"On judicial practice in murder cases" Resolution of the Plenum of the RF Armed Forces

Criminal lawyer

PLENAUM OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION DECISION of January 27, 1999 N 1 ON JUDICIAL PRACTICE IN CASES OF MURDER (ART. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) (as amended by Resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 02/06/2007 N 7, dated 04/03/2008 N 4 , dated 03.12.2009 N 27)

In order to ensure the correct application of legislation providing for liability for intentionally causing the death of another person, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation decides to give the following clarifications to the courts:
1. When considering cases of murder, which is a particularly serious crime, for the commission of which the most severe punishment can be imposed. Art. 44 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of types of punishments, courts are obliged to strictly comply with the requirement of the law for a comprehensive, complete and objective study of the circumstances of the case.

In each such case, the form of guilt must be established, the motives, purpose and method of causing the death of another person must be clarified, as well as other circumstances that are important for the correct legal assessment of the crime and the imposition of a fair punishment on the perpetrator must be examined.

2. If murder can be committed with both direct and indirect intent, then attempted murder is possible only with direct intent, that is, when the act indicated that the culprit was aware of the social danger of his actions (inaction), foresaw the possibility or inevitability the death of another person and wanted it to happen, but the death did not occur due to circumstances beyond his control (due to the active resistance of the victim, the intervention of other persons, timely provision of medical care to the victim, etc.).

3. It is necessary to distinguish murder from the intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm resulting in the death of the victim, bearing in mind that in the case of murder the intent of the perpetrator is aimed at depriving the victim of life, and when committing a crime under Part 4 of Art. 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the attitude of the perpetrator towards the death of the victim is expressed in negligence.

When deciding the direction of the intent of the perpetrator, one should proceed from the totality of all the circumstances of the crime and take into account, in particular, the method and weapon of the crime, the number, nature and location of bodily injuries (for example, injuries to vital organs of a person), as well as the previous crime and subsequent behavior of the perpetrator and the victim, their relationship.

4. According to Part 1 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation qualifies murder committed without the qualifying features specified in Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and without mitigating circumstances provided for in Art. Art. 106, 107 and 108 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (for example, in a quarrel or fight in the absence of hooligan motives, out of jealousy, motivated by revenge, envy, hostility, hatred, arising on the basis of personal relationships).

5. In accordance with the provisions of Part 1 of Art. 17 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the murder of two or more persons, committed simultaneously or at different times, does not form a set of crimes and is subject to qualification under paragraph “a” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and if there are grounds for this, also under other points of part 2 of this article, provided that the perpetrator has not previously been convicted of any of these murders. (as amended by the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 04/03/2008 N 4)

The murder of one person and the attempted murder of another cannot be considered a completed crime - the murder of two persons. In such cases, regardless of the sequence of criminal actions, the act should be qualified under Part 1 or Part 2 of Art. 105 and according to Part 3 of Art. 30 and paragraph “a”, part 2, art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

6. According to paragraph “b” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation qualifies the murder of a person or his relatives, committed with the aim of preventing the person from lawfully carrying out his official activities or fulfilling a public duty, or for reasons of revenge for such activities.

The performance of official activities should be understood as the actions of a person included in the scope of his duties arising from an employment agreement (contract) with state, municipal, private and other duly registered enterprises and organizations, regardless of the form of ownership, with entrepreneurs whose activities do not contradict the current legislation, and under the fulfillment of public duty - the implementation by a citizen of both the duties specifically assigned to him in the interests of society or the legitimate interests of individuals, and the commission of other socially useful actions (suppression of offenses, reporting to authorities about a committed or impending crime or the whereabouts of a wanted person in connection with the commission of offenses, giving evidence by a witness or victim incriminating a person in committing a crime, etc.).

Persons close to the victim, along with close relatives, may include other persons who are related to him or her (relatives of the spouse), as well as persons whose life, health and well-being are known to the perpetrator to be dear to the victim due to established personal relationships.

7. According to paragraph “c” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (murder of a person known to the perpetrator to be in a helpless state) should qualify the intentional infliction of death on a victim who is unable, due to a physical or mental state, to defend himself or to provide active resistance to the perpetrator, when the latter, while committing the murder, is aware of this circumstance. Persons in a helpless state may include, in particular, seriously ill and elderly people, young children, people suffering from mental disorders that deprive them of the ability to correctly perceive what is happening.

When qualifying the actions of the perpetrator under paragraph “c” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the basis of “murder associated with kidnapping or hostage-taking”, it should be borne in mind that, within the meaning of the law, liability under this paragraph of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is punishable not only for intentionally causing the death of the kidnapped person or hostage, but also for the murder of other persons committed by the perpetrator in connection with the kidnapping or hostage-taking. The act must be qualified in conjunction with the crimes provided for in Art. 126 or art. 206 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

8. When qualifying a murder under clause “d”, part 2 of art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation must be based on the fact that the concept of special cruelty is associated both with the method of murder and with other circumstances indicating the manifestation of special cruelty by the perpetrator. At the same time, in order to recognize a murder as committed with particular cruelty, it is necessary to establish that the intent of the perpetrator included committing the murder with particular cruelty.

A sign of special cruelty is present, in particular, in cases where, before the deprivation of life or in the process of committing a murder, the victim was subjected to torture, torture or mockery of the victim, or when the murder was committed in a way that the perpetrator knows is associated with causing special suffering to the victim (causing great number of bodily injuries, the use of painful poison, burning alive, prolonged deprivation of food, water, etc.). Particular cruelty can be expressed in committing a murder in the presence of people close to the victim, when the perpetrator was aware that his actions were causing them special suffering.

Mockery of a corpse in itself cannot be regarded as a circumstance indicating the commission of a murder with particular cruelty. What was done in such cases, unless there is other evidence of the perpetrator showing particular cruelty before taking the victim’s life or in the process of committing a murder, should be qualified under the relevant part of Art. 105 and under Art. 244 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for liability for desecration of the bodies of the dead.

The destruction or dismemberment of a corpse for the purpose of concealing a crime cannot be grounds for qualifying a murder as committed with particular cruelty.

9. A generally dangerous method of murder (clause “e” of Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) should be understood as a method of intentionally causing death, which the perpetrator knows to pose a danger to the life of not only the victim, but at least one other person (for example, by explosion, arson, firing shots in crowded places, poisoning water and food that other people besides the victim use).

If, as a result of the generally dangerous method of murder used by the perpetrator, the death of not only a certain person, but also other persons, occurred, the act must be qualified, in addition to paragraph “e” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, under paragraph “a”, part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and in case of harm to health to other persons - under paragraph “e” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and under articles of the Criminal Code providing for liability for intentional infliction of harm to health.

In cases where murder by explosion, arson or other generally dangerous method is associated with the destruction or damage of someone else’s property or with the destruction or damage of forests, as well as plantings not included in the forest fund, the act committed, along with paragraph “e” of Part 2 Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, should also be qualified under Part 2 of Art. 167 or part 2 of Art. 261 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

10. When qualifying a murder under paragraph “g” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is necessary to take into account what is contained in Art. 35 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation defines the concept of a crime committed by a group of persons, a group of persons by prior conspiracy and an organized group of persons.

Murder is recognized as committed by a group of persons when two or more persons, acting together with intent aimed at committing murder, directly participated in the process of taking the life of the victim, using violence against him, and it is not necessary that the injuries leading to death were caused by each of them ( for example, one suppressed the victim’s resistance, deprived him of the opportunity to defend himself, and the other inflicted fatal injuries on him). Murder should be recognized as committed by a group of persons even in the case when, in the process of one person committing actions aimed at intentionally causing death, another person (other persons) joined him for the same purpose.

A preliminary conspiracy to murder presupposes an agreement expressed in any form between two or more persons, which took place before the commencement of actions directly aimed at taking the life of the victim. At the same time, along with co-perpetrators of the crime, other members of the criminal group may act as organizers, instigators or accomplices of murder, and their actions should be qualified under the relevant part of Art. 33 and paragraph “g”, part 2, art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

An organized group is a group of two or more individuals united by the intent to commit one or more murders. As a rule, such a group carefully plans a crime, prepares murder weapons in advance, and distributes roles between group members. Therefore, when a murder is recognized as committed by an organized group, the actions of all participants, regardless of their role in the crime, should be qualified as co-perpetrator without reference to Art. 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

11. According to paragraph “h” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (murder for mercenary motives) should qualify a murder committed with the aim of obtaining material benefits for the perpetrator or other persons (money, property or rights to receive it, rights to living space, etc.) or getting rid of material costs (refund property, debt, payment for services, fulfillment of property obligations, payment of alimony, etc.).

A murder caused by the receipt by the perpetrator of the crime of material or other reward should be classified as murder for hire. Persons who organized a murder for reward, instigated its commission or assisted in the commission of such a murder are liable under the relevant part of Art. 33 and paragraph “h”, part 2, art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Murder in the process of committing these crimes should be classified as involving robbery, extortion or banditry. What was done in such cases is qualified under paragraph “h” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in conjunction with articles of the Criminal Code providing for liability for robbery, extortion or banditry.

12. According to clause “i”, part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should qualify murder committed on the basis of obvious disrespect for society and generally accepted moral norms, when the behavior of the perpetrator is an open challenge to public order and is caused by the desire to oppose himself to others, to demonstrate a disdainful attitude towards them (for example, deliberately causing death for no apparent reason or with using a minor reason as a pretext for murder).

If the culprit, in addition to murder for hooligan motives, committed other deliberate actions that grossly violated public order, expressed clear disrespect for society and were accompanied by the use of violence against citizens or the threat of its use, as well as the destruction or damage of other people’s property, then what he did should be qualified according to the law. "and" part 2 art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the corresponding part of Art. 213 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

To correctly distinguish between murder for hooligan reasons and murder in a quarrel or fight, it is necessary to find out who initiated it, and whether the conflict was provoked by the perpetrator to use it as a pretext for murder. If the instigator of a quarrel or fight was the victim, as well as in the case where the conflict was caused by his illegal behavior, the perpetrator cannot be held responsible for murder for hooligan motives.

13. Within the meaning of the law, qualification under paragraph “k” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the murder of a certain person committed by the perpetrator in order to conceal another crime or facilitate its commission excludes the possibility of qualifying the same murder, in addition to the specified paragraph, under any other paragraph of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for a different purpose or motive for murder. Therefore, if it is established that the murder of the victim was committed, for example, for mercenary or hooligan motives, it cannot simultaneously be qualified under paragraph “k” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Murder involving rape or violent acts of a sexual nature should be understood as murder in the process of committing these crimes or for the purpose of concealing them, as well as committed, for example, out of revenge for resistance provided during the commission of these crimes.

Considering that in this case two independent crimes are committed, the crime should be qualified under paragraph “k” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and, depending on the specific circumstances of the case, under the relevant parts of Art. 131 or Art. 132 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Clauses 14 - 15 - Deleted. (as amended by the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 02/06/2007 N 7)

16. Within the meaning of the law, murder should not be regarded as committed with the qualifying criteria provided for in paragraphs “a”, “g”, “f”, part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as in circumstances that are usually associated with the idea of special cruelty (in particular, multiple injuries, murder in the presence of persons close to the victim), if it was committed in a state of sudden strong emotional disturbance or when the limits of necessary defense were exceeded. (as amended by the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 02/06/2007 N 7)

17. Murder committed with the qualifying criteria provided for by two or more paragraphs of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation must qualify on all these points. Punishment in such cases should not be imposed on each point separately, however, when assigning it, it is necessary to take into account the presence of several qualifying criteria.

In cases where the defendant is charged with committing murder with the qualifying criteria provided for in several paragraphs of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and the charges on some of them were not confirmed, in the descriptive part of the verdict it is enough, with the appropriate motives, to formulate a conclusion that the charges on certain counts are recognized as unfounded.

18. The actions of an official who committed murder while exceeding his official powers should be qualified according to the totality of crimes provided for in Part 1 or Part 2 of Art. 105 and part 3 of Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Similarly, in conjunction with Part 2 of Art. 203 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation must qualify the actions of a manager or employee of a private security or detective service who committed a murder while exceeding the powers granted to him in accordance with the license, contrary to the objectives of his activities.

19. The murder of an employee of a place of deprivation of liberty or a place of detention or a convicted person in order to prevent his correction or out of revenge for the performance of his public duty, committed by a person serving a sentence of imprisonment or being held in custody, must be qualified, in addition to the relevant part of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, under Art. 321 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for liability for disruption of the normal activities of institutions that ensure isolation from society.

20. When assigning punishment for murder, it is necessary to take into account all the circumstances under which it was committed: the type of intent, motives and purpose, method, setting and stage of the crime, as well as the identity of the perpetrator, his attitude to the crime, circumstances mitigating and aggravating the punishment. Equally, data relating to the personality of the victim, his relationship with the defendant, as well as the behavior preceding the murder must be examined. Paragraph 2 - Deleted. (as amended by the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 3, 2009 N 27) Paragraph 3 - Deleted. (as amended by the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 02/06/2007 N 7)

21. In each case of intentionally causing the death of another person, it is necessary to establish the causes and conditions that contributed to the commission of the crime, and, if there are grounds for this, respond to them in the manner prescribed by procedural law.

22. In connection with the adoption of this Resolution, the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 22, 1992 No. 15 “On judicial practice in cases of premeditated murders” is declared invalid and the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the USSR dated 27 is considered no longer valid on the territory of the Russian Federation June 1975 No. 4 “On judicial practice in cases of premeditated murder” and dated September 22, 1989 No. 10 “On the implementation by courts of the guidelines of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the USSR when considering criminal cases of premeditated murder.”

Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation V.M. LEBEDEV

Secretary of the Plenum, Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation V.V. DEMIDOV

AZ-libr.ru

When considering cases of murder, which is a particularly serious crime, for the commission of which the most severe punishment can be imposed among the types of punishment provided for in Article 44 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the courts are obliged to strictly comply with the requirement of the law for a comprehensive, complete and objective study of the circumstances of the case.
In each such case, the form of guilt must be established, the motives, purpose and method of causing the death of another person must be clarified, as well as other circumstances that are important for the correct legal assessment of the crime and the imposition of a fair punishment on the perpetrator must be examined. 2.
If murder can be committed with both direct and indirect intent, then attempted murder is possible only with direct intent, that is, when the act indicated that the culprit was aware of the social danger of his actions (inaction), foresaw the possibility or inevitability the death of another person and wanted it to happen, but the death did not occur due to circumstances beyond his control (due to the active resistance of the victim, the intervention of other persons, timely provision of medical care to the victim, etc.).
3.
It is necessary to distinguish murder from the intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm resulting in the death of the victim, bearing in mind that in murder the intent of the perpetrator is aimed at depriving the victim of life, and when committing a crime under Part 4 of Article 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the attitude of the perpetrator towards the attack the death of the victim is expressed in negligence.
When deciding the direction of the intent of the perpetrator, one should proceed from the totality of all the circumstances of the crime and take into account, in particular, the method and weapon of the crime, the number, nature and location of bodily injuries (for example, injuries to vital organs of a person), as well as the previous crime and subsequent behavior of the perpetrator and the victim, their relationship. 4.
According to Part 1 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, a murder committed without the qualifying characteristics specified in Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and without mitigating circumstances provided for in Article 106, Article 107 and Article 108 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is qualified ( for example, in a quarrel or fight in the absence of hooligan motives, out of jealousy, for reasons of revenge, envy, hostility, hatred, arising from personal relationships).
5.
According to paragraph "a" part 2 of article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the murder of two or more persons should be classified if the actions of the perpetrator were covered by a single intent and were committed, as a rule, simultaneously.
The murder of one person and the attempted murder of another cannot be considered a completed crime - the murder of two persons. In such cases, regardless of the sequence of criminal actions, the act should be qualified under Part 1 or Part 2 of Article 105 and Part 3 of Article 30 and Clause "a" Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. 6.
According to clause “b”, part 2, article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the murder of a person or his relatives committed with the aim of preventing the person from lawfully carrying out his official activities or fulfilling a public duty, or motivated by revenge for such activities, is qualified.
The performance of official activities should be understood as the actions of a person included in the scope of his duties arising from an employment agreement (contract) with state, municipal, private and other duly registered enterprises and organizations, regardless of the form of ownership, with entrepreneurs whose activities do not contradict the current legislation, and under the fulfillment of public duty - the implementation by a citizen of both the duties specifically assigned to him in the interests of society or the legitimate interests of individuals, and the commission of other socially useful actions (suppression of offenses, reporting to authorities about a committed or impending crime or the whereabouts of a wanted person in connection with the commission of offenses, giving evidence by a witness or victim incriminating a person in committing a crime, etc.). Persons close to the victim, along with close relatives, may include other persons who are related to him or her (relatives of the spouse), as well as persons whose life, health and well-being are known to the perpetrator to be dear to the victim due to established personal relationships. 7.
According to paragraph “c” of Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (the murder of a person who is known to the perpetrator to be in a helpless state), it is necessary to qualify the intentional infliction of death on a victim who is unable, due to a physical or mental condition, to defend himself, to provide active resistance to the perpetrator, when the latter, committing murder, is aware of this circumstance.
Persons in a helpless state may include, in particular, seriously ill and elderly people, young children, people suffering from mental disorders that deprive them of the ability to correctly perceive what is happening. When qualifying the actions of the perpetrator under paragraph “c” of Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the basis of “murder associated with kidnapping or hostage-taking,” it should be borne in mind that, within the meaning of the law, liability under this paragraph of Part 2 of Article 105 The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation applies not only for intentionally causing the death of the kidnapped person or hostage, but also for the murder of other persons committed by the perpetrator in connection with the kidnapping or hostage taking. The act must be qualified in conjunction with the crimes provided for in Article 126 or Article 206 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. 8.
When qualifying a murder under clause “e”, part 2, article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, one must proceed from the fact that the concept of special cruelty is associated both with the method of murder and with other circumstances indicating the manifestation of special cruelty by the perpetrator.
At the same time, in order to recognize a murder as committed with particular cruelty, it is necessary to establish that the intent of the perpetrator included committing the murder with particular cruelty. A sign of special cruelty is present, in particular, in cases where, before the deprivation of life or in the process of committing a murder, the victim was subjected to torture, torture or mockery of the victim, or when the murder was committed in a way that the perpetrator knows is associated with causing special suffering to the victim (causing great number of bodily injuries, the use of painful poison, burning alive, prolonged deprivation of food, water, etc.). Particular cruelty can be expressed in committing a murder in the presence of people close to the victim, when the perpetrator was aware that his actions were causing them special suffering. Mockery of a corpse in itself cannot be regarded as a circumstance indicating the commission of a murder with particular cruelty. What was done in such cases, if there is no other evidence of the perpetrator showing particular cruelty before taking the victim’s life or in the process of committing murder, should be qualified under the relevant part of Article 105 and Article 244 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for liability for desecration of the bodies of the dead. The destruction or dismemberment of a corpse for the purpose of concealing a crime cannot be grounds for qualifying a murder as committed with particular cruelty. 9.
A generally dangerous method of murder (clause "e" part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) should be understood as a method of intentionally causing death, which the perpetrator knows to pose a danger to the life of not only the victim, but at least one other person (for example, by explosion, arson, firing shots in crowded places, poisoning water and food that other people, in addition to the victim, use).
If, as a result of the generally dangerous method of murder used by the perpetrator, the death of not only a certain person, but also other persons, occurred, the act must be qualified, in addition to clause "e" part 2 of article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, according to clause "a" part 2 of art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and in case of causing harm to health to other persons - under clause “f” part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and under the articles of the Criminal Code providing for liability for intentional causing harm to health. In cases where murder by explosion, arson or other generally dangerous method is associated with the destruction or damage of someone else’s property or with the destruction or damage of forests, as well as plantings not included in the forest fund, the act is committed, along with clause "e" part 2 Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should also be qualified under Part 2 of Article 167 or Part 2 of Article 261 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. 10.
When qualifying murder under clause “g”, Part 2, Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is necessary to take into account the definition contained in Article 35 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of the concept of a crime committed by a group of persons, a group of persons by prior conspiracy and an organized group of persons.
Murder is recognized as committed by a group of persons when two or more persons, acting together with intent aimed at committing murder, directly participated in the process of taking the life of the victim, using violence against him, and it is not necessary that the injuries leading to death were caused by each of them ( for example, one suppressed the victim’s resistance, deprived him of the opportunity to defend himself, and the other inflicted fatal injuries on him). Murder should be recognized as committed by a group of persons even in the case when, in the process of one person committing actions aimed at intentionally causing death, another person (other persons) joined him for the same purpose. A preliminary conspiracy to murder presupposes an agreement expressed in any form between two or more persons, which took place before the commencement of actions directly aimed at taking the life of the victim. At the same time, along with co-perpetrators of the crime, other members of the criminal group can act as organizers, instigators or accomplices of murder, and their actions should be qualified under the relevant part of Article 33 and paragraph “g”, Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. An organized group is a group of two or more individuals united by the intent to commit one or more murders. As a rule, such a group carefully plans a crime, prepares murder weapons in advance, and distributes roles between group members. Therefore, when a murder is recognized as committed by an organized group, the actions of all participants, regardless of their role in the crime, should be qualified as co-perpetrators without reference to Article 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. 11.
According to clause "z" part 2 of article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (murder for mercenary motives), it is necessary to qualify a murder committed in order to obtain material benefit for the perpetrator or other persons (money, property or rights to receive it, rights to living space etc.) or getting rid of material costs (return of property, debt, payment for services, fulfillment of property obligations, payment of alimony, etc.).
A murder caused by the receipt by the perpetrator of the crime of material or other reward should be classified as murder for hire. Persons who organized a murder for reward, instigated its commission or assisted in the commission of such a murder are liable under the relevant part of Article 33 and paragraph 3 of Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Murder in the process of committing these crimes should be classified as involving robbery, extortion or banditry. What is done in such cases is qualified under clause "z" part 2 of article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in conjunction with articles of the Criminal Code providing for liability for robbery, extortion or banditry. 12.
According to paragraph 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is necessary to qualify a murder committed on the basis of obvious disrespect for society and generally accepted moral norms, when the behavior of the perpetrator is an open challenge to public order and is caused by the desire to oppose himself to others, to demonstrate disdain for nim attitude (for example, deliberately causing death for no apparent reason or using an insignificant reason as a pretext for murder).
If the culprit, in addition to murder for hooligan motives, committed other deliberate actions that grossly violated public order, expressed clear disrespect for society and were accompanied by the use of violence against citizens or the threat of its use, as well as the destruction or damage of other people’s property, then what he did should be qualified according to the law. .”and” Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the corresponding part of Article 213 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. To correctly distinguish between murder for hooligan reasons and murder in a quarrel or fight, it is necessary to find out who initiated it, and whether the conflict was provoked by the perpetrator to use it as a pretext for murder. If the instigator of a quarrel or fight was the victim, as well as in the case where the conflict was caused by his illegal behavior, the perpetrator cannot be held responsible for murder for hooligan motives. 13.
Within the meaning of the law, qualification under clause "k" part 2 of article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of the murder of a certain person committed by the perpetrator in order to conceal another crime or facilitate its commission excludes the possibility of qualifying the same murder, in addition to the specified point, under any other paragraph 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for a different purpose or motive for the murder.
Therefore, if it is established that the murder of the victim was committed, for example, for mercenary or hooligan motives, it cannot simultaneously be qualified under paragraph “k” of Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Murder involving rape or violent acts of a sexual nature should be understood as murder in the process of committing these crimes or for the purpose of concealing them, as well as committed, for example, out of revenge for resistance provided during the commission of these crimes. Considering that in this case two independent crimes are committed, the crime should be qualified under clause "k" part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and, depending on the specific circumstances of the case, according to the relevant parts of Article 131 or Article 132 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. 14.
In accordance with Article 16 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which defines the concept of repetition of crimes, under paragraph "n" Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the actions of a perpetrator who has committed two or more murders in the absence of a single intent to commit them are qualified and, as a rule, , at different times.
Murder is recognized as being committed more than once if it was preceded by the commission of crimes provided for in Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and (or) Article 102, Article 103 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR. Within the meaning of the law, the basis for qualifying the actions of the perpetrator under clause “n”, Part 2, Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is also the commission by him previously of crimes provided for in Article 277, Article 295, Article 317, Article 357 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and (or ) Art. 66, Art. 67, Art. 191-2, paragraph “c” of Art. 240 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR. Moreover, to qualify an act as a murder committed repeatedly, it does not matter whether the perpetrator was convicted of the first crime, whether he committed a previously completed crime or attempted murder, or whether he was the perpetrator or other accomplice of this crime. If the perpetrator committed two murders at different times, for the first of which he was not convicted, the act as a whole should be qualified under clause "n" part 2 of article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and if there are other qualifying features - also under the relevant paragraphs of part .2 Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The issue should be resolved similarly if the perpetrator commits two attempted murders, for the first of which he was not convicted. All actions must be qualified under Part 3 of Article 30 and Clause “n” Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and, in addition, according to the relevant paragraphs of Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provide for qualifying features of both attempted murders. The act cannot be qualified under clause "n" part 2 of article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation if a conviction for a previously committed intentional causing of death to another person was expunged or withdrawn, as well as in the case of a court releasing a person from criminal liability for a previously committed murder in connection with the expiration of the statute of limitations. 15.
The court has the right in this court session to change the classification of the defendant’s actions from clause “a” to clause “n” part 2 of article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and vice versa, if this does not worsen his position and does not violate the right to defense (not related with a significant change in the factual circumstances of the case, including those related to the motive, purpose and method of murder, with the imputation of episodes that increase the actual volume of the previously brought charges, etc.).
In all other cases, the court changing the charge from one to another, paragraph 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation without returning the case for additional investigation is unacceptable. 16.
Within the meaning of the law, murder should not be regarded as committed with the qualifying criteria provided for in paragraphs.
“a”, “d”, “e”, “n” part 2 of article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as in circumstances that are usually associated with the idea of particular cruelty (in particular, multiple injuries, murder in the presence of persons close to the victim ), if it was committed in a state of sudden strong emotional excitement or when the limits of necessary defense were exceeded. 17.
A murder committed with the qualifying criteria provided for by two or more points of Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation must be qualified according to all these points.
Punishment in such cases should not be imposed on each point separately, however, when assigning it, it is necessary to take into account the presence of several qualifying criteria. In cases where the defendant is charged with committing murder with the qualifying criteria provided for in several paragraphs of Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and the accusation for some of them was not confirmed, in the descriptive part of the verdict it is enough to formulate a conclusion about the recognition of the accusation for those or other points are unfounded. 18.
The actions of an official who committed murder while exceeding his official powers should be qualified according to the totality of crimes provided for in Part 1 or Part 2 of Article 105 and Part 3 of Article 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Similarly, in conjunction with Part 2 of Article 203 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the actions of a director or employee of a private security or detective service who committed a murder in excess of the powers granted to him in accordance with the license, contrary to the objectives of his activities, should be qualified. 19.
The murder of an employee of a place of deprivation of liberty or a place of detention or a convicted person in order to prevent his correction or out of revenge for the performance of his public duty, committed by a person serving a sentence of imprisonment or being held in custody, must be qualified, in addition to the relevant part of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, under Article 321 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for liability for disruption of the normal activities of institutions that ensure isolation from society.
20.
When assigning punishment for murder, it is necessary to take into account all the circumstances under which it was committed: the type of intent, motives and purpose, method, setting and stage of the crime, as well as the identity of the perpetrator, his attitude to the crime, circumstances mitigating and aggravating the punishment.
Equally, data relating to the personality of the victim, his relationship with the defendant, as well as the behavior preceding the murder must be examined. The death penalty as an exceptional measure of punishment can be applied for the commission of a particularly serious crime that encroaches on life only when the need for its imposition is determined by special circumstances indicating a high degree of social danger of the act, and, along with this, extremely negative data characterizing the perpetrator as a person who poses an exceptional danger to society. When assigning life imprisonment to a guilty person, the sentence, by virtue of Article 57 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, must indicate the reasons for imposing this punishment as an alternative to the death penalty, which the court considered possible not to apply. 21.
In each case of intentionally causing the death of another person, it is necessary to establish the causes and conditions that contributed to the commission of the crime, and, if there are grounds for this, respond to them in the manner prescribed by procedural law.
22.
In connection with the adoption of this resolution, the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 22, 1992 is declared invalid. No. 15 “On judicial practice in cases of premeditated murders” and consider the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the USSR dated June 27, 1975 as not valid on the territory of the Russian Federation. No. 4 “On judicial practice in cases of premeditated murder” and dated September 22, 1989. No. 10 “On the implementation by the courts of the guiding clarifications of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the USSR when considering criminal cases of premeditated murders.”

Plenum of the Supreme Court: arrest is possible for any crime

Photo: supcourt.ru The Plenum of the Supreme Court of Russia at its next remote meeting made changes to its previous decisions on criminal cases. In particular, he pointed out that arrests of suspects and accused were not necessary, but he also allowed directly opposite options. He also gave explanations on the application of several norms of the Criminal Code and Criminal Procedure Code.

Arrest is not mandatory, but possible

Attempts to formulate more or less clear criteria for courts when choosing a preventive measure are constantly being made by the Supreme Court. This time, his explanations again note that courts can choose preventive measures for those involved in cases only if there are sufficient grounds to believe that they will continue to engage in criminal activities, or will threaten witnesses, or destroy evidence in the case. But even in this case, the courts have the right not to choose strict measures.

However, what grounds are considered “sufficient”, the Supreme Court does not explain, which actually preserves the current state of affairs. Moreover, the Supreme Court confirms the possibility of arrests against those suspected of minor crimes. However, if the court nevertheless decides to limit itself to a more lenient measure, then this cannot be prevented even by any of the circumstances of Article 108 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the suspect does not have a permanent place of residence in the Russian Federation, his identity has not been established, he violated a previously chosen preventive measure, he fled from preliminary investigation authorities or from the court).

Discipline the investigation

Separately, the plenum touched upon the courts' consideration of requests to extend arrest, which investigators often justify with arguments about the impossibility of completing the investigation in a timely manner. The Supreme Court pointed out the need to pay attention to the investigator’s (interrogating officer’s) compliance with the requirements of Article 109 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. It states, in particular, that a request to extend the arrest must be submitted no later than 7 days before its expiration.

“In the case when a petition to extend the period of detention is brought before the court repeatedly and on the basis of the need to carry out investigative actions specified in previous petitions, the court must find out the reasons why they were not carried out. If the reason, in the opinion of the court, is the ineffective organization of the investigation, this may be one of the circumstances leading to the refusal to satisfy the petition. In such cases, the court has the right to respond to identified violations by issuing private rulings,” the Supreme Court said.

House arrest, bail, or prohibition of certain activities

House arrest, according to the plenum, can be chosen if it is impossible to use a more lenient preventive measure, including bail and a ban on certain actions. However, the Supreme Court considers this preventive measure to be quite harsh, and therefore recommends that courts apply it in exceptional cases.

At the same time, the courts may bring up issues regarding the choice of bail for discussion by the participants in the hearing, even if the parties to the case did not request this.

“Preventive measures in the form of detention, house arrest, bail or a ban on certain actions are valid until the verdict enters into legal force, regardless of whether it is appealed,” notes the Supreme Court. He also "calls to the attention" of appellate courts that they must scrutinize arrest orders carefully. Their resolutions must contain specific reasons for which a particular decision was made.

Fraud and business

The plenum also made changes to the decisions regarding the consideration by courts of specific categories of cases. The Supreme Court recalled that a number of “entrepreneurial” cases from the Criminal Code are cases of exclusively private prosecution and cannot be initiated without statements from victims. These include articles of the Criminal Code: 159.1–159.3, 159.5, 159.6, 160, 165, part 1 of Art. 176, art. 177, 180, 185.1, part 1 of Art. 201 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

In turn, criminal cases under Articles 198–199.1, 199.3 and 199.4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation can be initiated only on the basis of materials from the tax authority or the territorial body of the insurer, the Supreme Court points out.

The Supreme Court also returned to the issue of arrests of businessmen. The Plenum noted that the Code of Criminal Procedure prohibits taking them into custody for crimes committed in connection with business activities. According to the Supreme Court, courts should check whether the investigation’s petitions contain specific information indicating the opposite. “In the absence of the specified information, such a request cannot be satisfied,” the document says.

“The presence in the decision to initiate a petition to select a preventive measure in the form of detention and the materials attached to the decision indicating the mercenary motive of the suspect or accused, as well as the method of disposing of the stolen property (for example, he appropriated it personally or used it for business purposes) cannot serve as a basis for recognizing the act as committed without connection with the implementation of entrepreneurial activity,” the Supreme Court also indicated.

In addition, the plenum forbade taking the word of those accused of tax evasion (Article 199 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) that they will compensate for the damage. This circumstance does not provide grounds for releasing them from criminal liability.

At the same time, the imposition of punishments on entrepreneurs should not be predetermined by the fact that they are in custody, the Supreme Court points out.

The full text of the explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court can be found here.

Search in legislation:
Legislative acts (documents):

DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE RF dated 09.12.2009 No. 78-G09-39 On upholding without change the decision of the St. Petersburg City Court dated 04.08.2009, which rejected the application to recognize Article 3 of the Law of St. Petersburg as contrary to federal legislation

“On standards for the distribution in St. Petersburg of printed materials, audio and video products, and other products not recommended for use by a child before reaching the age of 16” dated January 16, 2009 No. 816-6. [2009-12-09, ]

ORDER of Rosstat dated November 30, 2009 No. 278

“ON THE APPROVAL OF STATISTICAL INSTRUMENTS FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF THE RUSSIA MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF FEDERAL STATISTICAL SUPERVISION OF THE ACTIVITIES OF HEALTHCARE INSTITUTIONS” [2009-11-30, IKAZ]

ORDER OF ROSSTAT DATED 30.11.2009 No. 278

ORDER of the Ministry of Health and Social Development of the Russian Federation dated August 14, 2009 No. 593

“ON THE APPROVAL OF A UNIFIED QUALIFICATION DIRECTORY OF POSITIONS OF MANAGERS, SPECIALISTS AND EMPLOYEES, SECTION “QUALIFICATIONS OF POSITIONS OF EDUCATION WORKERS” [2009-08-14, ]

ORDER of Rosstat dated August 13, 2009 No. 171

“ON APPROVAL OF STATISTICAL INSTRUMENTS FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF THE RUSSIA MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF FEDERAL STATISTICAL SUPERVISION OF THE INCIDENCE OF THE POPULATION WITH MENTAL AND DRUG DISORDERS” [2009-08-13, IKAZ]

ORDER OF ROSSTAT DATED 13.08.2009 No. 171

ORDER of Rosstat dated 08/07/2009 No. 163 (as amended on 11/18/2009)

“ON APPROVAL OF STATISTICAL INSTRUMENTS FOR ORGANIZING FEDERAL STATISTICAL SUPERVISION OF ACTIVITIES IN THE FIELD OF HEALTH, WORK INJURIES AND VITAL MOVEMENT OF THE POPULATION” [2009-08-07, ]

ROSSTAT ORDER DATED 08/07/2009 No. 163

“ON APPROVAL OF STATISTICAL INSTRUMENTS FOR ORGANIZING FEDERAL STATISTICAL SUPERVISION OF ACTIVITIES IN THE FIELD OF HEALTH, WORK INJURIES AND VITAL MOVEMENT OF THE POPULATION” [2009-08-07, IKAZ]

ORDER of Rosstat dated July 29, 2009 No. 154

“ON THE APPROVAL OF STATISTICAL INSTRUMENTS FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF THE RUSSIA MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF FEDERAL STATISTICAL OBSERVATION IN THE FIELD OF HEALTH CARE” [2009-07-29, IKAZ]

ORDER OF ROSSTAT DATED 29.07.2009 No. 154

FEDERAL LAW No. 215-FZ of July 27, 2009

“ON AMENDMENTS TO THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” (adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on July 15, 2009) [2009-07-27, ]

ORDER OF THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE RF DATED 07/20/2009 No. 525

“ON THE IX ALL-RUSSIAN COMPETITION FOR THE TITLE “BEST DOCTOR OF THE YEAR” (TOGETHER WITH THE REGULATIONS ON THE IX ALL-RUSSIAN COMPETITION FOR THE TITLE “BEST DOCTOR OF THE YEAR”) [2009-07-20, ]

ORDER of the Ministry of Health and Social Development of the Russian Federation dated July 20, 2009 No. 525

“ON THE IX ALL-RUSSIAN COMPETITION FOR THE TITLE “BEST DOCTOR OF THE YEAR” [2009-07-20,]

DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 215694-5

“ON AMENDMENTS TO THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” (final edition adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on July 15, 2009) Who prepared the President of the Russian Federation_President of the Russian Federation [2009-07-15, OECT]

DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 215694-5

“ON AMENDMENTS TO THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” (edition prepared by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation for the second reading on July 15, 2009) Who prepared the President of the Russian Federation_President of the Russian Federation [2009-07-15, OECT]

EXPLANATORY NOTE

“TO THE DRAFT FEDERAL LAW “ON AMENDING THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION IN CONNECTION WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE FEDERAL LAW “ON AMENDING THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” Prepared by Vtorygina E.A._Vtorygin and E.A. Goryacheva S.P._Goryacheva S.P. Levichev N.V._Levichev N.V. Mizulina E.B._Mizulina E.B. Ostanina N.A._Ostanina N.A. [2009-07-15, CLEAR]

ORDER of the Ministry of Health and Social Development of the Russian Federation dated July 7, 2009 No. 415n

“ON APPROVAL OF QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIALISTS WITH HIGHER AND POST-GRADUATE MEDICAL AND PHARMACEUTICAL EDUCATION IN THE FIELD OF HEALTHCARE” (Registered with the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation on 07/09/2009 No. 14292) [2009-07-07 , ]

ORDER OF THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE RF DATED 07.07.2009 No. 415N

JOB DESCRIPTION FOR A 7TH GRADE PIANO AND GRANDS TUNER (O.M. Kabanov, 2009) Date 07/03/2009 Standard form number Developer O.M. Kabanov_O.M. Kabanov Source Kabanov O.M.

[2009-07-03, ]

DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 215694-5

“ON AMENDMENTS TO THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” (edition prepared by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation for the second reading on 07/01/2009) Who prepared the President of the Russian Federation_President of the Russian Federation [2009-07-01, OECT]

ORDER OF THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE RF DATED 06/24/2009 No. 365

“ON ESTABLISHING CONTROL FIGURES FOR ADMISSION OF CITIZENS FOR TRAINING IN POST-GRADUATE PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS IN STATE INSTITUTIONS OF SCIENCE UNDER THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION, IN 2 009 » [2009-06-24, ]

DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 215694-5

“ON AMENDMENTS TO THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” (edition adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in the first reading on June 24, 2009) Who prepared the President of the Russian Federation_President of the Russian Federation [2009-06-24, OECT]

DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 155209-5

“ON PROTECTING CHILDREN FROM INFORMATION THAT CAUSES HARM TO THEIR HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT” (ed., adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in the first reading on June 24, 2009) Prepared by Bednov A.V._Bednov A.V. Borzova O.G._Borzova O.G. Vasiliev V.A._Vasiliev V.A. Vtorygina E.A._Vtorygina E.A. Gerasimova N.V._Gerasimova N.V. Ivliev G.P._Ivliev G.P. Isaev A.K._Isaev A.K. Karpovich N.N._Karpovich N.N. Mizulina E.B._Mizulina E.B. Morozov O.V._Morozov O.V. Mukabenova M.A._Mukabenova M.A. Ostanina N.A._Ostanina N.A. Pligin V.N._Pligin V.N. Rodnina I.K._Rodnina I.K. Yakovleva T.V._Yakovleva T.V. Yarovaya I.A._Yarovaya I.A. [2009-06-24, OECT]

EXPLANATORY NOTE

“TO THE DRAFT FEDERAL LAW “ON AMENDING THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” Who prepared the President of the Russian Federation_President of the Russian Federation [2009-06-24, YASNITELNA]

DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 215694-5

“ON AMENDMENTS TO THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” (as amended by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation) Who prepared the President of the Russian Federation_President of the Russian Federation [2009-06-24, OECT]

ORDER of Rosstat dated June 10, 2009 No. 111

“ON THE PILOT SURVEY “FAMILY AND FERTILITY” [2009-06-10, IKAZ]

MOSCOW HEALTH DEPARTMENT DATED 06/03/2009 No. 12-18-10853

[2009-06-03, ]

Department of Health of Moscow dated 06/03/2009 No. 12-18-10853

[2009-06-03, ]

ORDER of the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 20, 2009 No. 97

"ON APPROVAL OF THE TABLE OF STATISTICAL REPORTING FORMS ON THE ACTIVITIES OF FEDERAL COURTS OF GENERAL JURISDICTION AND JUSTICES OF THE MAGISTRY, SAMPLES OF STATISTICAL REPORTING FORMS" [2009-05-20, ]

ORDER OF THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE RF DATED 20.05.2009 No. 257

“ON THE LIST OF RESEARCH WORKS PERFORMED BY FEDERAL STATE INSTITUTIONS OF SCIENCE AND EDUCATION, SUBJORGED TO THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE RUSSIA, IN 2009-2011” [2009-05-20, ]

ORDER OF THE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT AT THE SUPREME COURT OF THE RF dated May 20, 2009 No. 97

“On approval of the Table of statistical reporting forms on the activities of federal courts of general jurisdiction and justices of the peace, samples of statistical reporting forms” [2009-05-20, ]

OFFICIAL REVIEW OF THE Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 18, 2009 No. 1/obshch-1258

“ON THE DRAFT FEDERAL LAW “ON AMENDING THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” Who prepared the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation_Supreme Court of the Russian Federation [2009-05-18, ]

“CALENDAR FOR CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES BY THE STATE DUMA FROM MAY 6 TO MAY 22, 2009” Prepared by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation_State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation [2009-05-18, ]

FEDERAL LAW No. 71-FZ dated April 28, 2009

“ON AMENDING THE FEDERAL LAW “ON BASIC GUARANTEES OF CHILD’S RIGHTS IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” (adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on April 15, 2009) [2009-04-28, ]

DECISION of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation dated April 24, 2009 No. 2025-5 State Duma

“ON THE CALENDAR FOR CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES BY THE STATE DUMA FROM MAY 6 TO MAY 22, 2009” [2009-04-24, ]

ORDER of the Ministry of Health and Social Development of the Russian Federation dated April 23, 2009 No. 210n

“ON THE NOMENCLATURE OF SPECIALTIES OF SPECIALISTS WITH HIGHER AND POST-GRADUATE MEDICAL AND PHARMACEUTICAL EDUCATION IN THE FIELD OF HEALTHCARE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” (Registered with the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation on June 05, 2009 No. 14032) [2009 -04-23, ]

ORDER OF THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE RF DATED 04/23/2009 No. 210N

Federal Customs Service of the Russian Federation dated April 21, 2009 No. 14-42/17639

“ABOUT TRADEMARKS [2009-04-21, C]

Extract from the minutes of the meeting of the Council of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation dated April 21, 2009 No. 105 Who prepared the Council of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation_Council of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation

[2009-04-21, ]

DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE RF dated April 20, 2009 No. 48-o09-25 The verdict in the case of murder committed by prior conspiracy was left unchanged, since the court, having given a proper assessment of the testimony of other defendants changed at the trial, reasonably found the convict guilty of the crime and correctly qualified her actions, imposed punishment taking into account the nature and degree of public danger of the crime committed, the circumstances of the case, and personal information.

[2009-04-20, ]

DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 141018-5

“ON AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL LAW “ON THE BASIC GUARANTEES OF THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” (final edition adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on April 15, 2009) Prepared by the President of the Russian Federation_President of the Russian Federation [2009-04-15, OECT]

DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 141018-5

“ON AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL LAW “ON THE BASIC GUARANTEES OF THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” (ed., prepared by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation for the second reading on 04/15/2009) Who prepared the President of the Russian Federation_President of the Russian Federation [2009-04-15, OECT]

DECISION of the Committee on Civil, Criminal, Arbitration and Procedural Legislation dated 04/09/2009 No. 56(8)

“On DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 112803-5 “On AMENDING THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” Who prepared the Committee of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on civil, criminal, arbitration and procedural legislation_Committee of the State Duma of the Federal Meetings of the Russian Federation on civil matters, criminal, arbitration and procedural legislation [2009-04-09, ]

DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 141018-5

“ON AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL LAW “ON THE BASIC GUARANTEES OF THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” (ed., prepared by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation for the second reading on 03.25.2009) Who prepared the President of the Russian Federation_President of the Russian Federation [2009-03-25, OECT]

OFFICIAL REVIEW OF THE RF Government dated March 24, 2009 No. 1143p-P4

“ON THE DRAFT FEDERAL LAW “ON AMENDING THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF STRENGTHENING RESPONSIBILITY FOR CRIMES AGAINST SEXUAL INTEGRITY OF MINORS” Prepared by the Government of the Russian Federation_Government of the Russian Federation [2009-03-24, ]

EXPLANATORY NOTE

“TO THE DRAFT FEDERAL LAW “ON AMENDING ARTICLE 331 OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” Prepared by Kapur M.M._Kapura M.M. Kostoev I.M._Kostoev I.M. Mironov S.M._Mironov S.M. Chechenov Kh.D._Chechenov Kh.D. [2009-03-24, CLEAR]

ORDER of the Investigative Committee under the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation dated March 19, 2009 No. 6

“ON THE APPROVAL AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STATISTICAL REPORTING FORM “REPORT ON THE WORK OF INVESTIGATIVE BODIES OF THE INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEE AT THE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AT THE PRE-TRIAL STAGE OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS” IN THE SYSTEM OF THE INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEE AT THE PRO PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION » [2009-03-19, ]

REPORT ON THE WORK OF INVESTIGATIVE BODIES OF THE INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEE AT THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AT THE PRE-TRIAL STAGE OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS. FORM No. 1-B-SKP (DSUS) (Order of the Investigative Committee at the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation dated March 19, 2009 No. 6) Date 03/19/2009 Standard form number 1-B-SKP (DSUS) Developer Investigative Committee at the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation_Investigative Committee at the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation Source Order of the Investigative Committee under the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation dated March 19, 2009 No. 6

[2009-03-19, ]

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation dated March 10, 2009 No. 06-224 (together with

“RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE ORGANIZATION IN THE ENTITIES OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION OF WORK TO PREVENT CHILD ABUSE “) [2009-03-10, ]

ORDER of Rosstat dated February 26, 2009 No. 34

“ON THE APPROVAL OF STATISTICAL INSTRUMENTS FOR ORGANIZING STATISTICAL MONITORING OF THE ACTIVITIES OF INVESTIGATIVE BODIES AND INQUIRY BODIES, CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATIONS AND REPORTS ABOUT A CRIME” [2009-02-26, IKAZ]

REPORT of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation dated February 17, 2009

“REPORT OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION FOR 2008” [2009-02-17, ]

DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 141018-5

“ON AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL LAW “ON THE BASIC GUARANTEES OF THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” (as amended by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in the first reading on 01/28/2009) Who prepared the President of the Russian Federation_President of the Russian Federation [2009-01-28, OECT]

EXPLANATORY NOTE

“TO THE DRAFT FEDERAL LAW “ON PROTECTING CHILDREN FROM INFORMATION THAT CAUSES HARM TO THEIR HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT” Prepared by Bednov A.V._Bednov A.V. Borzova O.G._Borzova O.G. Vasiliev V.A._Vasiliev V.A. Vtorygina E.A._Vtorygina E.A. Gerasimova N.V._Gerasimova N.V. Ivliev G.P._Ivliev G.P. Isaev A.K._Isaev A.K. Karpovich N.N._Karpovich N.N. Mizulina E.B._Mizulina E.B. Morozov O.V._Morozov O.V. Mukabenova M.A._Mukabenova M.A. Ostanina N.A._Ostanina N.A. Pligin V.N._Pligin V.N. Yakovleva T.V._Yakovleva T.V. Yarovaya I.A._Yarovaya I.A. [2009-01-28, CLEAR]

DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 155209-5

“ON THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM INFORMATION THAT CAUSES HARM TO THEIR HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT” (ed., included in the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation) Prepared by Bednov A.V._Bednov A.V. Borzova O.G._Borzova O.G. Vasiliev V.A._Vasiliev V.A. Vtorygina E.A._Vtorygina E.A. Gerasimova N.V._Gerasimova N.V. Ivliev G.P._Ivliev G.P. Isaev A.K._Isaev A.K. Karpovich N.N._Karpovich N.N. Mizulina E.B._Mizulina E.B. Morozov O.V._Morozov O.V. Mukabenova M.A._Mukabenova M.A. Ostanina N.A._Ostanina N.A. Pligin V.N._Pligin V.N. Yakovleva T.V._Yakovleva T.V. Yarovaya I.A._Yarovaya I.A. [2009-01-28, OECT]

EXPLANATORY NOTE

“TO THE DRAFT FEDERAL LAW “ON AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL LAW “ON BASIC GUARANTEES OF THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” AND TO SEPARATE LEGISLATIVE ACTS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION FOR THE PURPOSES OF ENSURING CHILDREN’S RIGHTS TO HEALTH AND SECURITY VITIA » Who prepared Borzova O.G._Borzova O. G. Vasiliev V.A._Vasiliev V.A. Gerasimova N.V._Gerasimova N.V. Ivliev G.P._Ivliev G.P. Isaev A.K._Isaev A.K. Mizulina E.B._Mizulina E.B. Morozov O.V._Morozov O.V. Pligin V.N._Pligin V.N. Yakovleva T.V._Yakovleva T.V. [2009-01-28, CLEAR]

ORDER OF FMBA RF DATED 23.01.2009 No. 24

“ON IMPROVING THE WORK OF CERTIFICATION OF SPECIALISTS FOR A QUALIFICATION CATEGORY” (TOGETHER WITH “REGULATIONS ON THE CERTIFICATION COMMISSION OF THE FEDERAL MEDICAL-BIOLOGICAL AGENCY”) [2009-01-23, IKAZ]

OFFICIAL REVIEW OF THE RF Government dated January 22, 2009 No. 181p-P4

“ON DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 112803-5 “ON AMENDING THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” Prepared by the Government of the Russian Federation_Government of the Russian Federation [2009-01-22, ]

OFFICIAL REVIEW OF THE RF Government dated January 21, 2009 No. 155p-P4

“ON THE DRAFT FEDERAL LAW “ON AMENDING THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION” Prepared by the Government of the Russian Federation_Government of the Russian Federation [2009-01-21, ]

CONCLUSION of the Committee on Family, Women and Children dated January 20, 2009 No. 3.6-12/34

"ON DRAFT FEDERAL LAW No. 141018-5 "ON AMENDING THE FEDERAL LAW "ON BASIC GUARANTEES OF CHILD'S RIGHTS IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION" Who prepared the Committee of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on Family, Women and Children_Committee of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on Family, Women and children [2009-01-20, ]

All pages:

[
1
][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22]