University of prosecutor’s office of the Russian Federation
Kaliningrad, Kalinigrad, Russian Federation
Introduction. The relevance of the article is due to the transformation of acts of vandalism from mere damage to property into a complex, multifaceted phenomenon, and the emergence of new forms of vandalism, such as cyber-vandalism, ARvandalism and environmental vandalism, which pose challenges to the current legal framework. The research aims to trace the origins and evolution of the concept of ‘vandalism’ from antiquity to the present day, to analyse current forms and manifestations of vandalism, including in the digital sphere, and to conduct a critical assessment of the adequacy of the definition of vandalism enshrined in criminal law, as well as to analyse the scope of criminal offences covered by this definition and the problems associated with the classification of acts of vandalism. Methods. A range of scientific research methods was employed in the study. The research is based on the dialectical method of inquiry. Historical and legal analysis was used to examine the evolution of the concept; hermeneutic analysis was used to investigate the generally accepted understanding of vandalism; the dogmatic method was used to assess the provisions of criminal law; and comparative legal and statistical methods were used to identify problems relating to the classification of offences and the effectiveness of measures to combat vandalism; a sociocultural analysis was carried out to determine the object of the offence, and the formal-logical method was applied to formulate conclusions regarding the need to improve legislation. The author has studied historical and academic literature on the subject of the research and analysed statistical data. Results. As a result of the study, the author concludes that the definition of vandalism set out in criminal law is archaic, detached from its historical context, does not correspond to the realities of contemporary social relations, and contains terminology that gives rise to uncertainty in the application of the law. The need to improve the criminal law was formulated.
vandalism, desecration, damage to property, cultural and historical heritage sites, subject matter of the offence
1. Brand P. J. The Monuments of Seti I : Epigraphic, Historical, and Art Historical Analysis. Leiden : BRILL, 2000. 602 p.https://doi.org/10.1086/431687
2. Shel'shakova N. N. Istoriya proishozhdeniya vandalizma i ego suschnost' // Voprosy rossiyskogo i mezhdunarodnogo prava. 2021. T. 11, № 1A. S. 216–222. https://doi.org/10.34670/AR.2020.50.72.032
3. Grégoire H. Rapport sur les destructions opérées par le vandalisme, et sur les moyens de le réprimer / [in French]. [Paris] : De l'Imprimerie nationale, 1794, 32 p.
4. Naumov E. L. O ponyatiyah «stroenie», «zdanie» i «sooruzhenie» v rossiyskom i germanskom prave // Zakonodatel'stvo. 2015. № 3. S. 16–24.
5. Bratuhina E. V. Sootnoshenie ponyatiy «zdanie» i «sooruzhenie» po zakonodatel'stvu RF // Pravo i gosudarstvo: teoriya i praktika. 2021. № 1 (193). C. 96–98. https://doi.org/10.47643/1815-1337_2021_1_96
6. Nalimov Yu. D. Obschestvennoe mesto kak konstruktivnyy priznak ob'ektivnoy storony vandalizma // Vestnik Kazanskogo yuridicheskogo instituta MVD Rossii. 2020. T. 11, № 3 (41). S. 297–300. https://doi.org/10.37973/KUI.2020.41.3.006
7. Ganmyagmar B. Obschestvennoe mesto kak pravovaya kategoriya // Sibirskoe yuridicheskoe obozrenie. 2017. № 3 (14). S. 327–332. https://doi.org/10.19073/2306-1340-2017-14-3-95-100
8. Novoselov G. P. Uchenie ob ob'ekte prestupleniya. Metodologicheskie aspekty : monografiya. Moskva : Norma, 2001. 208 s.
9. Pavlov V. G. Ugolovnaya otvetstvennost' za huliganstvo i vandalizm : monografiya. Sankt-Peterburg : Yuridicheskiy centr-Press, 2011. 282 s.
10. Pashutina O. S. Predmet vandalizma: ponyatie i problemy zakonodatel'nogo opredeleniya // Biznes v zakone. 2008. № 2. S. 123–125.
11. Nikonorov E. A., Nikonorov A. A. Ponyatie obschestvennogo mesta v rossiyskom zakonodatel'stve // Vestnik ekonomicheskoy bezopasnosti. 2018. № 2. S. 222–227.
12. Ivanova E. V. K voprosu o zakonodatel'nom zakreplenii ponyatiya «obschestvennoe mesto» // Nauchnyy portal MVD Rossii. 2017. № 3 (39). S. 89–97.
13. Baburin V. V., Cheremnova N. A. Oskvernenie, unichtozhenie ili povrezhdenie v nekotoryh stat'yah ugolovnogo kodeksa Rossiyskoy Federacii // Yuridicheskaya nauka i pravoohranitel'naya praktika. 2020. № 1 (51). S. 55–64.
14. Bolotova E. D. O neobhodimosti ustanovleniya ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti za oskvernenie pamyatnikov istorii i kul'tury // Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta. Seriya: Yurisprudenciya. 2020. № 1. S. 115–121. https://doi.org/10.18384/2310-6794-2020-1-115-121
15. Pashutina O. S. Vandalizm: ponyatie i vidy ego proyavleniy // Obschestvo i pravo. 2008. № 2 (20). S. 144–146.
