Problems of qualification of nazi propaganda in conditions of digital transformation

Problem. In the context of digital transformation, extremist ideology, including Nazism, has acquired new forms of dissemination in information and telecommunication networks, which has significantly complicated the qualification of crimes related to Nazi propaganda. Aim. To identify and analyze the problems of qualification of crimes provided for in Articles 280, 282, 282.4 and 354.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, committed using information and telecommunication networks, and to propose criteria for their differentiation based on the dominant purpose of the act,
as well as to formulate recommendations for improving law enforcement practice, taking into account modern forms of digital propaganda. Methods. The research material was based on the norms of the Russian criminal legislation (Articles
280, 282, 282.4, and 354.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, and case materials on Nazi propaganda in information and telecommunication networks for the period 2024–2025. The primary method employed was formal legal analysis, which allowed identifying common
and distinguishing features of the elements of crimes. Results. Based on the analysis of Articles 280, 282, 282.4, and 354.1
of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and judicial practice materials for 2024–2025, the following issues were
identified: problems of composition competition, determining the moment of crime commission in information and telecommunication networks, and distinguishing between public and private communication. The research proposed qualification criteria based on the dominant purpose of the act: rehabilitation of Nazi ideology (Article 354.1), inciting hostility
using Nazi rhetoric as a tool (Article 282), and cumulative qualification in cases of two independent intentions. The study
substantiated the need to expand the concept of Nazi propaganda to include modern digital forms such as meme culture,
trolling, and automated systems. Conclusions. The current criminal legislation does not fully take into account the specifics of
the digital environment, which generates legal conflicts in the qualification of Nazi propaganda in information and telecommunication networks. The key role in overcoming these conflicts belongs to the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, which should provide clarifications on the issues of intent assessment and content orientation, as well as develop criteria for
distinguishing public actions from private communication in the digital space.