The prerequisites for the formation of the Institute of criminal liability of legal entities are under consideration of present article. The author has assessed the current conditions which can affect this institute and has examined the role of this institution in common and civil systems of law. Preconditions of formation of this Institute of the criminal liability of legal entities can be as external, which consists of combining factors of formation of qualitatively new social relations, as internal, due to existing provisions of the Russian legislation. The first group of prerequisites is related to the development of social consciousness, complication of technological processes and economic relations, the processes of globalization. The second group includes the obligations caused by the state participation in international agreements, the norms of existing national legislation, defining characteristics of a legal entity, and existing elements of criminal-legal influence concerning legal entities in the criminal law. The author has noted that the existing provisions of the Russian legislation are not an obstacle to the introduction of this institute and concluded that further development of the Institute of criminal liability of legal entities in the domestic legislation related to the scientific rationale of its relationships to existing elements of the national legal system. In this context the presence of a social conditions is essential, such conditions can help to effective functioning of the mechanisms of self-regulation and control of legal entities.
criminal responsibility, legal entities, historical and contemporary background, national legislation.
1. Abschlussbericht der Kommission zur Reform des strafrechtlichen Sanktionensystems (März 2000) Teil 12, publiziert bei Hettinger (Hrsg.), Reform des Sanktionenrechts, Bd. 3, 2000.
2. Busch R. Unternehmen und Umweltstrafrecht. 1997.
3. Criminal Responsibility of Legal and Collective Entities / eds. by A. Eser, G. Heine, B. Huber. 1999.
4. Ebner S. Zur Sanktionierung von Unternehmen in Deutschland. Kriminalistik 62 (2008).
5. Heine. Die strafrechtliche Verantwortlichkeit von Unternehmen. 1995.
6. Kathleen F. Brickey, Corporate Criminal Accountability: A Brief History and an Observation, 60 Wash. U.LQ.393 (1982), supra note 7.
7. Luhmann N. Ausdifferzierung des Rechts: Beitrage zur Rechtssoziologie und Rechtstheorie. Frankfurt a.M., 1981.
8. Schünemann B. (Hrsg.). Unternehmenskriminalität. 1996.
9. Schünemann B. Die aktuelle Forderung eines Verbandsstrafrechts — Ein kriminalpolitischer Zombie. Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik. 2014. Nr. 1.
10. Bek U. Obshchestvo riska: na puti k drugomu modernu / per. s nem. V. Sedel´nika, N. Fedorovoy. M., 2000.
11. Broslavskiy L. I. Otvetstvennost´ za okruzhayushchuyu sredu i vozmeshchenie ekologicheskogo vreda: zakony i realii Rossii, SShA i Evrosoyuza (Liability for Environment and Damages Compensation: Laws and Practices Russia, USA and European Union): monografiya. M., 2014.
12. Vlasov I. S. O vvedenii v Rossii instituta ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti yuridicheskikh lits. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava. 2015. № 11.
13. Golovanova N. A., Lafitskiy V. I., Tsirina M. A. Ugolovnaya otvetstvennost´ yuridicheskikh lits v mezhdunarodnom i natsional´nom prave (sravnitel´no-pravovoe issledovanie). M., 2013.
14. Grimm D. D. Lektsii po dogme rimskogo prava (vosproizvoditsya po pyatomu izdaniyu. SPb., 1916 g.). M., 2003.
15. Esakov G. Yuridicheskie litsa i otvetstvennost´ za ubiystvo (o novom angliyskom zakone). Ugolovnoe pravo. 2007. № 6.
16. Ziber U. Predislovie. Ugolovno-pravovoe vozdeystvie v otnoshenii yuridicheskikh lits: materialy rossiysko-nemetskogo ugolovno-pravovogo seminara (26 iyunya 2012 g.). M., 2013.
17. Kvashis V. E., Sluchevskaya Yu. A. Predposylki i perspektivy vvedeniya ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti yuridicheskikh lits. Voprosy pravovoy teorii i praktiki: sb. nauch. trudov. Omsk, 2015. Vyp. 10.
18. Krylova N. E. Kontseptual´nye problemy vvedeniya instituta ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti yuridicheskikh lits v Rossiyskoy Federatsii. Ugolovno-pravovoe vozdeystvie v otnoshenii yuridicheskikh lits: materialy rossiysko-nemetskogo ugolovno-pravovogo seminara (26 iyunya 2012 g.). M., 2013.
19. Meyer D. I. O yuridicheskikh vymyslakh i predpolozheniyakh, skrytnykh i pritvornykh deystviyakh. Meyer D. I. Izbrannye proizvedeniya po grazhdanskomu pravu. M., 2003.
20. Muromtsev S. O konservatizme rimskoy yurisprudentsii. M., 1885.
21. Naryshkin S. E., Khabrieva T. Ya. Mekhanizm otsenki antikorruptsionnykh standartov GREKO (sravnitel´no-pravovoe issledovanie). Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava. 2011. № 9.
22. Rozin V. M. Filosofiya prava: genezis prava. Osobennosti yuridicheskogo myshleniya. Prestupnaya lichnost´. M., 2016.
23. Sovremennoe pravoponimanie: kurs lektsiy / otv. red. M. N. Marchenko. M., 2016.
24. Tanimov O. V. Razvitie yuridicheskikh fiktsiy v epokhu Novogo vremeni. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki. 2014. № 4.
25. Engel´khart M. Modeli ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti organizatsiy v Germanii. Ugolovno-pravovoe vozdeystvie v otnoshenii yuridicheskikh lits: mater. rossiysko-nemetskogo ugolovno-pravovogo seminara (26 iyunya 2012 g.). M., 2013.
