Petryakova Lyudmila Aleksandrovna Astashkina Polina Dmitrievna

The key provisions of the institution of necessary defense are analyzed and the conditions for recognizing the harm caused as legitimate are identified. It is noted that one of the groups of crimes with an ambiguous assessment of the criteria for the legality of necessary defense is criminal attacks on sexual freedom and sexual integrity of the individual. It has been established that the main problem in this matter is determining the maximum possible harm that a defender can cause to an attacker on sexual freedom or integrity. One of the reasons is the uncertainty of the nature of the violence that can be caused to the victim as a result of crimes, responsibility for which is established by Chapter 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which in general does not negate the independent specificity and possible delayed consequences of such crimes. It is concluded that it is very difficult for victims to objectively assess the nature of the violence being prepared or committed; in this regard, it is proposed to change the provisions on necessary defense, regarding the possibility of causing any harm if not only the life, but also the sexual integrity and sexual freedom of the defender is threatened.

necessary defense, sexual crimes, sexual freedom of the individual, sexual integrity of the individual

Petryakova Lyudmila Aleksandrovna – Candidate of Juridical Sciences, Lecture, Department of Criminal Law, Law Institute, Irkutsk State University (1, K. Marx, Irkutsk, 664003, Russian Federation), ORCID: 0000-0003-1416-9977, RSCI AuthorID: 1028589, ResearcherID: ABC-1156-2021, e-mail: poimanowa@mail.ru

Astashkina Polina Dmitrievna – Legal Consultant of the Legal Clinic (Practice), Law Institute, Irkutsk State University (1, K. Marx, Irkutsk, 664003, Russian Federation), ORCID: 0009-0002-2482-6125, RSCI AuthorID: 11753256, ResearcherID: rid80364, e-mail: p.astashkina52@gmail.com

Petryakova L. A., Astashkina P. D. Problemy opredeleniya prevysheniya predelov neobhodimoj oborony ot prestupnyh posyagatel'stv na polovuyu svobodu i polovuyu neprikosnovennost' lichnosti [Problems of determining exceeding the limits of necessary defense against criminal attacks on sexual freedom and sexual integrity] Sibirskij yuridicheskij vestnik [Siberian Law Herald]. 2024, no 2(105), pp. 83–88. – DOI 10.26516/2071-8136.2024.2.83 (in Russian)

343.228

1. Antonov A.G. K voprosu o neobkhodimoy oborone pri iznasilovanii [On the issue of necessary defense during rape]. Vestnik Tomskogo instituta povysheniya kvalifikatsii rabotnikov FSIN Rossii [Bulletin of the Tomsk Institute for Advanced Training of Employees of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia], 2020, no. 4 (6), pp. 9-15. (in Russian)

2. Antonov A.G. K voprosu ob obshchestvennoy opasnosti iznasilovaniya v svyazi s otsenkoy pravomernosti neobkhodimoy oborony ot nego [On the issue of the public danger of rape in connection with assessing the legality of the necessary defense against it]. Pravda i zakon [Truth and law], 2022, no. 2 (20), pp. 24-29. (in Russian)

3. Garbatovich D. Neobkhodimaya oborona pri zashchite svobody i polovoy neprikosnovennosti [Necessary defense when defending freedom and sexual integrity]. Ugolovnoye pravo [Criminal law], 2008, no. 1, pp. 35-37. (in Russian)

4. Zvecharovskii I.E. Komu neobkhodima neobkhodimaya oborona? [Who needs the necessary defense?]. Ugolovnoye pravo [Criminal law], 2013, no. 1, pp. 28-30. (in Russian)

5. Maltsev V.V. Neobkhodimaya oborona pri posyagatelstve na svobodu, zdorov’ye, polovuyu svobodu i neprikosnovennost’ [Necessary defense in the event of an attack on freedom, health, sexual freedom and integrity]. Zakonnost [Legality], 2012, no. 2 (928), pp. 32-34. (in Russian)

6. Merkur’yev V.V., Tarakanov I.A. Predely neobkhodimoy oborony: k voprosu o sovershenstvovanii polozheniy stat’i 37 UK RF [The limits of necessary defense: on the issue of improving the provisions of Article 37 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation]. Vestnik Akademii prava i upravleniya [Bulletin of the Academy of Law and Management], 2016, no. 4 (45), pp. 30-34. (in Russian)

7. Parhomenko D.A. Usmotrenie pravoprimenitelya pri ocenke pravomernosti neobhodimoj oborony [Discretion of the law enforcer in assessing of the legitimacy of necessary defense]. Sibirskij yuridicheskij vestnik [Siberian Legal Bulletin], 2015, no. 1 (68), pp. 68-72. (in Russian)

8. Parkhomenko S.V. Deyaniya, prestupnost kotorykh isklyuchayetsya v silu sotsial’noĭ poleznosti i neobkhodimosti [Acts the criminality of which is excluded due to social utility and necessity]. Yuridicheskiy tsentr Press [Legal Center Press], 23004, p. 267. (in Russian)

9. Tarakanov I.A., Sviridova YU.S. Neobhodimaya oborona: predely pravomernosti prichineniya smerti posyagayushchemu licu [Necessary defense: limits on the legality of causing death to an encroaching person]. Vestnik Vladimirskogo yuridicheskogo instituta [Bulletin of the Vladimir Law Institute], 2021, no. 2 (59), pp. 122–128. (in Russian)