Kupirova Chulpan Sheukatovna, Senior lecturer, sub-department of criminal-legal disciplines, Chuvash State University named after I. N. Ulyanov (15 Moskovsky avenue, Cheboksary, Russia), firstname.lastname@example.org
Background. The aim of the article is to consider theoretical and practical aspects of the problem of ensuring the right of an under age child to receive financial support in modern Russia, as well as to develop suggestions on criminal legislation improvement regarding the present body of crime.
Materials and methods. In the research the author used such methods as formallogical, comparative-legal, generalization and statistical.
Results. The researcher suggested concrete, scientifically-grounded recommendations on further improvement of criminal legislation regarding liability for fraudulent delinquency in payment of support to under age children. Novelty characteristics are typical for statements on reasonability of modernizing sanctions of the article 157 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (CCRF) that adduces arguments for review and tighten thereof by increasing upper limits, as well as on introduction into the article 157 CCRF of qualifying index, aggrevating liability for individuals previously convicted of the present crime. It is necessary to correct the part 3 of the article 50 CCRF as a guarantee of ensuring obligation to pay child support.
Conclusions. Sanctions for the crime under examination are not adequate to the degree of public danger of the given criminal act. It is reasonable to reinforce criminal liability of parents for fraudulent delinquency in payment of child support. The analysis of sanctions of the article 157 CCRF allows to conclude that the most effective sanction is corrective labor, as it is usually inflicted to individuals both with and without permanent employment, excluding thereby the possibility of an obligator to avoid employment. As a guarantee of child support payment insurance it is necessary to provide a real possibility to withhold funds for under age children. The author believes the solution is as follows. The researcher suggests to state the part 3 of the article 50 CCRF I the following way: «From the salary of the individual inflicted corrective labour the funds to be withheld to the state in the amount set by the court decision in the limits of 5–20 % with exception of the part 1 of the article 157 CCRF. In case of infliction of corrective labor for the criminal act, provided for by the part 1 of the article 157 CCRF, the funds from the salary of the convicted individual to be withheld to the state, and then tranfered for repayment of child support liabilities in the limits of 5–20 %, but not less than the minimum wage». In this connection the article 157 CCRF also requires corrections. Particularly, taking into account the above mentioned arguments, the author suggests in the part 1 and 2 of the article 157 CCRF to provide for a penalty in the form of corrective labor for the period up to 2 years, or compulsory labor for the same period, or deprivation of liberty for the period up to 2 years, saving at the same time the most effective types of penalties and increasing the upper limits of periods. The author finds it reasonable to supplement the article 157 CCRF by fixing the description of a qualifying index as «the act, provided for by the part 1 and 2 of the present article, commited by the individual previously convicted of the crime, provided for by the present article, providing for punishment in the form of corrective labor for the period up to 2 years, or compulsory labor for the period up to 5 years, or deprivation of liberty for the period up to 3 years».
1. Lombrozo Ch. Genial'nost' i pomeshatel'stvo: Soch. [Genius and insanity: works]. Moscow: Eksmo-Press, 1998.
2. Grimm D. D. Lektsii po dogme rimskogo prava [Lectures on the Roman law dogma]. Moscow, 2003.
3. Pischikov V. A. Rastorzhenie braka: razdel imushchestva, prava detey, alimenty, obraztsy dokumentov [Divorce: division of property, rights of children, child support, document samples]. Moscow, 2005.
4. Ugolovnoe pravo. Osobennaya chast': ucheb. [Criminal law. Spesific part: textbokk]. Ed. by I. Ya. Kozachenko, G. P. Novoselov. Moscow: Norma: Infra-M, 2013.
5. Borzenkov G. N., Brilliantov A. V., Galakhova A. V. et al. Kommentariy k Ugolovnomu kodeksu Rossiyskoy Federatsii (postateynyy) [Comments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (article-by-article)]. Moscow: Yurayt, 2013.
6. Byulleten' Verkhovnogo Suda RF [Bulletin of the Sureme Court of the Russian Federation]. 2012, no. 7.
7. Vallask E. V. Kriminalistika [Criminalistics]. 2010, no. 2 (7).