Problems of the general part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, found in the study of official forgery (judicial and legislative)

Mitrofanov Andrey Pavlovich

In this article, on the basis of previous author's research, it is pointed out that some norms of the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are flawed in terms of falsification of official documents. The author studied the research Bunin O. Yu., Kozachenko I. Y., comparative analysis of the provisions of the criminal code 1960 and the criminal code. The article also compares the provisions of the articles 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 14, 28, 32-36 The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and relevant public relations in real life. Contradictions between the norms of the General Part of the criminal Law and the practice of application are revealed, their causes are analyzed. On what basis it is concluded that: the activities of some Russian judges and legislators has signs of forgery; there is a mismatch between the ideology of the criminal code, which borrowed from the Soviet era, and of bourgeois social relations in Russia; it is necessary to adopt a fundamentally new criminal law. The article also substantiates the expediency of introducing a preamble to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which, in the author's opinion, will strengthen the criminal law as a means of persuasion and education. Options for solving problematic issues related to the presence in the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are considered: provisions that are ignored by law enforcement officers in connection with maintaining a vicious criminal policy; deliberately false information; unfair (discriminatory) norms.

Keywords:crime, preamble, official forgery, criminal policy, justice, judicial proceedings, court, criminal ideology, falsification of an official document, responsibility.