Ensuring the peace and security of mankind in international humanitarian law and criminal law of the Russian Federation

Bagandova Leila Zakirovna ORCID: 0000-0001-5060-9015 Junior Researcher of the Scientific and Organizational Department; Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences 119019, Russia, Moscow, Znamenka str., 10, room 207 leyla.bagandova@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Ensuring the peace and security of mankind as a task of criminal law and an object of criminal law and international legal protection is closely linked to the provisions of international humanitarian law, since the rules of warfare established by it, if violated, threaten the peaceful coexistence of peoples and States. In this regard, it is advisable to consider the history of the development of the protection of the peace and security of mankind through the prism of the origin of legislation on war. Such representatives of Russian legal science as P.S. Romashkin, A.P. Trainin, V.M. Chkhikvadze, A.N. Savenkov, A.G. Zvyagintsev, A.G. Kibalnik and others also dealt with this problem.

The formation of legislation on the rules of warfare and its differentiation into fair and unfair (aggressive) has a long history. R.B. Dzeitova identifies two periods: 1) from 1919 until the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court; 2) after the adoption of the Rome Statute. The author divides the second period into separate time periods ^[1]. In our opinion, the proposed periodization is not entirely correct, since the peaceful settlement of international disputes and the renunciation of hostilities have been discussed before.

It seems that the periodization of the development and establishment of the prohibition of an act of aggression can be represented as follows:

1) 10th century – the first half of the 19th century. The period of the formation of the ban on unacceptable wars. The concept of "aggression" has not yet been discussed, but the concept of a just war has been developed. Separate legislative acts regulating the rules of warfare were adopted.

2) the second half of the 19th century – the middle of the 20th century. The period of the first attempts to develop the concept of "aggression", the adoption of the first multilateral international agreements aimed at the universal regulation of the rules of warfare;

3) the second half of the 20th century – the present. The legacy of the Nuremberg Tribunal and the adoption of more precise formulations and definitions. Aggressive war, its planning, preparation, unleashing and waging are recognized as the gravest international crime at the international level. The first period of the development of aggression is characterized by the significant influence of the Church on all social and military processes.

During the early and classical Middle Ages, religion played a major role in public life and government. She, in turn, preached only peace, and in this regard, in the middle of the tenth century, the bishops created the "Movement for the Peace of God." Using this movement, the church primarily fought against numerous internecine wars ^[2]. To do this, she had to develop the concept of a "just war." One of the first known agreements concluded within the framework of this concept is the Treaty near the village of Saint-Germain-Laprade in 975 ^[2]. Bishop Le Puy demanded that the lords take an oath to preserve peace and renounce violence against the church and the poor.

In 975, in Saint-Germain-Laprade, and then in 989 in the Cathedral of Charroux, measures were defined to protect the church and pets in case of aggression, pets, however, the Synod did not develop clear mechanisms to protect people. In 990, measures were developed to protect the merchant population. During the war, the destruction of mills, the ravaging of vineyards, and attacks on people walking or returning from church were condemned.

The events of 994 are considered significant, when at the congress of the clergy in Burgundy, the abbot of the Cluny monastery, Odillon, called for peace among Christians and outlined its conditions. He demanded that the holy nobility avoid wars in every possible way, called on the lords to conclude alliances and observe peace on Saturdays and Sundays, as well as during church holidays.

In the 30-40s of the 11th century, the number of conciliar decrees on the establishment of "God's peace" decreased, but at the same time the number of oaths on "God's truce" increased. "God's peace" is the protection of vulnerable segments of the population from the effects of war, and "God's truce", in turn, represents the exclusion of war in certain periods of time. The apogee of the "Peace Movement" reached in 1054, when the canons of the Narbonne Cathedral appeared. They proposed extending the truce to numerous church holidays, which, when recalculated, amounted to 285 days per year. There were about 80 days left to wage the war. The ban, however, did not apply to those who fought against violators of "God's peace." The first attempt to create a special army (militia) for the guardians of "God's peace" ended in failure, when in 1038 the Berry peasants, at the call of the Archbishop of Bourges, besieged the castle of Sira de Deol. Money was needed to maintain the special forces, so the "God's world" itself turned into a source of extortion, which very soon became known as "bad customs" (mals usos) – like seigneurial payments and duties.

At the turn of the Middle Ages and Modern times, documents on the limitation of the use of military force or its individual manifestations were often formed as part of military campaigns. Thus, in 1621, King Gustav II Adolf of Sweden signed the "Military Article" when sending Swedish troops into battle with Russian troops. This legislative act covered a wide range of public relations – only six "Military Regulations" contained norms on the classical laws of warfare, in particular, the regulation of attacks on women, unauthorized attacks on settlements, as well as looting and arson of churches and hospitals ^[3].

Until the second half of the 19th century, even before the appearance of multilateral international treaties, a number of principles of warfare were included in bilateral treaties. The Treaty of Friendship and Trade concluded between the United States and Prussia in 1785 provided for provisions on compliance with the rules in the event of war between the parties to the agreement. Article 23 of the document defines the inviolability of merchants, women, scientists, farmers, and other persons "whose activities are aimed at ensuring the general existence and well-being of mankind." Article 24 regulated relations regarding the detention of prisoners of war: "And in order to prevent the destruction of prisoners of war by sending them to remote and harsh countries or placing them in cramped and harmful places, the two Contracting Parties solemnly promise each other and the whole world that they will not apply such practices (Treaty of amity and commerce between His majesty the King of Prussia, and the United States of America; September 10, 1785 [Electronic resource] // URL: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/prus1785.asp (date of access: 12/18/2024).

The issue of the moment of the appearance of the first international multilateral treaty establishing the rules of warfare and ensuring the security of mankind is debatable. There is a position in the scientific literature that the Paris Peace Treaty of 1856, concluded as a result of the Crimean War, should be considered as such. The author points out that the Paris Declaration is one of the first examples of an indefinite multilateral treaty, which, according to its terms, is open for accession by all other States of the world (Declaration Respecting Maritime Law, 115 ConTS 1 (signed and entered into force 16 April 1856). This indicates the formation of universal law, recognized and applied by all States. In addition to the original seven signatory States of the Declaration (Austria, France, Prussia, Russia, Sardinia, Turkey and the United Kingdom), within two years at least 41 maritime states joined the Paris Declaration, and three more did so before 1914. O.V. Ilyinskaya, on the contrary, believes that "the first reaction The second Hague Convention of 1907 was the reason for the excessive use of armed reprisals" ^[4]. Several States that joined this agreement were non-European. We believe that it is impossible to fully agree with the point of view that the Paris Treaty is the first international multilateral treaty establishing the rules of warfare and ensuring the peace and security of mankind, since the Paris Declaration covered a limited range of issues related exclusively to the conduct of military operations on water. Indeed, this document should be considered one of the first in the context of the formation of the law of war, but not the entire international humanitarian law. In particular, it does not regulate issues of peace and security (Declaration Respecting Maritime Law. Paris, April 16, 1856 [Electronic resource] // URL: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/paris-decl-1856/declaration?activeTab=undefined (date of request: 12/18/2024). We partially share the opinion of O.V. Ilyinskaya – the documents adopted following the Second Hague Conference did have a significant impact on the formation and development of international humanitarian law, however, in our opinion, the emergence of modern international humanitarian law in terms of regulating relations to ensure peace and security of mankind is associated with the approval of three main legislative acts: "Instructions for the government of the Armies of the United States in the field" 1863 (Lieber's Code), the Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Active Armies of 1864 and the St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868.

The Lieber Code is a document regulating relations under martial law and military jurisdiction, prisoner exchanges, armistice and surrender, assassination and insurrection, as well as the protection of individuals, especially women, religion, art and sciences. The instruction defines all permissible actions in the context of warfare, however, it also provided for prohibitions on certain types of behavior of the parties: "manifestations of cruelty, i.e. the use of suffering ... torture ... senseless devastation of localities" are not allowed ^[5]. A person who abuses during a war is subject to the laws of retaliation ^[6]. Prisoners of war were forbidden to be treated as enemies and to take measures leading to shame, mutilation and suffering. Thus, the beginning of the legal responsibility for the use of prohibited means of warfare, looting and genocide was laid.

In 1864, the First Geneva Convention was signed, which officially and definitively established the basic principle of modern international law – warfare is possible only against enemy armed forces, and military actions against civilians, prisoners of war, sick and wounded are prohibited. The provisions of the international treaty also provide for the protection of medical units and sanitary vehicles. To accomplish this task, it was envisaged to create distinctive emblems.

The St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868 made a significant contribution to the formation of legislation aimed at ensuring the peace and security of mankind. The preamble of the Declaration states that during a war, States should pursue only one legitimate goal – the weakening of the enemy's military forces. In pursuance of the above-mentioned principle, this document established a ban on the use of a specific type of ammunition that is capable of causing serious harm to health and serious injury (bullets exploding when hitting a target), since "the use of such weapons would be contrary to the laws of humanity" (St. Petersburg Declaration on the Prohibition of the Use of Explosive Bullets [Electronic resource] // URL: https://docs.cntd.ru/document/901753623 ?ysclid=lvavan06o3221067852 (accessed: 04/18/2024).

In the 20th century, the formation of norms of international law on issues of ensuring peace and security of mankind continued. Thus, the Hague Conventions on the Laws and Customs of War were adopted, as well as the Geneva Conventions for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded and Sick Persons at Sea. After the First World War, a broad anti-war movement arose, under the influence of which the question arose of creating an international body whose competence would include ensuring peace between States. It became the League of Nations. The preamble to the Statute of the body in question recognized the need to "... make certain commitments not to resort to war ...". Article 11 of the Statute stated that "... any war or threat of war, whether it directly affects or not any of the members of the League, interests the League as a whole ...", and "... the latter must to take measures capable of truly protecting the world of nations" (Charter of the League of Nations [Electronic resource] // URL: https://yandex.ru/search /?text=%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%83%D1%82+%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B8+%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%B9&lr=213&clid=1955453&win=420&src=suggest_Dssm (accessed: 12/19/2024).

During the Second World War, a special commission for the investigation of crimes (London International Assembly) was established, which identified 4 groups of international crimes: preparation and conduct of aggressive war and acts of aggression; violation of the laws and customs of war; all internal and external crimes aimed at the destruction of a race, people or political party; crimes committed after the end of hostilities and directed against the restoration of peaceful coexistence of States and peoples ^[7]. The commission defined these acts as a group of war crimes, which it proposed to understand as "any gross violations of the law that violate the basic principles of criminal law recognized by civilized nations, committed during wartime or related to the preparation or conduct of war, or committed with the aim of preventing the restoration of peace" ^[7].

A detailed delineation of the crimes in question was implemented later. The brutal atrocities committed by the Nazis in the 1939-1945 war made it urgent to resolve the issue of developing an international policy to ensure peace and security of mankind. The League of Nations could not cope with the tasks assigned to it, and therefore the question arose of creating a new body that could achieve its goal of preventing further confrontations between States and saving future generations from the scourge of war. As a result of the discussions, the United Nations was formed in 1946.

After the end of World War II and with the creation of the United Nations, thanks to initiatives from the USSR, several international treaties were concluded to combat crimes against the peace and security of mankind. Thus, under the auspices of this organization, the development, signing and ratification of the most important international treaties took place, which formed the basis for the norms of the chapter and section "Crimes against the peace and security of mankind" in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. First of all, it is the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948 (Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide [Electronic resource] // URL: https://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventions/genocide.shtml (date of application: 12/18/2024), the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction in 1971 (Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction [Electronic resource] //URL: https://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventions/bacweap.shtml (date of application: 18.12..2024), Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Means of Influencing the Natural Environment, 1976. (Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Means of Influencing the Natural Environment [Electronic resource] // URL: https://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventions/hostenv.shtml (date of application: 12/18/2024), International Convention for the Suppression of the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries, 1989 (See: International Convention for the Suppression of the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries financing and training of mercenaries [Electronic resource] // URL: https://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventions/mercen.shtml (accessed: 12/18/2024), Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction of 1993 (Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction [Electronic resource] // URL: https://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventions/chemweapons.shtml (date of reference: 12/18/2024), etc.

The repulse of the Nazi invasion made it possible to hold the first war crimes tribunal in world history. The Nuremberg Trials began on November 20, 1945, and became the first trial in history aimed at bringing to justice those who had committed international crimes. The Nuremberg trials had a significant impact on the further development of international law. In particular, Article 6 of the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal provided for a list of international crimes for the first time in the history of international law.

All international crimes were divided into three groups.

The first group was crimes against peace, which included planning, preparing, unleashing and waging a war of aggression, war in violation of an international treaty, agreement or guarantee, as well as participation in a joint plan or conspiracy to commit any of the above actions.

The second group includes war crimes, which include murder, torture, enslavement or other purposes of the civilian population in the occupied territory, violations of the laws and customs of war, murder or torture of prisoners of war, wounded, sick or persons at sea, murder of hostages, robbery of public or private property (property), senseless destruction towns and villages and devastation not justified by military necessity.

The third group, crimes against humanity, includes murders, extermination, enslavement, deportation, or other atrocities committed against civilians before or during the war, or persecution on political, racial, or religious grounds for the purpose of committing them, regardless of whether these actions violate the national laws of the country in which they were committed., and fall under the jurisdiction of the courts.

Later, in 1991, the UN International Law Commission developed and adopted in the first reading a draft Code on Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, among which were highlighted: 1) aggression; 2) threat of aggression; 3) interference in the internal and external affairs of another State; 4) colonial rule and other forms of foreign domination; 5) genocide; 6) apartheid; 7) systematic and massive violation of human rights; 8) exceptionally serious war crimes; 9) recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries; 10) international terrorism; 11) illicit drug trafficking; 12) deliberate and serious damage to the environment (Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind [Electronic resource] // URL: https://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventions/code_of_offences.shtml (date of request: 12/18/2024).

The development of norms to ensure the peace and security of mankind within the framework of Russian criminal legislation has become necessary due to the ratification by the Russian Federation of a number of international treaties, thus, almost all crimes of this chapter are conventional. The exceptions are Articles 353-3541 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which prohibit the planning, preparation, unleashing, waging aggressive war and public calls for its unleashing, as well as the rehabilitation of Nazism, since such structures were introduced into international law by two documents – the Verdict of the International Military Tribunal for the Trial and Punishment of the Main War Criminals of the European Axis (Nuremberg Tribunal) and Resolution 3314 (XXIX) of the UN General Assembly of December 14, 1974 "Definition of aggression", none of which is an international treaty. In this regard, in our opinion, it is more correct to refer these crimes not to conventional ones, but to "crimes under international law" ^[8].

In 1996, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation introduced a new section and chapter containing norms on responsibility for crimes against the peace and security of mankind. The legislator identified two groups of crimes – crimes against peace and crimes against the security of mankind, despite the fact that international law also provides for a category of war crimes. This legal technique raises a number of questions, since the legislator does not mention war crimes, although they are fixed in the chapter.

Section XII "Crimes against the peace and security of mankind" consists of a single chapter of the same name, in connection with which, in special studies, there is a point of view that the specific object in this case coincides with the generic one ^[9], however, it is advisable to distinguish them. The generic object of this group of crimes is social relations aimed at ensuring the peace and security of mankind. The main problem is that neither international nor national law has developed a generally accepted definition of peace. Back in the middle of the 19th century, the Mayor noted that "war is as old as humanity, but peace is a modern invention" ^[10]. A possible reason for this oversight is that, although "war can be considered as a separate event, limited by a relatively narrow time frame and space and involving mainly military interaction," peace is a complex relationship, the content of which is highly unclear.

The state of peace in the scientific literature is proposed to be understood as the "state of international peace" ^[11] – "the interests of observing universal peace and the rules of peaceful settlement of interstate disputes protected by international law", the security of individual states ^[12], their peaceful coexistence and cooperation ^[12], as well as the state of security and the absence of actual hostilities between by states ^[13]. The concept of peace as opposed to war is extremely inaccurate in the historical literature on international law. It is characteristic that the words "peace" and "war" are used with great ambiguity to simultaneously indicate both the presence or absence of facts of transnational violence and coercion, as well as the legal consequences that can be established by an authoritative decision due to the varying intensity of violence and coercion. A.N. Trainin wrote that "peace – the greatest social value" and the basis of international associations ^[14].

Currently, it is generally accepted that "peace is a normal order of human relations," while the definition of "peace" has not been developed either in international, foreign, or national regulatory legal acts. The concept of the category "aggression", on the contrary, has been discussed and considered at the level of international organizations and military tribunals in considerable detail, so it seems possible to derive the definition of "peace" from the concepts of "aggression" enshrined in international documents. In accordance with the provisions of the 1933 Convention on the Definition of Aggression and UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX) of December 14, 1974, "Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as established in in this definition." Currently, it is generally accepted that "peace is a normal order of human relations," while the definition of "peace" has not been developed either in international, foreign, or national regulatory legal acts. The concept of the category "aggression" has been discussed at the level of international organizations and military tribunals in considerable detail, and in this regard, it is possible to deduce the definition of "peace" from the concept of "aggression" enshrined in international documents. Based on the definition developed by the UN General Assembly, aggression is understood as "the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other way inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as established in this definition" (The definition of aggression approved by resolution 3314 (XXIX) of the General Assembly United Nations General Assembly on December 14, 1974 [Electronic resource] // URL: https://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventions/aggression.shtml (date of request: 12/22/2024). The following definition of peace can be proposed: peace is a state of absence of the use of armed forces of States against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of each other, or armed organized non–State groups against States.

The definition of the term "security" is given in the federal legislation of Russia. According to Article 1 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation

"On Security" dated March 5, 1992, No. 2446-1 "security is a state of protection of vital interests... from internal and external threats" (Federal Law of the Russian Federation of March 5, 1992, No. 2446-1 "On Security" // SPS ConsultantPlus.). Thus, this is a state of protection for an indefinite circle of people from any threats encroaching on their vital interests. The list of "vital interests" of humanity is very wide and can hardly be exhaustively formulated in legislation, but based on a holistic understanding of crimes against the peace and security of mankind defined in international and national law, it is clear that these "vital threats" endanger the physical existence of humanity as a whole. Thus, the use of weapons of mass destruction threatens the existence of an indefinite circle of people, regardless of any of their characteristics.

The state of human security is the protection of humans as biological individuals, and this state, in our opinion, is broader in scope than the state of international peace, since it is not limited only to war and hostilities. The security of mankind also consists in protecting the "physical existence of an indefinite circle of people," which can happen both in the absence of violations of peaceful existence. A. Y. Ivanov defines the security of mankind as an absolute legal good. Thus, the security of mankind as an interest protected by criminal law is the state of protection of humanity as a whole or demographic groups from threats to their physical existence emanating from subjects of criminal law ^[15].

At the same time, it should be emphasized that the security of humanity has nothing to do with the legal status of war or armed conflict. For example, acts of genocide, whether global or regional, are most often committed during the war. In history, however, there are examples of genocide committed by one group or another during peacetime, or even by the ruling class against its own population. The tragedies that occurred in Cambodia and Rwanda have clearly shown that aggression is not necessary to commit genocide and crimes against humanity.

The section "Crimes against the peace and security of mankind" and its chapter of the same name contain 11 articles that establish 13 types of crimes. All crimes can be classified according to their specific object crimes against peace, crimes against the security of mankind and war crimes.

The first group includes planning, preparing, unleashing and waging a war of aggression, public calls for unleashing a war of aggression, the rehabilitation of Nazism, an attack on internationally protected persons or institutions, as well as an act of international terrorism.

Crimes against the security of humanity include genocide and ecocide.

The latter group of crimes includes the development, production, accumulation, acquisition or sale of weapons of mass destruction, looting, mercenary activities, as well as the use of prohibited means and methods of war.

The objective side of the crimes of all the considered groups is complex due to the presence of various signs. Thus, the rehabilitation of Nazism is expressed in two independent crimes, each of which is complex: the first is characterized by public denial of the facts established by the verdict of the International Military Tribunal, approval of the crimes mentioned in the aforementioned verdict, as well as the dissemination of deliberately false information about the activities of the USSR during the Great Patriotic War and its veterans; the second is expressed in public dissemination of information about the days of military glory and memorable dates of Russia related to the defense of the Fatherland and expressing obvious disrespect for society, as well as desecration of symbols of military glory of Russia, insulting the memory of defenders of the Fatherland or humiliating the honor and dignity of a veteran of the Great Patriotic War. 353 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation also establishes the corpus delicti, prohibiting a number of acts, the commission of one of which will already entail criminal liability – this is planning, preparing, unleashing an aggressive war. Waging an aggressive war is a continuing crime; the legal and actual moments of the end of the corpus delicti do not coincide. The actual moment of the end of the corpus delicti in question is the cessation by a State of war against another State, withdrawing its troops, withdrawing organized bandit formations, etc. The moment of the legal end of the corpus delicti is the moment when the violation of the criminal law prohibition established in law on planning, preparing, unleashing or waging aggressive war begins.

By the construction of the objective side, all the elements of the crime are formal. The exceptions are genocide, ecocide, and attacks on internationally protected individuals or institutions. There is a dispute in the doctrine about the construction of the corpus delicti constituting genocide. There are three main points of view: 1) it is a material composition, the consequence is the complete or partial destruction of these groups; 2) the composition is formal, since the moment of the end of the genocide is not associated with destruction, it is an element of the subjective side; 3) it is a formal and material composition. To understand the type of construction, an analysis of actions from the disposition of the norm should be carried out. Two of the five mentioned alternative actions constitute independent crimes – murder (Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and causing serious harm to health (Article 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Both compositions are material, i.e. they are considered finished from the moment the consequences occur, therefore, these compositions will form genocide only when socially dangerous consequences occur. 357 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are not related to the onset of consequences, respectively, the composition is designed according to the formal type. Therefore, in our opinion, genocide should be classified as a formal and material composition ^[16]. The corpus delicti provided for in Article 353 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is truncated: actions for planning and preparing an aggressive war form a truncated corpus delicti, since in their meaning they are preparations for a crime, but the legislator defines them as completed acts, and unleashing an aggressive war forms a formal corpus delicti.

The subjects of the crimes included in the section and chapter under consideration are persons who have reached the age of 16. The subject of certain types of crimes (art. 353 of the Criminal Code, art. 356 of the Criminal Code) is special. All crimes of the chapter in question are intentional.

The norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation providing for responsibility for crimes against the peace and security of mankind are blunt and require the use of special concepts that are established in normative legal acts of other branches of law, not only Russian, but also international law. Moreover, for the correct qualification of crimes against the peace and security of mankind, clear definitions in international legal acts, uniform approaches and a uniform understanding of formulations and terms by all States and law enforcement agencies are required. Thus, there are still no definitions of the concepts of "aggressive war", "rehabilitation of Nazism", "approval of crimes established by the verdict of the International Military Tribunal for the Trial and Punishment of the main War Criminals of the European Axis countries", "denial of facts established by the verdict of the International Military Tribunal for the Trial and Punishment of the main War Criminals of the European Axis countries" and others . In our opinion, it is necessary to develop these concepts, in particular, referring to the legislation of the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States. In 2021, the Republic of Belarus adopted the law "On Preventing the rehabilitation of Nazism", which reflected the main definitions of the act in question (Law of the Republic of Belarus dated May 14, 2021 No. 103-Z "on preventing the rehabilitation of Nazism" [Electronic resource] // National Legal Internet Portal of the Republic of Belarus. URL: https://pravo.by/document/?guid=12551&p0=H12100103 (accessed: 12/25/2024).

Criminal law prohibitions aimed at protecting the peace and security of mankind belong to the so-called general preventive ones, "designed more for the general prevention of these generally dangerous acts ^[17]. In this regard, the problem of studying and improving the norms on criminal liability for crimes against the peace and security of mankind is a particularly urgent task, the solution of which is an important prerequisite for preserving the peace and security of mankind.

Thus, the conducted research allowed us to come to the following conclusions: legislation on ensuring the peace and security of mankind began its formation in the early Middle Ages and reached its peak after the end of World War II; peace is a state in the absence of the use of armed forces of states against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of each other, or armed organized groups. non-state groups against States; Russian legislation reflects a number of prohibitions on committing crimes against the peace and security of mankind, but the very elements of these crimes are imperfect and need to be refined in terms of consolidating the basic definitions. In this regard, it seems advisable to develop and approve a resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation or a separate Federal law that would address the main problematic issues that cause difficulties in correctly classifying crimes against the peace and security of mankind.