Russian Federation
Sankt-Peterburg, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
UDK 34 Право. Юридические науки
GRNTI 10.17 Административное право
OKSO 40.02.02 Правоохранительная деятельность
BBK 67 Право. Юридические науки
TBK 7535 Административное право. Муниципальное право
TBK 7581 Уголовное право
The relevance of the research is determined by a legal gap in the current legislation, which lies in the fact that when bringing a person who has committed a crime under Article 116.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation repeatedly in relation to the same person to responsibility, the state of the criminal record of this criminal is not taken into account. In this case, a person who has unexpunged or outstanding convictions, when committing battery for the third time, according to common sense, should be brought to criminal responsibility, and not to administrative responsibility, as is currently the case. In order to eliminate this conflict, the authors propose to include part 2 of Art. 1161 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for the liability of a person who has an unexpunged or outstanding conviction in relation to the same person. At the same time, the authors consider it necessary to include a group of criminal cases considered as cases of public prosecution to part 2 of Art. 1161 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The authors also see an urgent problem of the need to improve the effectiveness of the prevention of domestic violence through the inclusion of new legal means in legislation and law enforcement practice. Attempts to implement the norms of international acts providing for legal means of preventing domestic violence in the Russian Federation, as well as the study of foreign experience on this issue, according to the authors, looks ambiguous and is debatable. In particular, the issue of introducing protective orders and orders as administrative and legal means of preventing administrative offenses through the adoption of the federal law «On the Prevention of Domestic Violence in the Russian Federation» is being considered. According to the authors, taking into account the foreign practice, there are sufficient grounds to believe that protective prescriptions and some other means will not be able to confirm their effectiveness in Russia.
beatings, family and domestic relations, administrative prejudice, repetition, protective order, responsibility, prevention
1. Evsikova E. V. Organy vnutrennih del kak osnovnoy sub'ekt preduprezhdeniya domashnego nasiliya: sravnitel'no-pravovoy analiz // Uchenye zapiski Krymskogo federal'nogo universiteta imeni V. I. Vernadskogo. Yuridicheskie nauki. - 2016. - T. 2 (68). - № 2. - S. 17-31.
2. Voropaev S. A., Kosarev M. N. O nekotoryh problemah primeneniya norm ob otvetstvennosti za poboi // Vestnik Ural'skogo yuridicheskogo instituta MVD Rossii. - 2018. - № 4. - S. 95-98.
3. Sokol A. M. O problemnyh voprosah proizvodstva po delam ob administrativnyh pravonarusheniyah o melkom hischenii // Vestnik Ural'skogo yuridicheskogo instituta MVD Rossii. - 2017. - № 4. - S. 17-22.
4. Ravnyushkin A. V. Implementaciya rekomendaciy Soveta Evropy o zaschite zhenschin ot nasiliya v rossiyskoe administrativnoe zakonodatel'stvo: problemy i perspektivy // Altayskiy yuridicheskiy vestnik. - 2018. - № 2 (22). - S. 83-88.
5. Vittes K. A., Sorenson S. B. Restraining orders among victims of intimate partner homicide // Injury Prevention. - 2008. - 14(3). - S. 191-195. DOI: 10.1136 / ip.2007.017947
6. Malecha A., McFarlane J., Gist J., Watson K. B. Applying For and Dropping a Protection Order: A Stady with 150 women // Criminal Justice Policy Rewiew. - 2003 (December) - № 4(14) - P. 486-504. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1177/0887403403255496
7. Petrovskiy A. V. Problemy konstruirovaniya norm i institutov profilaktiki semeyno-bytovogo nasiliya // Yuridicheskiy vestnik Kubanskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. - 2020. - № 1. - S. 55-62.
8. Shvabauer A. V. Ugrozy i istoki zakonoproekta o profilaktike semeyno-bytovogo nasiliya // Kriminologiya: vchera, segodnya, zavtra. - 2020. - № 1 (56). - S.14-23.
9. Gurinskaya A. L. Konflikty cennostey v pravotvorchestve: politiko-pravovaya priroda i effektivnost' ohrannyh orderov kak instrumenta profilaktiki semeyno-bytovogo nasiliya // Politicheskaya nauka. - 2020. - № 3. - S. 215-242.
10. Zatolokin A. A. Administrativno-pravovoy status instituta zaschitnyh predpisaniy / Administrativno-pravovoe regulirovanie pravoohranitel'noy deyatel'nosti: teoriya i praktika: materialy Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferencii, Krasnodar, 19 iyunya 2020 g. - Krasnodar: Krasnodarskiy universitet MVD Rossii, 2020. - S. 112-116.
11. Kosenko A. A. K voprosu o primenenii zaschitnogo predpisaniya v prakticheskoy deyatel'nosti OVD / Bor'ba s prestupnost'yu: teoriya i praktika : tezisy dokladov III Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferencii. - V 2-h ch., Mogilev, 20 marta 2015 g. - Ch. 2. - Mogilev: Mogilevskiy institut Ministerstva vnutrennih del Respubliki Belarus', 2015. - S. 251-253.
