The article holds a critical observation of the current explanations given by Plenum of Russian Federation Supreme Court on several criminal law issues. The argument shows that some of the explanations contradict criminal law and other legislation norms, as well as the theory of criminal law. It is also noted that neither the Constitution of the Russian Federation, nor sectoral legislation provide any requirements to the legislative statements of Plenum of Russian Federation Supreme Court. The authors conclude that the interpretation limits of criminal law should be regulated by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, or else by the judicial system legislation. The authors offer that the Federal Law “On judicial system of the Russian Federation” of December 31, 1996, No 1-FKZ, include the necessity to hold a scientific expertise of all decrees of Plenum of Russian Federation Supreme Court that deal with law compliance practices. A revised sample of article 1.1 of rule 3 of the Russian Federation Criminal Law is given.
decree of Plenum of Russian Federation Supreme Court, legal determination, classification of crimes
1. Rarog A. I., Gracheva Yu. V. Ponyatie, osnovanie, priznaki i znachenie sudeyskogo usmotreniya v ugolovnom prave // Gosudarstvo i pravo. 2001. № 11. S. 90-98.
2. Kuznecov V. I. Postanovleniya Plenuma Verhovnogo Suda RF: diskussionnye voprosy // Sibirskiy yuridicheskiy vestnik. 2005. № 4. S. 49-54.
3. Bezverhov A. G. Spornye interpretacii nekotoryh polozheniy ugolovnogo zakonodatel'stva v postanovleniyah Plenuma Verhovnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federacii // Vektor nauki Tol'yattinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Yuridicheskie nauki. 2010. № 2. S. 19-21.
4. Poezzhalov V. B., Linkevich A. E. Raz'yasneniya Plenuma Verhovnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federacii: spornye voprosy sudebnogo tolkovaniya // Evraziyskaya advokatura. 2016. № 4. S. 21-24.
5. Sm. takzhe: Bikmashev V. A. Postanovlenie Plenuma Verhovnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federacii «O primenenii sudami zakonodatel'stva o neobhodimoy oborone i prichinenii vreda pri zaderzhanii lica, sovershivshego prestuplenie»: nadezhdy i razocharovaniya // Sovremennye problemy ugolovnoy politiki : materialy III mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konf. / pod red. A. N. Il'yashenko. Krasnodar: Krasnodarskiy un-t MVD Rossii, 2012. S. 281-287.
6. Lobanova L., Mkrtchyan S. Nekotorye problemy ustanovleniya i realizacii novogo osnovaniya osvobozhdeniya ot ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2016. № 6. S. 111-121.
7. Sm., naprimer: Lopashenko N. A. Posyagatel'stva na sobstvennost'. M.: Norma: INFRA-M, 2012. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoy sistemy «Konsul'tantPlyus».
8. Merkushov A. E. Nekotorye voprosy sudebnoy praktiki po delam o krazhe, grabezhe i razboe // Byulleten' Verhovnogo Suda RF. 2003. № 4. S. 19-24.
9. Sm., naprimer: Tokmancev D. V., Vinokurov V. N. Novye pravila kvalifikacii nezakonnogo priobreteniya i nezakonnogo sbyta narkoticheskih sredstv // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2016. № 1. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoy sistemy «Konsul'tantPlyus».
10. Sm., naprimer: Volzhenkin B. V. Sluzhebnye prestupleniya. M.: Yurist', 2000. 368 s.
11. Ugolovnoe pravo. 2013. № 5.
12. Ugolovnoe pravo. 2014. № 5.
13. Ugolovnyy kodeks Respubliki Belarus' ot 9 iyulya 1999 g. № 275-Z (v red. ot 05.08.2017). URL: http://www.pravo.by (data obrascheniya: 20.01.2018).
14. Mad'yarova A. V. Raz'yasneniya Verhovnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federacii v mehanizme ugolovno-pravovogo regulirovaniya. SPb.: Yuridicheskiy centr Press, 2002. 405 s.
15. Yacelenko B. V. Princip zakonnosti v ugolovnom prave i predely sudebnogo tolkovaniya // Sovremennye problemy ugolovnoy politiki: materialy III mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konf. / pod red. A. N. Il'yashenko. Krasnodar: Krasnodarskiy un-t MVD Rossii, 2012. S. 82-92.
16. Obrazhiev K. V. Formal'nye (yuridicheskie) istochniki rossiyskogo ugolovnogo prava. M.: Yurlitinform, 2010. 216 s
