Legal Nature of Failure to Enforce a Sentence

The adoption of Federal Law No. 10-FZ dated February 6, 2023 «On Probation in the Russian Federation» is an important event in the development of the modern legal system of Russia. The issue of the relationship between probation and penal legislation in the Russian Federation is of theoretical and practical importance in the areas of legal regulation and law enforcement. In the areas of penal and probation, there are legal relations conditioned on the execution of criminal penalties and other measures of a criminal nature imposed by the court. The general purpose of both the penal legislation of the Russian Federation and the Federal Law on Probation is to prevent the commission of repeated crimes. At the same time, with the adoption of the Federal Law on Probation, the scope of penal law in the Russian Federation is expanding. At the same time, it cannot be stated with certainty that the institute of probation is an integral part of the penal legislation. Penal and probation legal relations differ during the period of implementation of post-penitentiary probation. The subject of the Federal Law on Probation goes beyond the scope of the subject of penal legislation by regulating relations to provide assistance to persons released from punishment after serving a term of imprisonment or forced labor. In this connection, researchers note the intersectoral nature of probation, primarily post-penitentiary. Executive probation and penitentiary probation can be considered as an institution (sub-institute), a source of penal law. The Federal Law on Probation fills in the regulatory insufficiency of Russian penal law, defines the necessary directions for the development of penal legislation, determines the development of the doctrine of domestic penal law. Taking into account the common goals and differences between penal legislation and probation legislation, the necessity of delineating the spheres of their legal regulation is justified on the basis of determining the limits of penal relations operating during the execution of punishments and other measures of a criminal legal nature, as well as the limits of probation legal relations associated with the execution of punishments and other measures of a criminal legal nature, which then continue to be implemented within the framework of post-penitentiary probation.

Introduction: the paper investigates criminal and penal enforcement inconsistencies in the legislative regulation on the use of firearms by the staff of the penal system in their official activities. Legal details consist in the fact that we put forward scientifically substantiated proposals to reform criminal-legal and penal enforcement aspects associated with the use of firearms by employees (guns, submachine guns, rifles, which are operated by the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia). We analyze Article 86 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which establishes relevant security measures. We also consider the practice of foreign countries related to this problem. Aim: to investigate the criminal-legal and penal enforcement aspects related to the use of firearms by staff of the penal system for example, in relation to convicts. Methods: we use dialectical method as methodological and theoretical basis for the study, and deductive method to analyze the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation regarding the use of firearms. We also use systematized methods to study articles of the Criminal Code and the Penal Enforcement Code. They help to classify the legal facts that establish the legal right of staff to use firearms. We use empirical methods of mastering in order to improve penal officers’ performance in the use of firearms. The article presents the results of a survey of 318 employees. Results: we have investigated the essence of criminal-legal relations in terms of the use of firearms by employees of the penal system; we have also studied the practice of implementing the norms concerning the use of firearms by law enforcement officers; we propose a theoretical model for improving criminal legislation related to the use of firearms In addition, we provide scientifically substantiated ideas and empirical studies aimed at improving criminal and penal enforcement legislation on the use of firearms. Research findings of our paper include new ideas concerning the use of firearms within the boundaries of criminal and penal enforcement legislation (we suggest that the foundations associated with the use of firearms should be contained in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Key words: criminal legislation; penal enforcement legislation; use of firearms; legal facts; legal relations; security measures; Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia; penal enforcement system.

ABSTRACTThis article provides an extensive overview of major intellectual property rights (IPR) criminal enforcement agencies and judicial institutions; criminal enforcement rates and trends; recent major enforcement operations; and the substantive criminal IP law and sentencing regulations in the United States and China. Substantive criminal IP laws and enforcement practices manifest a consistent pattern of increased criminalisation of IP infringements and politically motivated sweeping campaigns to enhance enforcement in both countries, not only on the books but also in action. In addition, documentary and descriptive statistical analyses reveal that various aspects of the criminal enforcement institutions and practices in the two countries differ notably.Then a comparative legal analysis indicates that the U.S. criminal law on IP thefts is more updated and comprehensive with the promulgation of several new IP acts. In addition, types and severity of sanctions that IP offences carry diverge greatly between the two countries. More importantly, how punitive the system appears on the books does not always tally with what happens in practice. Finally, I provide policy recommendations for improving IP enforcement in China, from better and more frequent collaboration during enforcement to enhancing institutional capacity of the enforcement agencies. Recommendations are also made for China to modify its substantive criminal IP law and promulgate a detailed sentencing guideline.

The Private Enforcement of Law

In essence, law enforcement is a process of adjustment between values, rules and real behavior patterns that aim to achieve peace, so that the main task of law enforcement itself is actually an effort, activity or work so that the law is upright and peace is maintained. stand up. In order to achieve this goal, there must be an adjustment between values ​​or rules and the real behavior faced by law enforcers. Law enforcement, which is a process of concretizing an abstract form of law into a concrete one, means that laws and regulations are meaningless if they are not applied concretely by law enforcement officials. In law enforcement itself, it is necessary to have evidence activities that can be used by law enforcers (investigators) in this case to take other actions, including reconstructing. In this case, the police in carrying out law enforcement use their coercive power to obtain clear evidence that is in accordance with law enforcement when viewed from the point of view of the subject, law enforcement can be carried out by a broad subject and can also be interpreted as law enforcement efforts that involve all subjects. law in every legal relationship. In a narrow sense, in terms of the subject matter, law enforcement is only defined as the efforts of certain law enforcement officials to guarantee and ensure that the law is enforced, if necessary, law enforcement officials are allowed to use force. Law enforcement efforts are divided into two, namely by penal (criminal law) and non-penal (outside criminal law). In this case, reconstruction is included in the penal method, namely to enforce the law for the victim so that the incident that caused harm to the victim can be revealed so that the real incident is clear. This also applies to law enforcement against suspects, meaning that in the reconstruction the suspect needs to be proven whether it is true that the suspect committed the crime or not. The implementation of reconstruction or other activities carried out by police investigators must have the basis of the laws and regulations governing it. Without the rules that regulate it, it can be said that law enforcers themselves do not enforce the law, even against the law.

Police work consists of (criminal) law enforcement, maintaining public order and rendering assistance to those who need it. An essential method for fulfilling these tasks is surveillance and observation. Drones, equipped with interchangeable payloads, are the next step in technological progress that can help law enforcement agencies in ways that were previously impossible. Observation by means of a drone equipped with a camera is an important, though not exclusive, focal point. This chapter has a predominantly exploratory approach: in a fictional situation where one is not limited by legal or other constraints, which practical applications could drones have for police work, now and in the foreseeable future? This chapter focuses on the different ways in which drones can "add value" to police work. Among others, the following perspectives are dealt with:

ntroduction: the paper analyzes the amendments made by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation no. 797 of December 14, 2020 to the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of December 28, 2001 no. 1500 “On commissions for pardon in the territories of constituent entities of the Russian Federation” and the norms of the new Regulation on the procedure for considering petitions for pardon in the Russian Federation. Methods: comparative legal method and method of interpretation of legal norms. Results: having analyzed legal documentation on the activities of the commissions and having considered convicts’ petitions for pardon, we point out the following positive changes: an increase in the rotation period of members of the commissions for pardon; clarification of their analytical and control functions; inclusion of social adaptation in the number of circumstances taken into account when considering the issue of pardon; exclusion of personal data of individuals recommended for pardon by the highest official of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation from publication in the mass media; taking into account the opinions of the victims of the crime. We think that negative changes are those that have created new problems in the form of contradictions with the norms of criminal and penal legislation. These include the possibility of granting pardon to persons serving other criminal law measures, and applying for pardon directly to the commission on pardons, bypassing the administration of institutions and bodies that execute sentences. Conclusion: the current task to expand the practice of granting pardon cannot be solved by adopting a new Regulation on the procedure for considering petitions for pardon in the Russian Federation. Keywords: criminal legislation; penal legislation; convict; pardon; criminal punishment; other measures of a criminal legal nature; President of the Russian Federation; commissions on pardons.

Criminal acts in the field of taxation are a form of crime that is very detrimental to the state because they hinder state income from the tax sector. Taxes are the primary source of state income, which is then used for state management and in implementing development to improve community welfare. One effort to minimize criminal acts is to create regulations that become the basis for law enforcement for tax obligations. Overcoming criminal acts requires a criminal law policy that supports law enforcement. Criminal law outlines criminal policy, either substantive or procedural criminal law. The formulation of criminal law policy in tax laws is in line with the formation of tax law through the tax reform policy, which began in 1986 through the formation of several laws in the field of taxation. Finally, the Law Number 7 of 2021 concerning the Harmonization of Tax Regulations continues the policy. With the implementation of the Law on Harmonization of Tax Regulations, there needs to be a more in-depth study of tax criminal policies in this law towards optimizing state revenues from the tax sector. The research was conducted using normative legal research methods and supported by primary data. The approach used is a statutory approach, namely by analyzing various related laws in studying legal synchronization both vertically and horizontally and using legal theories. The research finds that criminal law policy in the Law on Harmonization of Tax Regulations applies more non-penal than penal policy. Non-penal prioritizes administrative settlement rather than criminal law settlement. The administrative settlement will enable more income through administrative fines. However, this approach does not fully support optimizing state revenues from the tax sector in the long run because this policy would not support taxpayer compliance.

This study aims to analyze law enforcement in the criminal justice system based on the value of restorative justice. The problem is the approach used in criminal law enforcement is mostly still giving a deterrent effect and conventionally imposing the law itself. The ideal law enforcement has to be supported by awareness of the role of punishment as a social sub-system, community’s influence is quite significant in efforts to enforce the law. The efforts to develop law enforcement with the concept of restorative justice are the ones that are directed at reforming criminal law in Indonesia. This research was conducted to identify how restorative justice is regulated in law enforcement that is centered on recovering the crime victims from the losses and suffering they undergo. This is interesting to study through the concept of restorative justice-based law enforcement. The research method is normative jurisdiction with the approach of the rule of law and the concept approach. The results of the research show that restorative justice has not been maximally used as a basis for consideration and a center for law enforcement because it focuses more on retaliation for criminals over the crimes they have committed. The value of restorative justice is specifically limited to the punishment of children, which is regulated in Act Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Criminal Justice System for Children. In other words, the law enforcement has not been satisfying because one of its objectives is recovery of victims. Keywords: Law Enforcement, Restorative Justice, Criminal Law DOI : 10.7176/JLPG/92-04 Publication date: December 31 st 2019

The occasion: to present a paper at a world congress for criminology on a half day panel, the theme of which is “penal legislation”, produces a sort of “balance-sheet” mood. And this in turn brings about some astonishment about just how new this theme is. Only 15 years ago “Labeling Theory”, with its fundamental acceptance of the idea that “criminality” is a definitional problem, an idea which today almost strikes us as banal and obvious, could back then cause hot debates in German criminology. For at that time a historical and political interest was mostly lacking in this discipline. The simple fact that “criminality” is defined by penal statute, and that penal statutes are created in a political process and thus subject to historical change, could for all practical purposes be pushed to the fringes of our attention in order to make room for the, by way of comparison, long and unbroken examination of the “personality of the offender”. One can understand this established naivité partly by the havoc raised in the German social sciences in the Nazi period — an especially clear example being the fate of Rusche and Kirchheimer's 1939 book which had to wait 30 years before it was taken serious academically (cf. Steinert, 1981). The positivist tradition, with which this has to do on the other part, goes back to the last century, of course just as the tradition of criminology as a form of police science and a science of control does.

Medical referral and license disposition for drivers in Iowa

Law Number 32 Year 2009 on Environmental Protection and Management ( UUPPLH ) that have entered criminal provisions in Chapter XV , which consists of 23 chapters. Provision of punishment is much more complete and detailed than the Law Number 23 Year 1997 on the old Environmental Law, but still a lot of things that need to be addressed in the UUPPLH. The results showed that the enforcement of the criminal law to an act of formal law has a special event, because it relates to the principle ultimum, meaning that the effective use of criminal law to an act of formal law enforcement have to wait until the administration declared is no longer effective. To avoid difficulties in the enforcement of environmental law, the legislation specifically about formal law should be drafted clearly, firmly, not interpretations. Authors attempt to compare with Environmental Law in South Korea, in order to find a refinement of Law Number 32 of 2009. Key words: criminal law policy, enforcement of environmental law

AFTER the previous edition of JILS raised the theme of “Crimes and Society: General Issues on Criminal Law in Indonesia”, in this edition JILS wanted to explore various cases and developments in criminal law enforcement. The complexity of criminal law enforcement in many conditions presents a variety of debates, ranging from legality and non-retroactive principles of law which in certain cases find discrepancies between facts and existing theories. In addition, criminal law which is considered ultimum remedium and has the character of a double-edged sword, on the one hand protects the interests of victims and the public but on the other hand injures the rights of the accused, becomes very complex because of its relation to the protection of human rights. In order to provide the most up-to-date discourse in the development of criminal law enforcement, in this edition we take the theme “Penal Policy and The Development of Criminal Law”. This theme provides a different perspective for readers relating to criminal law policy and formulation of criminal law enforcement. In this edition, we received a large number of articles sent to the editorial desk, therefore it requires considerable time in choosing, reviewing and giving our best feedback and comments to the authors. To highlight the development of criminal law enforcement, this Journal volume is dedicated to discuss several issues related to the penal policy and development of criminal law enforcement.

The history of the criminal law policy of the European Union allows us to state that the criminal law of the European Union will not in any way reflect a certain national criminal law in the foreseeable future. The types of offenses that form the backbone of the national criminal justice system, namely general crimes against persons, crimes against property such as theft, fraud or destruction of property, as well as misdemeanors against public order, etc., are unlikely to be harmonized at EU level in the near future. future. However, the subjective and institutional powers that allow Member States to cooperate in the field of investigation, prosecution and execution of sentences, at the same time indicate the possibility of cooperation on these types of crime in the framework of criminal procedure or criminal enforcement policy.Instead, there are three key types of problems that have led to the implementation of EU criminal policy measures or to the approximation of substantive criminal law.First of all, it concerns the protection of the primary (general) interests of the European Union, which would obviously find it difficult to act effectively if, for example, fraud against its interests were not subject to criminal law protection. In addition, for example, counterfeiting currency (Euro) also harms an area of ​​common interest at EU level.The second group of measures concerns cross-border crime. Although sometimes cross-border criminal offenses are not related to the primary interests of the European Union, they still address issues where the consequences of such offenses are cross-border in nature and therefore affect the interests of both individual states and the European Union as a whole. . In addition, the method of committing criminal offenses, as a rule, may include cross-border activities. If such activities are not prosecuted under criminal law policy in all Member States' legal systems, this may affect the possibility of reducing effective investigations and prosecutions. In particular, the release of pollutants inevitably entails transboundary consequences; money laundering usually initiates related transactions, crossing the borders of several states.The third category can be defined as criminal offenses with high publicity factors (they often contain cross-border elements). Obviously, they also affect the legitimate interests of the European Union, which must be protected by criminal law efforts. However, they have another distinctive feature: they significantly affect the security of the entire European Union. An example of such acts is, in particular, terrorism.

Purpose Law enforcement agencies in the United States are relying on state fusion centers for intelligence to develop actionable, data-driven reports that increase efficiency and improve investigations in crime prevention and homeland security. This study assesses the extent to which artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) are increasingly shaping intelligence operations in law enforcement and the functions of state fusion centers in supporting intelligence-led policing (ILP). The reliance and integration of AI/ML is improving analytic accuracy, situational awareness and information and data sharing and collaboration among law enforcement and homeland security agencies. This study examines the state of contemporary academic literature, assesses AI/ML applications used in law enforcement and builds a conceptual and theoretical framework centered on ILP policing. It also relies on empirical data, case study applications, and DHS assessments to explore the degree to which AI-driven processes and analytics enhance criminal intelligence, investigative efficiencies, situational awareness and predictive policing. The analysis, while focusing on the opportunities and challenges of using AI/ML tools in law enforcement, also highlights the need for ethical governance, transparency and accountability when relying on advanced technologies for crime prevention and policing. Design/methodology/approach This study utilizes qualitative methods, including a thematic content analysis of government and think tank/practitioner reports as well as academic literature on the benefits, costs and ethical factors regarding variations in the implementation of AI/ML tools for law enforcement intelligence products and resource allocation. For cross-validation of operational outcomes, it examines publicly available information in the DHS Fusion Center Annual Assessment, Bureau of Justice Statistics, LEMAS and RAND Corporation assessments of intelligence-led policing. Findings Qualitative Results Federal and state sources report fusion centers and law enforcement agencies integrating advanced analytic and ML-enabled tools into each step in the criminal intelligence lifecycle process. However, ethical and structural challenges limit and constrain technology-driven narratives in fusion centers. Given these challenges, there is a consistent qualitative and thematic pattern: state fusion centers now function as criminal intelligence analytic hubs or resources that leverage the most contemporary analytic and data-driven tools for criminal intelligence and law enforcement investigations. Interrelated themes describe AI/ML technologies in terms of shaping, constraining and complicating the intelligence lifecycle in fusion centers and law enforcement operations. Seven specific themes emerged from latent coding are illustrated in the chart. Research limitations/implications There are limitations on the collection of quantitative data since DHS, leading think tanks and NGOs do not disclose specific figures on the proportion of AI/ML tools. The DHS Fusion Center Annual Assessment process monitors technology adoption and the growth of analytic capabilities throughout the national network of fusion centers; however, the specific quantitative statistics are not disclosed in public summaries (DHS, 2024). Second, publicly available data and information constitute the bulk of empirical sources. Consequently, this study relies primarily on qualitative narrative reporting, not quantitative performance metrics. Third, publication bias is likely present in industry and government sources as these reports may provide overly optimistic observations and conclusions while overlooking ethical dilemmas, failures and challenges. Moreover, qualitative thematic analysis could reflect broader structural narratives as opposed to empirical outcomes. Finally, since AI/ML adoption varies across fusion centers and according to technology levels, qualitative themes identified in this study must be read as representative patterns and not as universally generalizable. Originality/value Fusion center utilization of AI/ML technologies is as much an operational tool as it is a policy, governance and ethical challenge. Successful and professional use in support of law enforcement is about placing technological innovations firmly within institutional accountability and constitutional guardrails. On the one hand, AI/ML tools are enhancing analytical intelligence production by accelerating analytic workflows, predictive modeling and expanding data/information integration capabilities. AI/ML are extending ILP concepts by offering improvements in situational awareness and threat identification and operational efficiencies. On the other, substantial constraints hinder responsible use of these technologies. In the absence of standardized oversight frameworks, data-quality issues, algorithmic bias and the lack of professional development, workforce capacity and critical skills on the part of fusion center analysts will cancel the benefits of these tools.