Justice

Introduction. The identity of a representative of the Russian social system at the turn of the first and second quarters of the twenty-first century is an important characteristic on which the stability and viability of Russia depends.

Methods. Philosophy is the most universal system of knowledge and experience, the quintessence of cultural development. Philosophy accumulates and uses the positive experience of all the most significant forms of mastering reality, and is also a meta-knowledge for all relevant practices of cognitive-transformative activity.

Results. The main issues to be considered within the framework of the problem of social identity are formulated. The etymology of the concept of “identity” and the varieties of its explications are considered. The most common meanings and modes of using the concept of “identity” are given. The variants of using this concept in relation to social systems and public relations are considered separately. The phenomena of identity and subjectivity are correlated as characteristics of participants in public relations.

Discussion and Conclusion. The relevance of the identity problem and the importance of forming a methodology for analyzing priority issues of this issue are substantiated. Further steps are outlined to detail and concretize the theoretical and practical components of a wide range of issues within the framework of the problem of social identity.

The "The Link of Times" column in the "Justice" Journal aims to introduce our readers to the achievements of Russian legal science that have theoretical, cognitive, and cultural value for today.

Introduction. The formulation of the research problem is associated with the presence of a number of questions related to the understanding of the institute “non-procedural contacts” both within the framework of professional (official) and other activities of judges. The purpose of the study is to analyze the provisions of the Basic Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Constitutional Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges of the Republic of Kazakhstan of the Republic of Kazakhstan”, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On the Supreme Judicial Council of the Republic of Kazakhstan”, the Code of Judicial Ethics, in the context of studying the phenomenon of “non-procedural contacts”. The objective of the study is to analyze the organizational and legal location of the institution of “non-procedural contacts” in the legal framework of the Republic of Kazakhstan, its formal and actual prospective legislative location in the legal “fabric” of the Republic of Kazakhstan and, as a result, the possibility of preventing future facts of non-procedural behavior and minimizing various consequences for both the judicial system of the country and the security of society as a whole.

Methods. The study was conducted using a set of methods, including legal analysis based on the study of official documents, regulatory legal acts and legal provisions governing judicial activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan. These methods contributed to a deep analysis of issues related to the use of “non-procedural contacts” by some unscrupulous judges in their professional judicial activities and to identify possible consequences for the legality and fairness of judicial decisions.

Results. Conclusions were formulated that the legal position of the term “non-procedural contacts” in Article 4 of the Code of Judicial Ethics of the Republic of Kazakhstan is not entirely justified. Considering that today the Code of Judicial Ethics of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 21, 2016 is not a “full-fledged” regulatory legal act adopted in accordance with the established legal procedure, but is recognized as an act adopted at the VII Congress, in fact, of the republican public association “Union of Judges of the Republic of Kazakhstan” and does not have actual legal force.

Discussion and Conclusion. Thus, the authors propose to enshrine the definition of “non-procedural contacts” in the current Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. This proposal is aimed at the official and legislative definition of the place of the institute of “non-procedural contacts” in the legislative framework of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the first step for the organizational and legal recognition of such a phenomenon in the activities of judges and its potential minimization for judicial and national security.

Introduction. The article presents a general legal analysis and juxtaposition of the two analogous agreements, mediating the relationships of public and private entities in the investment sphere: concession agreements and agreements on public-private (municipal-private) partnership. The analysis is carried out taking into consideration the lessons learned in the legal regulations, judicial and bidding practice.

Theoretical Basis. Methods. The theoretical basis for the study is rooted in the basic proceedings on economics and law in the sphere of public-private partnerships as well as the analytics of some international organizations. The research uses traditional methods such as dialectical, formal legal and comparative legal methods.

Results. Based on the belonging of the agreements in question to one group of public-private partnership treaties, similar elements of theirs are characterized. With this in mind, the mechanism of choosing the optimal contractual construction is described in the article. Basic dissimilarities of the agreements are also considered. The main one of them is definitely ownership rights to the object of the treaty. Moreover, the article touches on the practical problems and theoretical issues related to the topic, including the usage of some international experience.

Conclusion. Practical suggestions towards the improvement of the awarding and execution of the agreements are made, such as the necessity of registration of the ownership right for all of the projects implemented by the agreements on public-private partnerships. The author also mentions some theoretical aspects of shared ownership of public and private partners.

Introduction. The article is devoted to the criminal-legal assessment of the seizure of objects in metaverses. The author characterizes metaverses as one of the most promising areas of development of modern information and telecommunication technologies. Metaverses are fictional worlds with a multi-million audience and their own economy. It is not surprising that violations of rights, primarily economic ones, are becoming increasingly widespread in them. Violations of rights to other people’s objects in metaverses are registered all over the world. This practice is also widespread in the Russian Federation.

Methods. The problem of taking possession of objects in metauniverses is investigated by the author on the basis of the general dialectical method of cognition using general theoretical methods (analysis, synthesis, deduction, induction, logical, systemic) and specific scientific methods (formal-logical, legal analysis).

Results. There are several possible approaches to the qualification of seizure of someone else’s property in the virtual world. The first is a complete refusal to regulate such relations by the state. Some experts recognize the need to regulate these relations, but believe that the current criminal law does not contain suitable provisions. There is an opinion that virtual objects can be recognized as the subject of theft. Also in practice, there is a qualification of the described acts as unauthorized access to computer information.

Discussion and Conclusion. The author expresses his opinion on the advantages and disadvantages of the above approaches and substantiates his point of view that the appropriation of someone else’s property in the virtual world should be considered as a violation of the intellectual rights of the platform owner or another user. If the necessary qualifying features are present, such appropriation should be qualified as a crime against intellectual property.

Introduction. The specifics of appealing a verdict decided in a special procedure of judicial proceedings arise from the shortened procedure of judicial proceedings in which the verdict is decided, as well as the truncated content of the sentence. A significant reduction in the judicial investigation, which does not prove the guilt of the defendant, narrows the possibilities of appealing the verdict.

Methods. On the basis of the general dialectical method of cognition, using general theoretical methods (analysis, synthesis, deduction, induction, logical, systematic) and private scientific methods (formal logical, legal analysis), the author investigated the features of appealing to the court of appeal of sentences decided in a special order of judicial proceedings, and revealed their content.

Results. In this article, the author has identified and analyzed the main specific features that distinguish the appeal of a verdict decided in a special judicial procedure from the appeal of a verdict decided in the framework of an ordinary judicial procedure. Among the most important of these features, the author refers to: 1) narrowing the range of subjects of appeal: since only a guilty verdict can be issued in a special order, the justified person, as well as persons against whom a decision on the application of compulsory medical measures or minors to whom compulsory educational measures have been applied, cannot appeal against it; 2) reduction of the limits of appeal (the grounds for its appeal are narrowed – it is not allowed to appeal the inconsistency of the court’s conclusions with the actual circumstances of the case, since they were not investigated by the court and were not reflected in the descriptive and motivational part of the verdict); 3) substantial restriction of the rights of subjects of appeal proceedings (none of the participants in the process when filing appeals and submissions and their the court has no right to discuss issues of inconsistency of the conclusions of the court of first instance with the actual circumstances of the case).

Discussion and Conclusion. The author comes to the conclusion that the specifics of appealing a verdict decided in a special procedure of judicial proceedings to the court of appeal are related both to the content of the verdict itself and to the specifics of its decision.

Introduction. The article is devoted to the study of the problem of interstate unification of international crimes in various regions of the world (Africa, Latin America, CIS countries). It attempts to trace the extent to which national traditions and the specifics of criminal legislation contribute to (or hinder) the legally correct implementation of the provisions of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in domestic law. The purpose of the article is to clarify those legislative practices that are considered the most successful in the designated direction and can be taken into account in the process of state building in the post-Soviet space.

Methods. The basis of the study is the dialectical method of cognition, which allows studying the subject of research in relation to other legal phenomena, as well as general scientific and special legal methods, mainly comparative legal.

Results. The article states that the convergence of national legislations with the requirements and standards of international criminal law, on the one hand, enriches the legislation itself, contributing to its saturation with high-quality and long-tested provisions, far from considerations of political expediency, and on the other hand, serves the development of international criminal law regulation itself, since representatives of the states parties to the Rome Statute take part in the functioning of the working bodies of the International Criminal Court, the election of its judges and other forms of international cooperation. In addition, it is concluded that the consequence of the implementation of the norms of international criminal law is not so much the unification of national legislations, since the differences between them even within a single region remain striking, as the unification of the results of legal regulation of the relevant crimes in the direction of strengthening the fight against them.

Discussion and Conclusion. At present, the International Criminal Court continues to take an unfriendly position towards the Russian Federation. This has been expressed, among other things, in its issuance of arrest warrants for Russian citizens, despite the fact that our country ceased all cooperation with it back in 2016. However, it also continues to behave inconsistently towards other states, the consequence of which is the expected withdrawal of Hungary from the Rome Statute.