2021 Issue №3

In this article, the author examines the actual issue of applying provisions of an extreme necessity to actions containing signs of a crime under Article 199.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on such a circumstance that excludes the criminality of the act. The author analyses a variety of views on the problem under consideration. Methodologically, the study relies on general scientific methods, as well as the method of formal legal analysis. The purpose is to identify existing gaps of a theoretical and practical nature and to propose possible ways to bridge them. The article notes the importance of making amendments to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 48 dated 26.11.2019 "On the practice of applying Legislation on Liability for Tax crimes by courts".

The article discusses some problems related to the legal personality of artificial intelligence. The concept of artificial intelligence and its legally significant features, the ratio of artificial intelligence and robot are investigated. The purpose of the study is to analyze the main models of granting legal personality to artificial intelligence. The following research methods are used: comparative, analytical and historical. Results: The first model denies the possibility of granting artificial intelligence legal personality, within its framework artificial intelligence is not considered as a subject, but is considered as an object of law, which does not take into account the essential features of artificial intelligence. The second model boils down to creating a legal fiction by analogy with legal entities. The use of this model looks the most reasonable, since artificial intelligence and legal entities largely have economically significant characteristics, in addition, this model is most often used for atypical subjects. Within the framework of the third model, the identification of the legal personality of artificial intelligence with human is carried out. However, this position rests on significant ideological problems. The fourth model proposes to endow artificial intelligence with its own special legal personality, but there is no precise description of this model in the doctrine.

The process of testimony verification at the crime scene is often challenging due to its complex and dynamic nature. Moreover, there are certain peculiarities when performing this work during the investigation with the participation of a minor. The purpose of this study is to highlight the main features that arise during the testimony verification at the crime scene with the participation of a minor and to develop the most practical implementation recommendations. The study confirms the value and urgency of the investigation recording. The author also comes up with some recommendations on how to correct mistakes made in the descriptive part of the testimony verification protocols. The examined materials revealed malpractice of not registering the questions the answers posed to the minor in the protocol. The information provided to minors, must be recorded in the language clear to them. Additional means of fixation are shown to be effective, while the use of video recording is recommended. The basic rules for the use of additional fixation means are noted.