Criminal Responsibility for Violation of The Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion under the Laws of Russia and Germany

The current legislation of Russia responsibility for violations of the right to freedom of conscience and religion is provided for in Art. 148 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Federal Law of 29 June 2013 No.136-FZ presented this articke in a new edition. Part 1 Art. 148 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation undergone the most significant change and that was due, according to the experts, to the high-profile "Pussy Riot" case. The authors of the articles was asked to examine the current edition of Part 1 Art. 148 of the Criminal Code with the position of its legal characteristics and enforcement, as well as problems arising in judicial practice. In particular, a marked similarity between the individual elements of the crime with the offence stipulated by part 1 art. 213 of the Criminal Code providing for criminal responsibility for hooliganism. Further the authors note the ambiguous understanding of the victim, as well as the difficulty in interpreting the purpose, which is listed as "offense of religious feelings". Then a characteristic of criminal legal norms providing for criminal responsibility for crimes against the ideological, including religious, opinion is presented according to the criminal law of the Federal Republic of Germany: § 166 "Offense of Denominations, Religious Communities and Philosophical Associations" and §167 "Preventing Someone from Holding a Religious Ceremony". These provisions are in section XI of the Criminal Code "Crimes in the Sphere of Religion and Ideology", therefore, common object of a crime is a direct threat to the human right to freedom of conscience as one element of the constitutional rights and freedoms of man and of the citizen, which determines similarity with art. 148 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Special attention is given to the characteristics of an offensive action, which in Germany did not cover any disparaging review, but only one that is a rough form of disrespect. Such forms may be offensive in themselves either on the content when given a shameful characteristic behaviour or condition (e. g., allegation of shameful facts or extremely unfavorable ratings). When establishing the abusive acts, it is not the recipient's subjective perception of insults, but objective assessment of the act, which is carried out in each case by the enforcer.

religion, faith, offence of the feelings of believers, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, hooliganism, publicity, religious hatred, extremism, extremist material

1. Арямов А.А., Руева Е.О., Пономаренко В.С. Вариация на тему уголовно-правовой охраны свободы вероисповедания в Российской Федерации // Известия высших учебных заведений. Уральский регион. - 2014. - № 3. - С. 11.

2. Беспалько В.Г. Уголовно-правовая охрана религиозных отношений // Журнал российского права. - 2014. - № 7. - С. 41-50.

3. Большой психологический словарь. 4-е изд., расшир. / под ред. Б.Г. Мещерякова, В.П. Зинченко // URL: http://online-knigi.com/page/118634 (дата обращения: 24 сентября 2017 г.).

4. Никитенко И.В., Хомик Э.В. Уголовная ответственность за посягательства на свободу совести и меж-конфессиональное согласие: вопросы теории и законодательства // Вестник ДВЮИ МВД России. - 2017. - № 1 (38). - С. 60-64.

5. Рарог А.И. Проблемы квалификации преступлений по субъективным признакам. - М., 2015.

6. Серебренникова А.В. Уголовная ответственность за нарушение права на свободу совести и вероисповеданий по УК Германии (параграф 167) и УК Российской Федерации (ст. 148) // Юридические записки. - 2013. - № 1.

7. Серебренникова А.В. Уголовно-правовое обеспечение свободы вероисповеданий по § 166 УК ФРГ // Евразийский научный журнал. - 2016. - № 10.

8. Хулап В. Уголовное законодательство Германии в сфере религии: история и современные дискуссии // Государство, религия, церковь в России и за рубежом. - 2017. - № 2.

9. Fischer T. StGB, 58. Aufl. 2011, § 166 StGB. Rn. 6, 7.

10. Heidegger М. Die Zeit des Weltbildes. Vortrag 1938. FaM, 1950. S. 73ff.

11. Lackner K./Kühl K. StGB, 26. Aufl. 2007, § 166 StGB. Rn. 3.

12. Laufhütte H. W., Rissing-van Saan R. Strafgesetzbuch. Leipziger Kommentar. Vol. 6. Berlin, 2010. S. 273-275.