Responsibility for participation in the organized groups and criminal associations (criminal organizations)
( Pp. 151-154)

Problem. The causes of the preparation of the article are the difficulties in the qualification of the actions of the participants of the organized groups and criminal associations which were exposed in the result of the analysis of the law enforcement including the difficulties which were connected with the lack of coordination between the Criminal Code of Russia and the legal positions of The Supreme Court of Russia. Model. The study was performed with the formally juridical and relatively legal methods and with the functional approach and analysis and synthesis methods. Conclusion. Analyses of the Criminal Code of Russia and other states, of the practice of The Supreme Court of Russia and of the scientific literature shows that actions of all participants of the organized groups and criminal associations should be qualified as actions of joint perpetrators regardless of their role in the committed crime. Practical importance. The author offers in store to examine a question if it is the possibility to fasten at the legislative level concerned legal position of The Supreme Court of Russia to qualify the actions of all participants of the organized groups and criminal associations as the actions of joint perpetrators. Value. The study is destined for the law enforces in the field of criminal law, for the scholars and for the postgraduates and students of law universities with the aim of more thorough study the qualification rules of the organized groups and criminal associations action.

Yankovsky D.A., (2014), RESPONSIBILITY FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE ORGANIZED GROUPS AND CRIMINAL ASSOCIATIONS (CRIMINAL ORGANIZATIONS). Gaps in Russian Legislation, 6 => 151-154.

Baleev S.A. Otvetstvennost za organizatsionnuyu prestupnuyu deyatel nost po rossiyskomu ugolovnomu pravu // Dis. kand. yurid. nauk. Kazan , 2000. 211 s.
Vvedenskiy A.YU., Korolev B.I. Zakonodatel noe regulirovanie instituta souchastiya i otvetstvennosti souchastnikov prestupnogo soobshchestva v Rossii v X - nachale XX vv.: istoricheskiy aspekt // Probely v rossiyskom zakonodatel stve. 2011. № 2.
Garmash A.M. Kak ne stat uchastnikom organizovannoy prestupnoy gruppy, sovershayushchey prestupleniya v sfere predprinimatel skoy deyatel nosti // Probely v rossiyskom zakonodatel stve. 2012. № 1
Dodonov V.N. Sravnitel noe ugolovnoe pravo. Obshchaya chast . Monografiya. Pod obshch. i nauch. red. d.yu.n., professora, zasluzhennogo deyatelya nauki Rossiyskoy Federatsii S.P. SHCHerby. M., 2009. 446 s.
Dolgopolov K.A. Naznachenie nakazaniya za prestuplenie sovershennoe v souchastii // Probely v rossiyskom zakonodatel stve. 2012. № 4.
Sirotkin I. Otvetstvennost uchastnikov organizovannykh grupp i prestupnykh organizatsiy. Rezhim dostupa: http://www.library.ru/help/docs/n59629/pres.doc
Fletcher Dzh., Naumov A.V. Osnovnye kontseptsii sovremennogo ugolovnogo prava. M.: YUrist , 1998. 512 s.

companiesto, organized group, the criminal community, special subject of the crime, the individualization of punishment, the theory of "equivalence" of complicity.