1. The commission by an official of actions that clearly go beyond the scope of his powers and entail a significant violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens or organizations or the interests of society or the state protected by law is punishable by a fine in the amount of up to eighty thousand rubles or in the amount of the wages or other income of the convicted person. for a period of up to six months, or deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to five years, or forced labor for a term of up to four years, or arrest for a term of four to six months, or imprisonment for a term of up to four years.
2. The same act committed by a person holding a public office of the Russian Federation or a public office of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, as well as the head of a local government body, is punishable by a fine in the amount of one hundred thousand to three hundred thousand rubles or in the amount of the salary or other income of the person convicted of a period of one to two years, or forced labor for a term of up to five years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a period of up to three years or without it, or imprisonment for a term of up to seven years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions, or engage in certain activities for a period of up to three years or without it.
3. Acts provided for in parts one or two of this article, if they are committed: a) with the use of violence or the threat of its use; b) using weapons or special means; c) causing grave consequences - is punishable by imprisonment for a term of three to ten years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to three years.
Commentary on Article 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation
1. The objective side of the crime consists in the commission by an official of actions that clearly go beyond the limits of the rights and powers granted to him by law. These should be considered actions that sharply and obviously do not correspond to the authority of the person.
2. Exceeding official powers may be expressed:
- in committing actions that relate to the powers of another official (superior or equal in status) or can be performed only in the presence of special circumstances specified in the law or regulations (for example, the use of weapons);
- a single decision or action that must be carried out collectively or in agreement with another official or body (for example, the issuance by a judge of an act requiring a decision as part of a panel of judges);
- committing actions that no one has the right to commit under any circumstances (for example, using violence against a suspect or accused) (clause 19 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation “On judicial practice in cases of abuse of power and exceeding official powers”) .
3. On the content of the consequences in the form of a significant violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens or organizations or legally protected interests of society or the state, see the commentary to Art. 285 CC.
4. The subjective side of the crime is characterized by intentional guilt.
5. The subject of the crime is an official.
6. For a person holding a government position in the Russian Federation, a government position in a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, or the head of a local government body, see the commentary to Art. 285 CC.
7. The content of specially qualifying characteristics (Part 3 of Article 286) almost completely coincides with the content of similar characteristics of other crimes.
8. If there are signs of crimes under Art. 105 and part 3 and 4 art. 111 of the Criminal Code, committed in the course of exceeding official powers, the act should be qualified in conjunction with Art. 286.
9. Special means include rubber truncheons, handcuffs, sniffer dogs, tear gas, water cannons, armored vehicles, etc. (Clause 20 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation “On judicial practice in cases of abuse of official powers and abuse of official powers”).
Automotive law. Auto assistance. Autofriendship
One of the common issues is liability for road accidents with injuries or deaths. In this regard, I am publishing comments to Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine
Article 286. Violation of road safety rules or the operation of transport by persons driving vehicles.
1. Violation of road safety rules or the operation of transport by a person driving a vehicle, which caused moderate bodily injury to the victim, -
shall be punishable by a fine of up to one hundred tax-free minimum incomes of citizens, correctional labor for a term of up to two years, or arrest for a term of up to six months, or restriction of freedom for a term of up to three years, with or without deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a term of up to three years.
2. The same acts, if they caused the death of the victim or caused grievous bodily harm, -
shall be punishable by imprisonment for a term of three to eight years with or without deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a term of up to three.
3. Acts provided for in part one of this article, if they resulted in the death of several persons, -
shall be punishable by imprisonment for a term of seven to twelve years with deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a term of up to three years with deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a term of up to three years.
Note. In this article and Articles 287, 289 and 290, vehicles should be understood as all types of cars, tractors and other self-propelled machines, trams and trolleybuses, as well as motorcycles and other vehicles.
1. The object of the crime is road safety, health and life of citizens.
An act is considered criminal only if the rules for driving and operating vehicles are violated. Transport means all types of cars, tractors and other self-propelled machines, trams and trolleybuses, as well as motorcycles and other mechanical vehicles. The Road Traffic Regulations define a motor vehicle as a vehicle powered by an engine, excluding mopeds and bicycles with an engine displacement of less than 50 cubic centimeters. This term also covers trams, trolleybuses, tractors, sidecars and other self-propelled machines and mechanisms.
Other self-propelled machines mean any road construction, agricultural and other special machines (excavator, grader, truck crane, forklifts, etc.)
2. The objective side of the crime involves a violation of traffic safety rules and the operation of transport, the occurrence of harmful consequences, a causal relationship between the violations and the resulting harmful consequences.
In order to have the corpus delicti under comment, it is necessary to establish that the harmful consequences that have occurred are causally related to the violation of traffic safety rules and the operation of transport. The absence of such a connection excludes the liability of the violator under Art. 286 of the Criminal Code.
Violation of traffic safety rules can be expressed in speeding, driving while intoxicated, violating intersection rules, improper overtaking, driving through a prohibited sign, improper maneuvering, etc.
Violation of operating rules is the operation of technically faulty equipment, violation of the rules for transporting passengers, exceeding the tonnage and dimensions of transported goods, etc.
To hold a person accountable, it must be established that he violated traffic rules (Road Rules. Approved by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine on December 31, 1993), violations of other safety rules, for example, when repairing cars, electric tractors and other self-propelled machines, does not entail liability under Article 286 of the Criminal Code. Such violations are not aimed at traffic safety, but at other objects: life, human health, safe working conditions, etc.
Responsibility under Part 1 of Art. 286 of the Criminal Code is punishable for actions resulting in moderate bodily injury (see commentary to Article 122 of the Criminal Code).
Part 2 Art. 286 of the Criminal Code provides for liability for violation of traffic safety rules and the operation of transport, resulting in the death of the victim or causing him serious bodily injury.
On the concept of “grievous bodily harm”, see the commentary to Art. 121 CC.
Part 3 Art. 286 provides for liability for actions provided for in .1 Art. 286 of the Criminal Code, resulting in the death of two or more persons.
The actions of the perpetrator, which simultaneously entailed the consequences provided for by different parts of Art. 286 of the Criminal Code, require qualification in the part that provides for the most severe consequences received.
If each of the violations was of an independent nature and was not connected with each other by a subjective aspect, as well as by the place or time of commission, then they require qualification in each specific case according to the totality of crimes.
Violation of the Traffic Rules by the victim (driver, pedestrian, passenger or other road user) or other unlawful behavior is not grounds for releasing the driver from criminal liability if there is corpus delicti in his actions. Such circumstances may be taken into account by the court as mitigating liability.
This crime is considered completed from the moment the consequences specified in the disposition occur.
It does not matter the circumstances related to the person’s lack of the right to drive a vehicle or the deprivation of such a right in an administrative or judicial manner, whether he is a transport worker or not. It also does not matter whether such a person is the owner or lessee of the vehicle, drives it by proxy, or has stolen it without permission.
For violation of traffic safety rules during practical driving in a training vehicle with dual controls, the instructor, and not the student, is responsible if he has not taken timely measures to prevent socially dangerous consequences.
3. The subjective side of the crime is characterized by a careless form of guilt, which is expressed in the nature of the attitude of the perpetrator to the consequences. The very action or inaction in violation of traffic safety rules or the operation of transport can be intentional or committed through negligence
4. The subject of the crime is a person who has reached the age of 16 at the time of the commission of the crime.
A driver who, after committing this crime, intentionally left the victim in a life-threatening situation is liable for a set of crimes (the relevant part of Article 286 of the Criminal Code and Article 135 of the Criminal Code).
If the driver’s actions do not contain the corpus delicti provided for in Art. 286 of the Criminal Code, but the life of the victim was endangered as a result of a traffic accident committed by the driver, then deliberately leaving the victim without help with other necessary signs entails liability under Article 135 of the Criminal Code.
If it is established that the perpetrator created the socially dangerous nature of his actions or inactions, foresaw their socially dangerous consequences and desired their occurrence or deliberately allowed them to occur, then his actions should be qualified under the articles of the Criminal Code providing for liability for a crime against the life and health of citizens (for example , Art. 123 of the Criminal Code) or against the authority of public authorities (for example, Art. 345 of the Criminal Code).
Source
Mego-Info - Legal portal No. 1
1. The conviction for committing a criminal offense is decided by the court.
2. Having established, at the stage of pre-trial investigation, a framework for exoneration from a criminal record and having taken the advantage of a person suspected of such an indictment, the prosecutor puts the fuss about the exoneration from a criminal offense into Evidence and without conducting a pre-trial investigation will force him to trial.
3. Before going to trial, the prosecutor wants to identify the victim and understand his idea of the possibility of exonerating the suspect from a criminal record.
4. As soon as the trial is completed before the trial with the indictment, the side of the criminal prosecution will go to trial with all the troubles about the criminal record of the accused, the court may not It’s easy to look at this kind of fuss.
1. The article is commented to convey that the release from criminal liability for committing a criminal offense is carried out only by the court.
2. The prosecutor, having established at the stage of the pre-trial investigation the grounds for criminal release, may remove the suspect from such release. In this case, the person is obliged to carry out the following procedural actions: a) consideration of criminal charges; b) without fully conducting pre-trial investigations, proceed with such efforts before the trial; c) before sending him to trial, find out about the victim and understand his thoughts about the possibility of exonerating the suspect from a criminal background.
3. Implementing norms of criminal and criminal procedural legislation in order to release an individual from a criminal background, giving special respect to the attribution of Part 3 of Art. 289 of the Code of Criminal Procedure about the obligations of the prosecutor before the court, to find out about the victim and to understand his idea of the possibility of exonerating the suspect from criminal liability. This is a reasonable and logical benefit, as long as it is aimed at protecting the legitimate interests of the victim in criminal proceedings.
At the same time, the legislator, in our opinion, completely correctly calls for the investigator, the prosecutor, and the court to place the victim before the release on criminal charges, rather than giving him the right to defend such a decision to the court (Part. 3 Article 286, paragraph 8 Part 1 of Article 287, Part 2 of Article 288 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). An analysis of these legal norms shows that the court may still be satisfied with the negative thoughts of the victim and the released individual from the criminal record, making decisions and the medical position of the victim. the prosecutor's fuss about the prison.
622
4. The court is obliged to take a hard look at the criminal record of the accused, if at the time of the court review of the progress that came before the trial with the indictment, one of the sides of this breach is more brutal to go to court for such troubles.
‹ Article 285. Underlying provisions of criminal investigation during the time of release of a person from a criminal record. Article 287. The prosecutor's fuss about release from a criminal record. ›
