phenomenon is explored, which concretizes the list of characteristic features of extremism. Attention is also drawn to a broad approach to the definition of this phenomenon, which does not set a strict framework. The final section of the article provides the author’s definition of extremism.

In the article, the author correlates the agricultural regulation of horticulture, as a branch of agricultural crop production, with its legal support. The author comes to the conclusion that the legislation on horticulture finds only fragmentary legal support for horticulture in various normative acts. The relevant legislation needs to adopt a special comprehensive regulatory act, an example of which, in particular, is the special Federal law “On Viticulture and Winemaking in the Russian Federation”.

The purpose of the research. The article considers the block of social conditions of the effectiveness of the mechanism of ensuring public order during mass public events.

Conclusions. The social conditions are proposed to be graded into the conditions of the external and internal environment, which, in turn, can be divided into conditions of a lesser order. A special place in the classification is occupied by legal and institutional conditions.

The article examines the modern challenges and obstacles faced by cryptocurrency owners, which continue to attract increasing attention from both business structures and ordinary users. Due to their decentralized nature and the ability to ensure anonymity and security of transactions, cryptocurrencies are a unique tool for transferring digital assets and participating in new economic models. Given modern development trends, cryptocurrency can become an integral part of the global financial system, changing the ways of storing and transferring values, becoming a catalyst for the development of new technologies and innovations, increasing the efficiency and transparency of financial transactions.

In the article, from the standpoint of adequacy to the legal principle of consistency and certainty, as well as admissibility as differentiations, the criteria characterizing the group formations identified in the General Part of the Criminal Code are considered. The article analyzes the features proposed by the legislator and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, which offers the relevant criteria in its resolutions. A special emphasis is placed on the criteria of a criminal organization. As a result of the consideration of the criteria of group formations, it is concluded that all the presented distinctive features of criminal groups are abstract, which increases uncertainty and the absence of the necessary feature that allows us to present a group formation as a unique sufficient basis. Attention is paid to the interesting conclusion of the Supreme Court about the possibility of complicity of a group of persons with one sane person.

The article deals with certain issues related to the use by the prosecutor of the results of operational investigative activities (ORD) in criminal proceedings in modern legal conditions. It is being stated. that his capabilities in this are significantly limited. what practitioners reasonably pay attention to. as well as scientists. The hitherto unexplained removal of the prosecutor from the list of subjects of the preliminary investigation, leaving only the supervisory function for him, automatically deprived the prosecutor of the right to give instructions on the conduct of operational investigative measures. to receive and use their results in pre-trial criminal proceedings. As for the possibilities of their use by the prosecutor in preparation for the maintenance of public prosecution in court and in the direct implementation of this activity. They are also limited at this stage of the criminal proceedings. In the author’s opinion, this contradicts common sense, since at this stage the prosecutor is the only participant in it on the part of the prosecution, who often needs operational investigative support for his activities. However, the absence in the Federal Law “On Operational Investigative Activities” of norms granting him appropriate powers limits him in the implementation of the procedural and official task of assisting the court in making a lawful decision. a reasonable and fair sentence. The article expresses and substantiates the opinion on the need to return to the prosecutor the right to give instructions to operational investigative bodies on the implementation of appropriate measures. This would significantly increase the effectiveness of prosecutorial supervision over the enforcement of laws in the investigation of crimes, as well as the possibilities and quality of maintaining public prosecution. To do this, according to the author, it is advisable, first of all, to include in the Federal Law “On Operational Investigative activities” norms establishing the right of the prosecutor to give instructions on the production of operational investigative measures, as well as the duty of heads of bodies. to carry out these orders and provide the prosecutor with information about their results. The author also agrees with the opinion of prosecutors and scientists on the need for appropriate additions to the Federal Law “On Operational Investigative Activities” and the Instructions on the procedure for submitting its results to the body of inquiry, investigator or court in 2013. The provisions introduced in them may be basic for the preparation and implementation of an interdepartmental organizational and administrative document. detailing the conditions and procedure for submitting the results of the investigation to the prosecutor – the public prosecutor, as well as the organization and implementation of his interaction with the staff of operational investigative bodies during the trial. Since the Prosecutor’s office is entrusted with the function of coordinating the activities of law enforcement agencies to combat crime. Its full implementation is necessary not only at the organizational level, but also at the practical level.

The purpose of the research. The present article deals with the issue of criminal-legal assessment of the activity on the use of separate means of communication – equipment of SIM-box type (SIM-bank). Currently, the use of such equipment is widespread in the realization of the objective side of various crimes, including the so-called “telephone fraud”, as well as knowingly false reports of an act of terrorism. The use of SIM-box type equipment not only allows to “automate” the implementation of the objective side of the crime, through the parallel execution of mass calls, but also makes it difficult to reliably identify the person receiving communication services. Thus, the use of SIM-box type equipment encroaches on an independent object – public relations arising from the provision of normal operation of the public communications network and regulated by the current legislation in the field of communications. Taking into account the difficulty of forming a correct legal definition of such equipment, the author substantiates the expediency of criminal-legal assessment of the activity of making mass telephone calls (mailings) carried out in violation of the current legislation. In view of the above, it is proposed to supplement Chapter 28 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with a new article 274.3 containing the projected criminal liability. In the process of research, the following methods were used: formal-logical, literal interpretation.

Purpose of the study. The article discusses the problems of criminal procedural activity that arise during the monitoring of information transmitted during telephone conversations or accumulated within the framework of the functioning of mobile communication devices. The aim of the study is to define ways to transform the legal basis of criminal proceedings to raise the efficiency of the implementation of the procedural means of the institution of evidence provided by the legislator. The possibilities of simplifying procedural issues of obtaining permission to carry out relevant investigative actions are analyzed.

Conclusions. As a result of the study, the authors come to the conclusion that it is necessary to reform the provisions of art. 186 and 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Perfecting the procedure for monitoring and recording conversations, receipting information about the connection of subscribers and (or) subscriber devices will ensure the achievement of the aims of criminal proceedings, the protection of the legal status of the sufferer, and the effectiveness of the investigation.

The article outlines the controversial issues of the application of the norms on exemption from criminal liability. In particular, attention is paid to the social conditionality of these norms, the possibilities of their application in cases of unfinished criminal activity and complicity in crime, and ways to improve their content and implementation are proposed.

The purpose of the publication is to consider additional possibilities of applying the rules on exemption from criminal liability in situations that have not been adequately developed in the theory and practice of criminal law. For example, in cases of commission of unfinished crimes, complicity in a crime, application of criminal law norms with administrative prejudice.

The conclusions obtained during the study. The article draws conclusions about the possibility and expediency of applying the norms on exemption from criminal liability in cases of commission of an unfinished crime, complicity in a crime and acts recognized as criminal on the basis of norms with administrative prejudice.

The scientific significance of the publication. The article attempts to consider from a new scientific perspective the issues of the application of exemption from criminal liability in cases of commission of an unfinished crime, complicity in a crime, as well as in situations of recognition of an act as a crime on the basis of norms with administrative prejudice.

The practical significance of the publication. This article contains ideas on expanding the possibilities of applying the norms on exemption from criminal liability, in relation to situations of commission of an unfinished crime, complicity in a crime and in cases of recognition of an act as criminal, on the basis of norms with administrative prejudice.