To the question about the concept of “Economic criminality”
- Тип работы:
- Экономические науки
Узнать стоимость новой
Детальная информация о работе
Выдержка из работы
Section 11. Science of law
12. Yerali A., Baimuratova K. A., Omar B. Economical jurisprudence is the innovative prosperity adapted for market relations. Life Science Journal 2014−11 (12s): 732−736] (ISSN: 1097−8135). [Electronic resource]. — Available from: http: //www. lifesciencesite. com. 158
13. История специализированного межрайонного экономического суда Мангыстауской области. Ш. О. Есба-ганбетов, Председатель специализированного межрайонного экономического суда Мангыстауской области// [Электронный ресурс]. — Режим доступа: http: //www. mangoblsud. kz/?action=contents&-lan=kaz&-page=115
Master of Legal Sciences, Lecturer of the Department of Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Science of Law Faculty of the Kazakh National University named after Al-Faraby
E-mail: lilek1989@mail. ru Bazilova Aigul Abayevna, Master of Legal Sciences, Lecturer of the Department of Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Science of Law Faculty of the Kazakh National University named after Al-Faraby Kusmambetov Kyanysh Daniyarovich, Master of Legal Sciences, Assistant of the Department of Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Science of Law Faculty of the Kazakh National University named after Al-Faraby
To the question about the concept of «Economic criminality»
Abstract: This article is the result of the authors'- complex investigation of such social and legal phenomenon as economic criminality. Economic crimes develop, their new types appear, methods of crimes are created on the modern stage of the world community development. The authors made their own conclusions regarding the term of «economic criminality& quot- on the basis of examination of these works.
Keywords: economic crime, commercial criminality, corporate criminality, ownership, and economic relations.
New kinds of crimes directly connected with activity in this sphere appear due to the transit to market economy. Disputes regarding determination of the category of these crimes still arise in science from the beginning of the last century and up to the present moment. Various definitions of economic criminality exist.
The author of special investigation of the problem of economic criminality in the countries with developed market economy E. E. Dementyeva noted that interest to this theme in the west criminology arose already in the beginning of the XX century. Criminality of the poor layers of the population including stealing and other offences against ownership, begging, vagrancy was considered as economic criminality during that period. Fundamentally, the other approach started to be formed only in the middle of the century, in compliance with which the crimes of so called «white collars» were regarded as economic crimes, then a number of economic crimes include a wider range of criminal actions connected with economic power abuse [1, 12].
For the first time the public knew about it as the phenomenon of «white collar criminality» from the works of American criminologist E. Saterland. Thus, in 1940 Edwin Saterland proposed the concept of respectable «white-collar criminal» having higher social status. According to this concept, major
of so named «white collars» are wealthy people: businessmen, politicians, clerks who execute illegal actions causing common nuisance, than usual criminals from lower society layers («criminals»). Besides, crimes of this rarely judged part of public are often left unpunished [2, 43].
E. Saterland proposed to include them in the subject of researches of criminologists and keep rather intensive struggle with them than with common crimes [2, 46].
In Sweden a well-known criminologist B. Swensson proposed the definition of economic crimes ac continuous, systematic, punishable offence of selfish nature executed within commercial activity which forms the basis of this offence [5, 25].
V. N. Burlakov noted that central problem is in the selection of criteria of crime qualification as economic one, and, therefore, in the determination of the borders of social phenomenon of «economic crime» It is a case of consideration of this phenomenon from criminological or more properly social and criminological positions. Regarding criminal and legal approach the borders of primary concept of «economic crime» in the opinion of a range of domestic specialists are hardly possible to determine [3, 254].
Efforts to classify existing approaches to determine a crime range which falls into the concept of «economic crimes» could be found in special literature. For instance, G. K. Mishin
To the question about the concept of «Economic criminality»
emphasizes three groups of various approaches (positions). Followers of the first group refer all crimes committed with the purpose of gaining economic benefit (richness) to economic crimes, and include crimes against ownership (property) in this group without any restrictions. Followers of the second group exclude crimes against ownership not connected with commercial activity from the group of economic crimes. Representatives of the third group recognize economic crimes as crimes of legal persons (commercial subjects) [4, 38].
Secondly, economic crimes committed in the sphere of economics can be regarded as economic ones. Therefore, the category of economic crimes will include criminal actions within direct execution of economic activity, not connected with it, but within functioning commercial system. In the last case we have to name crimes as economic, such as production stealing made by wage and salary workers.
Finally, thirdly, the category of economic crimes can include the crimes committed only in key economy segment (system of management), connected with gaining income, that is in the sphere of economic activity = sphere of entrepreneurship, business. Only criminal actions of the subjects of this entrepreneurship (business) themselves committed by them directly during economic activity are reasonable to be considered with this approach.
Economic crime, in the opinion of A. M. Yakovlev, «is expressed in the combination of selfish infringement against social ownership, national economy management order by persons executing certain functions in the system of economic relations» [5, 57].
Thus, professor A. I. Dolgova provides the following concept: «…Economic crime is the combination of selfish infringement against property used during commercial activity, established order of economic process management and economic rights of citizens by persons executing certain functions in the system of economic relations» [6, 268].
I. I. Rogov specified that only «economic activity punished in criminal order is covered with the concept of economic criminality» [7, 91]. Otherworldly, the author, firstly, limits the sphere of economic crimes with the actions connected only with commercial activity. Secondly, he limits his own research only with legal, criminal and judicial concept of economic criminality.
The category of «economic crime» was further developed in program article on this theme published in 1992 by A. M. Medvedev. Economic crimes were defined by this author as «in the broadest form», as well as «socially-dangerous acts infringed against economy as the combination of industrial (economic) relations and causing material loss of it'! In this regard, A. M. Medvedev fairly noted that with traditional approach to the definition of the subj ect of crimes (including economic crime) as public relations, participants themselves do not draw their attention to the last. «Meanwhile, the author continues, participants of economic relations are certain people acting as product manufacturers and product consumers, owners having certain economic rights and freedom, demands and concerns infringed by economic crimes».
«Thus, — the conclusion was made in the article, — it can be said, that economic crimes infringe against economy, right, demands and concerns of the participants of economic relations, violate the functioning of economic (commercial) mechanism, cause material loss to these social values» [8, 81].
Others, on the contrary, believed that commercial crimes were a variety of economic crimes. For instance, B. V Vol-zhenkin  shared the position of this group of authors, N. F. Kuznetsova thought that economic crime includes infringement against ownership and business crimes (implying all commercial crimes committed as in state, so in private sector ofeconomy) [10, 12], L. D. Gaukhman and S. V. Maximov refer commercial crimes to the crimes in the sphere of economy, together with more two categories — «other state crimes infringed against economic interests of the nation» and «crimes against ownership» [11,12].
E. E. Dementyeva, summarizing the results of own research of corporate crimes which form the basis of economic criminality in the countries with developed market economy, provides somewhat different classification of these types:
1) crimes including misuse of capital investments and causing damage to partners, shareholders and etc. -
2) crimes including misuse of deposit capital and causing damage to creditors, guarantors (false bankruptcy causing damage to creditors, fraud in insurance sphere) —
3) crimes connected with violation of the rules of free competitiveness (industrial spying, artificial increase or decrease of prices) —
4) crimes including violation of the consumer'-s rights (production of non-qualitative products resulted in physical damage to consumers) —
5) crimes infringed on the state financial system (income concealing, tax evasion) —
6) crimes connected with illegal nature use and causing damage to environment (environment pollution) —
7) crimes including contrivance in the sphere of social insurance and pension provision, also crimes connected with deliberate violation of safety rules causing material and physical damage to employees-
8) commercial bribes-
9) computer crimes [1, 43].
Making conclusions, the following features of economic criminality which determine the specific nature of this phenomenon of delinquent behavior predominantly in the sphere of entrepreneurship and business can be emphasized:
1) performance in the sphere of entrepreneurship, business undercovered by legal economic activity.
2) performance directly during economic (entrepreneurship) activity, within its border lines and competence.
3) execution of entrepreneurship (business) by the subjects.
4) using criminal methods of acquiring economic benefits during legal economic activity, parasitizing on economic and legal conditions in the official (permitted) market economic medium.
Section 11. Science of law
5) high social status of businessmen and high credit of trust to it by public, prostituted by businessmen delinquents, which serve as undercover to carry out their criminal activity.
6) anonymity, absence of victim personification.
7) lack of direct contact with victim.
8) peculiarity and majority of offence subjects.
9) peculiarity of the subjects of economic criminality.
10) mass and generic nature of crimes.
11) crimes secrecy.
12) selfish nature of crimes.
13) reference to the category of nonviolent crimes.
14) availability of phenomenon of insensible, indifferent attitude of public to economic criminality.
Thus, complex analysis of the subject matter of economic criminality, various approaches to its definition in the scientific society was carried out in this scientific article, own conclusions were also made concerning the nature of economic crimes, as well as its main characteristics.
1. Dementyeva E. E. Economic crime and struggle with it in the countries with developed market-based economy//Legal-ity. — No. 5. — M., 1992. — Р. 5−50.
2. Saterland E. White-collar crime. — New-York, 1949. — Р. 272.
3. Burlakov V. N. Criminology XX century. — Saint-Petersburg, 2000. — Р. 554.
4. Mishin G. K. Problem of economic criminality. Multi-disciplinary research experience. — M., 1994. — Р. 88.
5. Criminology. Text-book for legal higher educational institutions/Under the general editorship of the doctor of legal sciences, professor A. I. Dolgova. — M., 1997. — Р. 484.
6. Criminology: Text-book/Under the editorship of V N. Kudryavtsev, V E. Eminov — M., 1997. — Р. 316.
7. Rogov I. I. Economics and criminality. — Almaty, 1991. — Р. 159.
8. Medvedev A. M. Economic crimes: concept and system//Soviet state and justice. — No. 1. — M., 1992. — Р. 78−88.
9. Volzhenkin B. V Economic crimes. — SPb., 1999. — P. 312.
10. Kuznetsova N. F. Codification of the norm on economic crimes//Moscow University Messenger. Series 11. Legal right. -M., 1993. — C. 5−23.
11. Gaukhman L. D., Maximov S. V Criminal responsibility for crimes in the sphere of economics. — M., 1996. — Р. 290.
Dzhansarayeva Rima Yerenatovna, Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Head, Chair of Criminal Law, Criminal Process and Criminalistics, Doctor of Law, Professor
E-mail: jansarayeva@mail. ru Bissengaly Lilya Bissengalyevna, Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, assistant Chair of Criminal Law, Criminal Process and Criminalistics, master of jurisprudence
The definition of «extremism»
Abstract: On the basis of analysis of the definitions of «extremism& quot- in the contemporary scientific literature, its characteristics, forms of expression, is introduced into the scientific revolution the author’s definition of extremism and its symptoms, examines the ratio of extremism and terrorism.
Keywords: terrorism, countering, legal means, legislation, crime.
Extremism in the modern sense of the word is the embodiment of a certain kind of negative developments, which aim to generate members of the international community doubts about the possibility of maintaining stability in the world on the principles of democracy, respect for human rights and freedoms of man and citizen. Today extremism in one form or another is so firmly entrenched in many spheres of social life, that there is a need to give a legal response to this phenomenon. However, repeatedly made in recent years trying to discover the essence of extremism from the perspective of law, continue to cause controversy among lawyers about the possibility of a legal assessment of this phenomenon in principle.
In Encyclopedic Dictionary defines extremism as «adherence to extreme views, measures (usually in politics)» [1, 52]. However, this definition is vague and does not reflect all the features of this complex phenomenon. It should be noted that it is not clear what looks to be recognized «extreme», and what — no, and who will determine whether any specific extreme views. Any universal criterion for the interpretation of this concept has not yet produced as a conceptual analysis of the phenomenon of extremism in general and the construction of its theoretical models are just beginning to enter the research plans. In doing so, the notion of «views» and «measures» carry completely different meanings. Under the «look» with a certain approximation can be understood as