Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Genesis of regulation of special forfeiture in Ukraine

View through CrossRef
Introduction. This paper analyzes the development of norms on the implementation of special forfeiture in Ukraine since its independence. The purpose of the paper is determining the main periods of development of legal regulation of special forfeiture in Ukraine and highlighting the main features of each period. Results. According to the criterion of development of features of structural placement of norms on special forfeiture in the Criminal Code of Ukraine, three main periods of regulation of the specified measure of criminal character are allocated. The main features of the first period of regulation of special forfeiture, which is the regulation of the implementation of the specified measure of criminal nature at the level of norms of the Special Parts of the Criminal Codes of Ukraine of 1960 and 2001, are characterized. The main problems concerning the law enforcement of the rules on special forfeiture, which arose in connection with the legislative approach to special forfeiture at this stage, are described. The peculiarities of the second period of development of regulation of special forfeiture are described, during which the latter was carried out at the level of both the General Part of the Criminal Code and its Special Part. The conflicts between the provisions of the General and Special Parts of the Criminal Code regarding special forfeiture that arose at this stage are described, as well as some inconsistent legislative steps to amend the provisions of the law on criminal liability relating to special forfeiture. The main features of the current stage of legal regulation of special forfeiture are described. The problems of making changes to the legislation related to the adoption of laws that do not take into account the peculiarities of the development of legal regulation of special forfeiture are described. Conclusion. Relevant conclusions have been made, in particular, that special forfeiture, contrary to stereotypical views, is not a fundamentally new (implemented over the last decade) measure of a criminal nature in the criminal law of Ukraine. The stages of development of norms on special forfeiture are singled out. The chronological boundaries of each of the stages are set.
Title: Genesis of regulation of special forfeiture in Ukraine
Description:
Introduction.
This paper analyzes the development of norms on the implementation of special forfeiture in Ukraine since its independence.
The purpose of the paper is determining the main periods of development of legal regulation of special forfeiture in Ukraine and highlighting the main features of each period.
Results.
According to the criterion of development of features of structural placement of norms on special forfeiture in the Criminal Code of Ukraine, three main periods of regulation of the specified measure of criminal character are allocated.
The main features of the first period of regulation of special forfeiture, which is the regulation of the implementation of the specified measure of criminal nature at the level of norms of the Special Parts of the Criminal Codes of Ukraine of 1960 and 2001, are characterized.
The main problems concerning the law enforcement of the rules on special forfeiture, which arose in connection with the legislative approach to special forfeiture at this stage, are described.
The peculiarities of the second period of development of regulation of special forfeiture are described, during which the latter was carried out at the level of both the General Part of the Criminal Code and its Special Part.
The conflicts between the provisions of the General and Special Parts of the Criminal Code regarding special forfeiture that arose at this stage are described, as well as some inconsistent legislative steps to amend the provisions of the law on criminal liability relating to special forfeiture.
The main features of the current stage of legal regulation of special forfeiture are described.
The problems of making changes to the legislation related to the adoption of laws that do not take into account the peculiarities of the development of legal regulation of special forfeiture are described.
Conclusion.
Relevant conclusions have been made, in particular, that special forfeiture, contrary to stereotypical views, is not a fundamentally new (implemented over the last decade) measure of a criminal nature in the criminal law of Ukraine.
The stages of development of norms on special forfeiture are singled out.
The chronological boundaries of each of the stages are set.

Related Results

METAPHORICAL REPRESENTATION OF UKRAINE IN MODERN ENGLISH MASS MEDIA DISCOURSE
METAPHORICAL REPRESENTATION OF UKRAINE IN MODERN ENGLISH MASS MEDIA DISCOURSE
The article describes the metaphorical representation of the image of Ukraine in the mass media discourse. A conceptual metaphor is the main form of expression of the metaphorical ...
Extended Forfeiture versus Special Forfeiture
Extended Forfeiture versus Special Forfeiture
The topic "Extended forfeiture vs special forfeiture" explores two different approaches to the legal process of forfeiture of assets in criminal investigations or criminal prosecut...
Prospects for the Application of Unexplained Wealth Order in the Forfeiture of Assets Proceeds of Corruption in Indonesia
Prospects for the Application of Unexplained Wealth Order in the Forfeiture of Assets Proceeds of Corruption in Indonesia
This research focuses on discussing two things, namely (1) how the legal politics of regulating asset forfeiture for corruption crimes in Indonesia and (2) what are the prospects f...
Legal Politics in the Indonesian Presidential System: How to Leverage Potential of Asset Forfeiture Bill for Corruption Eradication?
Legal Politics in the Indonesian Presidential System: How to Leverage Potential of Asset Forfeiture Bill for Corruption Eradication?
This study examines the potential for the ratification of the Asset Forfeiture Bill in Indonesia, particularly by the Parliament for the 2024-2029 period, and its role in the eradi...
SYSTEMATIZATION OF THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK OF ENSURING THE WATER TRANSPORT COMPETITIVENESS IN UKRAINE
SYSTEMATIZATION OF THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK OF ENSURING THE WATER TRANSPORT COMPETITIVENESS IN UKRAINE
Topicality. Business entities in the field of water transport can gain competitive advantages and ensure their competitiveness through the introduction of innovations into the proc...
Extended Forfeiture versus Civil Forfeiture
Extended Forfeiture versus Civil Forfeiture
The article examines two fundamental concepts in the legal field: extended forfeiture and civil forfeiture. Extended forfeiture refers to the process of confiscating assets that ar...
The National Bank Of Ukraine As A Party To A Court Proceedings
The National Bank Of Ukraine As A Party To A Court Proceedings
The purpose of the article is to determine the procedural status of the National Bank of Ukraine in administrative, civil, and commercial cases, as well as to develop scientificall...
CIVIL FORFEITURE UNDER ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING LEGISLATION IN MALAYSIA
CIVIL FORFEITURE UNDER ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING LEGISLATION IN MALAYSIA
The Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 [AMLAFTA] empowers the Malaysian Courts to forfeit any property that is the subject...

Back to Top