No 9 (2025)

The article is devoted to the study of the problem of differentiation of criminal liability for encroachments on personal and family secrets in modern Russian criminal law. The author focuses on the need for an integrated approach to ensuring proper legal protection of this area of legal relations, emphasizing the importance of the difference between the collection and dissemination of confidential information. The object of the study is social relations arising in the field of personal and family secrets, as well as criminal law mechanisms that ensure the protection of these relations. The subject of the study is legal structures and legal institutions regulating the differentiation of criminal liability for these offenses. The purpose of the study is to develop scientifically based proposals to improve the mechanism for differentiating criminal liability for attacks on personal and family secrets, taking into account current trends and the increasing threat of intrusion into the private sphere of citizens. Special attention is paid to the study of foreign experience and judicial practice of the highest judicial instances of Russia. The author identifies the shortcomings of the current legislation regarding the insufficient differentiation of responsibility for the collection and dissemination of personal and family secrets. Recommendations are proposed to improve the effectiveness of legal protection of confidentiality, including the introduction of additional liability for violating personal information related to various types of secrets, as well as tougher sanctions for individual cases of disclosure. The methodological basis of the research includes the use of formal logical methods of analysis and synthesis, classification and limitation of concepts, comparative jurisprudence, historical and legal and comparative legal methods. The scientific novelty of the work consists in a detailed analysis of currently existing approaches to the differentiation of criminal liability, as well as the systematization of foreign practices and the development of specific recommendations for the reform of domestic legislation, focusing on increasing the level of protection of personal and family secrets in the context of modern technology and social change. In contrast to existing approaches that consider personal and family secrets as a single or related object, the study substantiates their differentiation. Personal secrecy is positioned as the core of the constitutional right to privacy of an individual, while family secrecy is interpreted as confidential information that arises within a special social community – the family, and is protected in the interests of all its members.

The development of artificial intelligence technology is one of the priority, yet not fully explored, areas of scientific and technological development. In this regard, the article analyzes the issues of implementing and using artificial intelligence technology in monetary circulation. The approaches to defining the concept of "artificial intelligence technology" in legislation and scientific literature are analyzed. Categories of artificial intelligence and the specifics of their potential use are identified and analyzed. The concepts of "monetary circulation" and its structural elements are studied. Approaches to determining the place and role of legal regulation of monetary circulation within the system of financial law are analyzed. The article examines the features and prospects of using artificial intelligence technology in the processes of cash circulation, non-cash circulation, and digital monetary circulation. General scientific methods (dialectical method of scientific cognition, systemic method, methods of analysis, synthesis, generalization, induction, deduction, observation, explanation, interpretation and classification, description of concepts and terms) and special legal methods (in particular, formal legal method) were used in the course of this research. As a result of the study on the promising directions for using artificial intelligence technology in cash circulation, non-cash circulation, and digital monetary circulation, it was found that a risk-oriented approach should be adhered to when implementing and utilizing artificial intelligence technology in monetary circulation processes to ensure a balance between the development of this technology and the prudent management of associated risks. The lack of clear regulatory legal regulation concerning the use of artificial intelligence in monetary circulation processes leads to uncertainty and problems regarding the responsibility for decisions made by artificial intelligence. It is concluded that, in this regard, there is a need to develop new regulatory frameworks that take into account the specifics of artificial intelligence operations and ensure a balance between innovation and the protection of societal and state interests.

This article examines the key issues of application of the limitation period in cases involving anti-corruption lawsuits aimed at protecting public interests and initiated by prosecutors. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of judicial practice, identifying differences in the approach of courts to the interpretation of norms and legal regulation in this area. The circumstances under which it is possible to deviate from the standard limitation periods if it is necessary to protect the public good and ensure fairness are studied separately. The central object of the analysis is the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 49-P of October 31, 2024, which establishes the conditions and legal grounds for such exceptions, which emphasizes the importance of protecting the public interest in the fight against corruption and maintaining law and order. The research employs methods of comparative analysis, study of judicial practice, and a systematic approach. It is based on legal acts, court decisions, and doctrinal approaches to the statute of limitations. The study identifies key legal conflicts between public and private interests in applying limitation periods to anti-corruption claims. For the first time, a comprehensive analysis of the Constitutional Court Decision No. 49-P of October 31, 2024 is provided, which justifies the possibility of waiving limitation periods to protect state interests. The author concludes that legislative clarification of the criteria for exceptions to limitation periods is necessary, along with strengthened guarantees for bona fide participants in civil turnover. Measures are proposed to enhance legal certainty and balance public and private interests in anti-corruption cases.

The current regulation of insolvency of the deceased person in Russia is named as «bankruptcy of the inheritance estate» in most part of the scientific papers dedicated to this legal topic. Researchers use this naming to justify the restoration of the deceased's legal capacity. This fiction helps recognize the deceased as the subject of bankruptcy before the final distribution of property among creditors. This kind of a «resurrection» of a citizen generates a legal consequence as if a separation of property masses appeared. Basis of such an interpretation might lie in paragraph 4 of Article 223.1 of Federal Law «On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)». The resulting conclusion of this approach leads to competition between creditors of the heir and creditors of the deceased, which makes liability of the legal successor unlimited. From that point of view, the position of the heir is in obvious contradiction with the norm of paragraph 1 of Article 1175 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. This is why the Supreme Court describes the status of the heirs as exclusively procedural. The heir has an interest in the inheritance mass, but a procedural understanding of his status cuts off his material position in the insolvency procedure. By referring to the history of law and comparative case law (English and German law), the status of the heir in the bankruptcy procedure of the deceased person is determined in the research. The author also reviewed the legislation, its scientific understanding, and application in relation to the implementation of the principle of limited liability for the debts of an insolvent citizen. After the examination of the Russian approach in the regulation of bankruptcy of the deceased, the author suggests that the idea of giving the heir the status of a fictitious debtor should be abandoned. The principle of limited liability for the debts of the deceased person proves that there is no automatic «mixing» of property upon inheritance. The heir should be perceived as the owner of two blocs – personal and hereditary – regardless of the fate of the property transferred to him. This understanding imposes the legal successor with the duty to «liquidate» the inheritance, as it happens in insolvency. Isolation of property blocs as an a priori construction serves as the key point of this paper and brings consistency to the interpretation of the current regulation. So, competition between creditors is excluded, grounds for personal liability of the legal successor are proposed, and mutual obligations are preserved. But, most importantly, the figure of the heir is determined as the key one to the process of insolvency of the deceased.

The article presents a study of the domestic legislation of the XI–XVIII centuries, aimed at criminal law counteraction to illicit trafficking in alcoholic beverages. The relevance of the study is due to the significant number of illegal alcoholic and alcohol-containing products on the modern Russian market. Studying the historical experience of the formation of criminal legislation providing for responsibility for these acts makes it possible to identify patterns in the development of legal norms and identify the most effective criminal law mechanisms for countering such crimes. The purpose of the study is a comprehensive analysis of the formation and development of Russian legislation on combating illegal production and trafficking of alcoholic beverages, as well as identifying patterns and features of this process. The subject of the study is the criminal law norms providing for liability for acts that infringe on the legal turnover of alcoholic beverages. The research methodology is represented by a set of general scientific and private scientific methods of cognition. The following general scientific methods of cognition are used: system-structural analysis, logical analysis of texts and judgments. The historical and legal method was used as a private scientific method, which made it possible to analyze the development of Russian criminal legislation aimed at protecting the legally established procedure for the production and turnover of alcoholic beverages. The scientific novelty of the research is expressed in a comprehensive analysis of the Russian legislation of the XI–XVIII centuries, aimed at countering the illicit trafficking of alcoholic beverages. The article presents a detailed analysis of the development of criminal law norms providing for liability for the illegal production and trafficking of alcoholic beverages in Russia and in Russia from ancient times to the beginning of the XVIII century. The main focus is on the evolution of legislation in the field of combating illicit trafficking in alcoholic beverages, dubbed "korchemstvo". The paper examines in detail the first mentions of punishments for illegal alcohol trafficking in the Pskov judicial charter, the development of standards of responsibility in the era of Ivan III and Ivan IV. A special place in the study is occupied by the analysis of the punishment system for drunkenness. Special attention is paid to the reign of Peter I. The author notes that the issues of criminal law counteraction to illicit trafficking in alcoholic beverages are inextricably linked with the state policy on alcohol trafficking. Excessive restrictions on alcohol turnover imposed by the State have led to an increase in the share of the grey alcohol market and an increase in corruption in this sector.

The author studied the legal relations arising in the field of production and circulation of organic products on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The subject of the study is the experience of the Republic of Kazakhstan in legislative activities in the area of production and circulation of organic products, the improvement of the adopted legislation in the studied area, taking into account changes in the requirements of global standards for organic production. The aim of the research is to conduct a comparative analysis of international experience and the experience of Russia in the field of organic farming, to examine certain issues and the effectiveness of legal regulation of the circulation of organic products in Russia. The research objectives are to substantiate the need for legislative regulation of organic product production, as well as to identify the risks associated with the development of organic production; to determine the measures of financial support for organic product producers. The methodological basis of the research is presented through a systematic method, comparative legal methods, statistical methods, historical methods, and methods of analysis and synthesis. The author examines the legal acts regulating organic product production in the Republic of Kazakhstan in a historical retrospective, drawing parallels with the current legislation of the Russian Federation in the field of organic product production. The relevance of the research is due to the recent legislative interest in the development of the domestic market for organic product production in the Russian Federation, which is reflected in the Decree No. 309 of the President of the Russian Federation dated May 7, 2024, "On the National Goals for the Development of the Russian Federation for the Period Until 2030 and Prospects Until 2036." Studying this experience and its implementation will help Russia, with its vast potential for organic product production, the availability of agricultural land, and natural resources, to take a leading position among the world's producers of organic agricultural products. The work includes a comparative analysis of the current legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, identifying differences in norms and outlining issues of mutual recognition of production standards among the EAEU member states using the example of the two countries.