No 4 (2021)

The paper considers the institution of acquisition prescription relating to real estate (land plots), the procedure for the implementation of which is established by Article 234 of the RF Civil Code. The paper presents the main problems of the law enforcement practice when considering cases in courts on the recognition of property rights under acquisition prescription. In particular, the study reveals the main reasons for mass refusals of courts in such claims, despite the existence of a norm in the law and a number of explanations of the highest judicial authorities. To identify the problems and the ways to their solution, the author analyzes various scientific works covering this topic; draws attention to the lack of scientific papers on the relevant issue and the insufficient investigation of problems and ways to solve them. Despite the explanation of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, most approaches contradict law enforcement practice and the principles of civil law. For some unknown reason, the publications after November 2020 do not take into account the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 26.11.2020 No. 48-P on the issues of acquisition prescription, which has a generally binding nature and answers a lot of problematic issues in the law enforcement practice of Article 234 of the RF Civil Code. The paper describes new approaches proposed by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which should be used when considering cases on prescriptive possession claims and implementation of this institution. The author puts forward a thesis about filling in numerous gaps, but it is too early to speak of the end of the discussion. The content of Article 234 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation requires bringing in accordance with new approaches of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the interpretation of this norm.

The paper analyzes the features of the criminal subculture that contribute to strengthening the criminal hierarchy and occupying the highest position in it. Regulatory and attributive features of the criminal subculture are highlighted. The corresponding cultural measures aimed at prevention of taking up the highest position in the criminal hierarchy are reduced to overcoming totalitarianism and extremism, the cult of criminal leaders’ personality, restriction on the use of cult tattoos, jargon, and other attributes of the criminal subculture. It is specified that when identifying a person who holds the highest position in the criminal hierarchy, special knowledge is essential not only regarding the mental sphere of the criminal but also about the criminal “world”, which in its whole forms a certain criminal subculture. It is proved that the attributive elements of the criminal subculture perform a number of functions in the criminal world, such as communication, conspiracy identification, and stratification as they allow to establish affiliation of a particular individual to a particular criminal caste. The paper specifies cultural determinants of taking up the highest position in the criminal hierarchy, and on their basis describes criminological approaches to prevent this type of crime. It is emphasized that the subject of cultural expertise in establishing the fact that a person holds a higher position in the criminal hierarchy is the specific status of this individual, the features of its acquisition, and the presence of distinctive attribute elements. The main task of the expert is to determine the conformity of the process of taking up a specific criminal status by a person to existing norms and traditions of the criminal community. The examples from investigations and court practice demonstrate the possibilities of forensic cultural expertise to establish the facts and circumstances that contributed (could have contributed) to the occupation of the highest position in the criminal hierarchy.

The paper presents the results of legal research on the involvement of citizens in the administration of justice during criminal proceedings. The existing Russian criminal procedure legislation provides for a relevant procedure. However, some aspects of citizens’ participation in the administration of justice in the sphere of criminal proceedings, for today, are regulated insufficiently, which causes certain difficulties by an executor of law. The study focuses attention on the special constitutional and legal significance of such participation as a form of interaction of the state and society on the whole. The authors consider the participation of citizens in the administration of justice both as a constitutional guarantee of the defense of human and civil rights and freedoms in the Russian Federation and concerning the procedural support of the corresponding right of a criminal procedure participant. The paper states that citizens’ participation in the administration of justice is characterized to a greater degree by their rights than by responsibility. The authors justify the conclusion on the necessity of different interpretations of the concepts of civil duty and legal duty. Such attitude is proved by the fact that the imposed form of participation in justice does not make impossible the juror’s intentional violation of bans stipulated towards a juror. The paper pays attention to the study of the process of trial jury formation in criminal proceedings. The authors identified and analyzed the reasons for citizens’ unwillingness to exercise this right. The study considers both the admissible not contradictory to legal rules forms of such denial and its covert types hindering the administration of justice. It is identified that the waiver of a right to exercise justice can be caused both by objective and subjective factors. Based on the analysis of statistical data and with the account of the examples from judicial practice, the authors justify the necessity of further improvement of norms of the current legislation in ensuring the citizens’ participation in the administration of justice.

One of the main ways of achieving mercenary purposes in thefts committed using the information and telecommunication technologies is the application of social engineering techniques implemented through the psychological influence methods and aimed at controlling the consciousness and behavior of people. Late identification of such thefts and the shortcomings when collecting primary material during the preliminary investigation indicate the necessity to study the features of their mechanism of marking formation. The paper deals with the forensic characteristics of the material, ideal, and electronic-digital traces peculiar for this type of crime. Material traces are represented as traces-objects (technical devices adapted for the social engineering methods implementation, SIM cards, bank cards, documents), and traces-displays (biological traces allowing to identify that the theft of funds is committed by a specific person using a particular technical device). As the ideal traces, the authors consider the mental image of a crime committed in the mind of a person presented in the evidence of a victim, suspect (accused), witness, expert, specialist, and other persons, resulting from the illegal remote actions of a suspect (an accused) to have psychological influence (the use of social engineering methods) on a victim using the information and telecommunication technologies. The paper defines digital traces, considers their specific examples depending on the use of the Internet and (or) computer, mobile devices, and the social engineering methods by intruders. The authors formulate the typical trace pattern of analyzed thefts, the knowledge of which allows obtaining the forensically important information on the way and nature of a crime, persons involved in it, and determining the tactics of follow-up law enforcement intelligence and investigative actions.