The police and issues of the fight against terror and extremism
Reference:
Bagandova L.Z.
Distinguishing the rehabilitation of Nazism from related crimes: theory and practice
// Police activity.
2024. ¹ 4.
P. 1-13.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0692.2024.4.71117 EDN: JJLQDC URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=71117
Abstract:
The subject of this study is the criminal law prohibition on the rehabilitation of Nazism, established by the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. The author emphasizes the importance of considering aspects of the qualification of this act in the presence of a large number of related crimes, which in all their elements are very close to the one under consideration. The article examines in detail such crimes that are classified as extremist, as well as vandalism, slander, destruction or damage to military graves, monuments, obelisks, other memorial structures or objects perpetuating the memory of those who died defending the Fatherland or its interests, or dedicated to the days of military glory of Russia. The author draws attention to the presence of similar features of the corpus delicti aimed at prohibiting the rehabilitation of Nazism with administrative offenses, in particular, with article 20.3 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. The methodology of the research consists of such methods as formal legal, logical, systematic, as well as the method of analysis. The novelty of this study lies in the complexity and comprehensiveness of the consideration of the stated issues. The author argues that the difficulty of qualification lies in the fact that actions can simultaneously fall under both "extremist" crimes and directly under the corpus delicti, which enshrines the prohibition of rehabilitation of Nazism. The author concludes that the identification of extremism and the prohibition on the rehabilitation of Nazism is incorrect, and Article 354.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is special in relation to Article 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The author's special contribution is manifested in a large number of analyzed sources of judicial practice from different years, on the basis of which the author drew his conclusions and justified the terminology used by the legislator in constructing various provisions of Article 354.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Keywords:
Fascism, theory of qualification, Great Patriotic War, the multiplicity of crimes, a war veteran, a symbol of military glory, Nazi symbols, extremism, criminal legislation, rehabilitation of Nazism
Question at hand
Reference:
Kolichenko A.A., Mushakov V.E., Gracheva O.A.
Features of ensuring the confidentiality of information about a protected participant in criminal proceedings in the context of digitalization
// Police activity.
2024. ¹ 4.
P. 14-24.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0692.2024.4.71325 EDN: RRTPAI URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=71325
Abstract:
The use of information technology is undoubtedly a catalyst for the development of society and the state, but at the same time it creates certain risks for the protection of personal data of ordinary citizens, including citizens participating in criminal proceedings. This article is devoted to the growing problem of ensuring the confidentiality of information about a protected participant in criminal proceedings in the context of digitalization, which requires special attention. This problem seems relevant due to the fact that citizens often independently make public various aspects of their daily lives, posting information about themselves on the Internet, including the publication of text, photo and video materials, etc. For this reason, in order to ensure the confidentiality of information about the protected person in the context of digitalization, the removal from public access of personal data that allows identifying the protected participant in criminal proceedings is of particular relevance. The authors of the article used general scientific research methods (analysis, synthesis, deduction, induction, formal logical, forecasting) and private scientific research methods (statistical and formal legal). Based on the results of the study, the authors of the article came to the conclusion that in modern conditions the task of removing an exhaustive amount of personal data from public access is unsolvable, and therefore one should strive to minimize the possibility of disclosing confidential information about protected persons via the Internet. The authors propose, in order to ensure the confidentiality of information of a protected participant in criminal proceedings, that the investigator, interrogator or prosecutor who initiated the application of the security measure in question should inform participants in criminal proceedings about the need to take independent measures to remove digital traces on the Internet.
Keywords:
personal identification, victim, witness, law enforcement, interaction, investigator, information security, personal information, digitalization, criminal proceedings