Author

DESYATOVA O.V.

Title of article

THEINSTITUTIONOFCAUSINGHARMDURINGAPPREHENDINGTHEPERSON WHO COMMITTED A CRIME IN THE LEGISLATIONOF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND FOREIGN COUNTRIES

Section

Section 9. Comparative studiesand foreign experience

Issue, year

3 (49) 2019

Abstract

The article presents the results of the comparative legal analysis of the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation, Bulgaria, Latvia, Ukraine, Belarus, Azerbaijan, the Netherlands, China, Great Britain, the USA, and the Federal Republic of Germany concerning the regulation of such
circumstance excluding the criminality of the act as causing harm during apprehending the person who committed the crime. There is a great similarity of the relevant provisions of the criminal legislation
of the CIS countries, determined by the unity of the legal framework formed in the Soviet period. The problems arising when applying the norms of the considered institution are revealed. The analysis
of law enforcement practice showed that the subjective side of the actions of the person who carries out the apprehension is not always evaluated. This leads to incorrect qualification of his (or her)
actions both in the case of the person’s delusion regarding the validity of apprehending, and in case of exceeding the measures necessary to apprehend the person who committed the crime. The criteria of
legality of apprehending the person who has committed the crime are presented. Recommendations onqualification of actions in case of causing harm to the apprehended person, including the actual error,
are given.

Keywords

apprehending the perpetrator of crime; necessary defense; causing harm; excess ofmeasures; comparative legal analysis; qualification of actions; degree of public danger.

References

1. Popov K.I. Pravomernoe prichinenie vreda dlya dostizheniya obshchestvenno-poleznoy tseli [Legitimateinfliction of harm to achieve a socially useful goal]. Agrarnoe i zemel’noe pravo – Agricultural and land law, 2015, no. 4 (124), pp. 114-117.

2. Ugolovniy kodeks Respubliki Bolgariya [Criminal Code of the Republic of Bulgaria]. St. Petersburg, Yurid. tsentr Press Publ., 2001.298 p.
3. Sidorov B.V., Babichev A.G. Osobennosti ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti za ubiystvo pri prevyshenii mer, neobhodimyh dlya zaderzhaniya litsa, sovershivshego prestuplenie (voprosy primeneniya i sovershenstvovaniya ugolovnogo zakona) [Features of criminal liability for murder in excess of the measures necessary to detain the
person who committed the crime (questions of application and improvement of the criminal law)]. Vestnik ekonomiki, prava i sociologii. – Bulletin of Economics, Law and Sociology, 2015, no. 2, pp. 147-159.

4. Ugolovniy kodeks Latviyskoy Respubliki [Criminal Code of the Republic of Latvia]. St. Petersburg, Yurid. tsentr Press Publ., 2001. 313 p.

5. Ugolovniy kodeks Ukrainy [Criminal Code of Ukraine]. St. Petersburg, Yurid. tsentr Press Publ., 2001. 393 p.

6. Ugolovniy kodeks Respubliki Belarus’ [The Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus]. Minsk, Thesey Publ., 2001. 319 p.

7. Ugolovniy kodeks Azerbaydzhanskoy Respubliki [Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan]. St. Petersburg, Yurid. tsentr Press Publ., 2000. 356 p.

8. Ugolovniy kodeks Gollandii [The Criminal Code of Holland]. St. Petersburg, Yurid. tsentr Press Publ., 2000. 510 p.

9. Ugolovniy kodeks Kitayskoy Narodnoy Respubliki. St. Petersburg, Yurid. tsentr Press Publ., 2001. 303 p.

10. Sichinava I.R. Prichinenie vreda pri zaderzhanii litsa, sovershivshego prestuplenie (Ugolovno-pravovye aspekty). Kand. Diss. [Causing harm during the detention of the person who committed the crime (criminal law aspects). Cand. Diss.]. Rostov-on-Don, 2004. 182 p.

11. Milyukov S.F., Nikulenko A.V. Pravovoe regulirovanie prichineniya vreda prestupniku pri ego zaderzhanii v UK nekotoryh zarubezhnyh gosudarstv [Legal regulation of harming a criminal during his detention in the criminal code of some foreign countries]. Vestnik Rossiyskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. I. Kanta – Bulletin of the
Russian state University named after I. Kant, 2010, vol. 9, pp. 81-90.

12. Kondrashova O.V. Ugolovno-pravovaya otsenka prichineniya vreda pri zaderzhanii litsa, sovershivshego obshchestvenno opasnoe posyagatel’stvo. Avtoref. Kand. Diss. [Criminal-legal assessment of harm in the detention of a person who committed a socially dangerous assault. Autoabstract Cand. Diss.]. Omsk, 2004. 22 p.

13. Martsev A.I., Tsaregorodtsev A.M. Neobhodimaya oborona. Zaderzhanie prestupnika. Kraynyaya neobhodimost’ [Necessary defense. Detention of criminals. Emergency]. Omsk, Higher school of police of the USSR interior Ministry, 1987. 32 p.

14. Agapov P.V. [i dr.]. Aktual’nye problemy ugolovnogo prava [Actual problems of criminal law]. Moscow, 2016. 484 p.

15. [Bezborodov D.A., Zarubin A.V., Kraev D.Yu., Popov A.N.]. Aktual’nye problemy ugolovnogo prava: uchenie o prestuplenii [Actual problems of criminal law: the doctrine of a crime]. St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg. legal Institute (branch) of the Academy of the General Prosecutor of the Russian Federation, 2017. 188 p.

16. Skorilkina N., Kolomenskiy P. Znachenie ugolovno-pravovogo instituta zaderzhaniya litsa, sovershivshego prestuplenie, v prakticheskoy deyatel’nosti organov vnutrennih del [The value of the criminal law institute of detention of the person who committed the crime in the practice of the internal affairs bodies]. Ugolovnoe pravo
– Criminal Law, 2000, no. 4, pp. 33-35.

17. Savinov A.V. Prichinenie vreda pri zaderzhanii litsa, sovershivshego prestuplenie, kak obstoyatel’stvo, isklyuchayushchee prestupnost’ deyaniya. Kand. Diss. [Causing harm during the detention of a person who committed a crime, as a circumstance excluding the crime of an act. Cand. Diss.]. Moscow, 2002. 186 p.

18. Yakunina S.A. Prichinenie vreda pri zaderzhanii litsa, sovershivshego prestuplenie. Kand. Diss. [Causing harm during the detention of the person who committed the crime. Cand. Diss.]. Rostov on-Don, 2005. 214 p.