Abstract: In this article the author evaluates the theoretical problems regarding the institutional formation of the General Part of criminal law and its system. The analysis shows that the main goal of the General Part is to provide normative “service” to the two central categories: crime and criminal responsibility. The results of the studies substantiate the categorical character of these terms, showing their links to other phenomena. In the opinion of the author the system of institutions of the General Part of the criminal law is formed around these two categories, while not being limited to them. Based upon the results of the study the author concludes that the following institutions should be devoted to the category of crime in criminal law: the institution of definition and category of crime, including the sub-institution of situations excluding criminal character of an act; institution of persons subject to criminal responsibility; institution of guilt, including an sub-institution of situations excluding guilt; institution of attempted crime; institution of multiple crimes; institution of coparticipation in crime. Then, the institutions devoted to the category of criminal responsibility should be the following: institution of definition and goals of criminal responsibility; the institution of relief from criminal responsibility; institution of types and kinds of punishment; institution of assigning punishment; institution of relief from serving punishment; institution of confiscation of property and rules of its application; institution of compulsory measures of medical character and rules for its application; the institution of criminal record; institution of criminal responsibility of juveniles.

Keywords: jurisprudence, law, institution, system, order, norm, act, crime, punishment, responsibility.

References:
1. Abdurakhmanova A.A. Problemy instituta sudimosti v ugolovnom prave Rossii. Avto-
ref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. – Makhachkala, 2005.
2 Baulin Yu.V. Obstoyatel'stva, isklyuchayushchie prestupnost' deyaniya. – Khar'kov, 1991.
3. Blinnikov V.A. Sistema obstoyatel'stv, isklyuchayushchikh prestupnost' deyaniya, v ugolov-
nom prave Rossii. Avtoref. dis. ... d-ra yurid. nauk. – Nizhniy Novgorod, 2002.
4. Boyko A.I. Sistema i struktura ugolovnogo prava. V 3 t. T. 1. Sistemologiya i struktura-
lizm v sovremennoy poznavatel'noy kul'ture. – Rostov-na-Donu, 2007.
5. Vasil'ev A.M. Pravovye kategorii. – M., 1976.
6. Galiakbarov R., Efimov M., Frolov V. Mnozhestvennost' prestupnykh deyaniy kak institut
sovetskogo ugolovnogo prava // Sovetskaya yustitsiya. – 1967. – ¹ 2.
7. Galiakbarov R.R. Ugolovnoe pravo. Obshchaya chast'. Uchebnik. – Krasnodar, 1999.
8. Grammatchikov M.V. Sudimost': istoricheskiy, ugolovno-pravovoy i ugolovno-ispolni-
tel'nyy aspekty. Avtoref. dis. … kand

Abstract: The article includes analysis of the mechanism of transportation crimes, based upon the poly-ergatic nature of railway, waterway and air transportation and the mono-ergatic nature of automobile transportation. The author provides the classification of ergatic system, their correlation, he analyzes the topical issues regarding the mechanism of crime in general and reckless crime in particular, formulates the term for the mechanism of transportation crime, singles out its objective (technical system, information system, situation) and subjective (the person driving (controlling) the vehicle) elements. He shows the differences between the criminal law and forensic law definitions for the mechanisms of crime, discusses the ways of causing harm to the social relations on secure transportation functioning.

Keywords: jurisprudence, transportation, ergatic system, mono-system, poly-system, classification of ergatic system, transportation crime, forensic mechanism, criminal law mechanism, elements of mechanism, operator, technical system, information system, situation.

References:
Belokobyl'skii N.N., Chuchaev A.I. Mekhanizm transportnogo prestupleniya. — Saratov, 1991.
Bugaev B.P. Ergonomika i bezopasnost' poletov. — Kiev, 1974.
Vinokurov V.N. Ob''ekt prestupleniya: sposoby konkretizatsii, ustanovleniya i zakreple-niya v zakone. — Krasnoyarsk, 2010.
Volzhenkin B.V. Deterministicheskaya kontseptsiya prestupnogo povedeniya // Sov. gos-vo i pravo. — 1971. — ¹ 2.
Volkov B.S. Deterministicheskaya priroda prestupnogo povedeniya. — Kazan', 1975.
Gilyazev F.G. Nekotorye voprosy viny v kriminologii // Voprosy effektivnosti bor'by s prestupnost'yu i sovershenstvovanie zakonodatel'stva. — Ufa, 1975.
Grinberg M.S. Ob''ekt prestupleniya v oblasti ispol'zovaniya tekhniki // Problemy pravo-vedeniya. — Novosibirsk, 1976.
Gumerov I.A. Mekhanizm soversheniya dorozhno-transportnykh proisshestvii i osnovnye komponenty dorozhnogo dvizheniya, obespechivayushchie ego bezopasnost'. — Kazan', 2004.
Gushchin V.K. Bezopasnost' poletov letatel'nykh apparatov. — Riga, 1979. Vyp.

Abstract: The article is devoted to the issues of methodological understanding of the nature of economic crime, the author analyzes the causes for the appearance of this term, it dogmas and modern understanding of the elements of economic crimes. The author views various concepts and provides the ontological approach towards the essential elements of crimes against economic activity. Much attention is paid to the history of development of criminal legislation in the economic sphere, the author analyzes object and system of crimes against the economic activities (in the sphere of economic activities). Based upon the analysis of criminal legislation of Russia and Belarus, as well as the legal doctrine, the author points out the tendencies of development of the criminal law norms in the economic sphere, and he points out the tendencies for the development of criminal law norms in the economic sphere, as well as the conceptual bases for the formation of the object and system of economic crimes within the framework of new social market relations.

Keywords: jurisprudence, economic crimes, elements of crimes, crimes in the sphere of economy, property crimes, concepts of economic crimes, definition of crimes in the sphere of economics, crimes against property, object of crimes, system of crimes.

References:
Aistova L. Sootnoshenie norm chastnogo i publichnogo prava v prestupleniyakh v sfere eko-nomicheskoy deyatel'nosti // Ugolovnoe pravo. — 2004. — ¹ 4.
Belyaev N.A. O prestupleniyakh protiv sotsialisticheskoy sistemy khozyaystva po sovetskomu ugolovnomu pravu: avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. — L., 1954.
Blagov E.V. Prestupleniya v sfere ekonomiki. — M., 2010.
Volzhenkin B.V. Prestupleniya v sfere ekonomicheskoy deyatel'nosti (ekonomicheskie pre-stupleniya). — SPb., 2002.
Volzhenkin B.V. Ekonomicheskie prestupleniya. — SPb., 1999.
Gorelov A.P. Chto okhranyayut ugolovno-pravovye normy ob otvetstvennosti za ekonomiche-skie prestupleniya? // Zakonodatel'stvo. — 2003. — ¹ 4.
Gribov A.S. Differentsiatsiya otvetstvennosti za ekonomicheskie prestupleniya v Rossii, FRG i SShA (sravnitel'no-pravovoe issledovanie): avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. — Saratov, 2011.
Dmitriev O.V. Ekonomicheskaya prestupnost' i protivodeystvie ey v usloviyakh rynochnoy sistemy khozyaystvovaniya. — M., 200