Modern problems of legal regulation of the prosecutor’s warning about the inadmissibility of extremist activities as an act of prosecutorial response

Introduction. The article is devoted to the issues of legal regulation of a prosecutor’s warning about the inadmissibility of extremist activities as an act of prosecutorial response. It is noted that Russian and foreign scientists who study contemporary issues of extremism emphasize both the problems of its occurrence and manifestation, and the possibility of its prevention in various areas of law enforcement. Special attention is also paid to the study of legal tools, the prosecutor’s response in this area of prosecutor’s supervision, the legal regulation of the prosecutor’s warning about the inadmissibility of extremist activities, as one of the actions of prosecutor’s reaction, used in the above mentioned direction of prosecutor’s supervision.

Materials and methods. The methodological basis of the study comprises general scientific (analysis, analogy, comparison) and special methods of knowledge of legal phenomena and processes (method of interpretation of legal norms, technical-legal, formal-legal and formal-logical methods).

The results of the study. As a result of the analysis, it was revealed that the use of the prosecutor’s response considered in the paper has a positive effect on the state of law in this area: it is used in a certain area of legal relations; it is a preventive act; it has specific legal consequences (the prosecutor’ appeal a statement about the liquidation of a public or religious association or another organization and the decision to suspend their activities); it can be used along with other acts of the prosecutor’s response (the prosecutor’s view on the inadmissibility of violation of the law). At the same time, the author emphasizing the characteristic features of the legal tool under consideration and its implementation, substantiates the existence of problems in the legal regulation of warning the prosecutor about the inadmissibility of extremist activities as an act of prosecutorial response and the need for changes in the current legislation.

Discussion and conclusion. The effectiveness and necessity of the further application of the act under consideration as an independent type of prosecutorial response acts, as well as the existence of problems in its legal regulation are substantiated. The conclusion is made about the need to change a number of provisions of the current legislation regulating the basis of application, the implementation procedure, the responsibility of the supervised subjects addressed to in this act, and the timing of the prosecutor’s warning about the inadmissibility of extremist activity as an act of prosecutorial response.

1. Andriyanov V.N., 2017. Konstitucionno-pravovye osnovy protivodejstviya terrorizmu [Constitutional and legal foundations of countering terrorism]. Vserossijskij kriminologicheskij zhurnal [All-Russian Criminological Journal]. Т. 11. № 1.

2. Vinokurov A.Yu., 2002. Bor’ba s ehkstremizmom sredstvami prokurorskogo nadzora [The fight against extremism by means of prosecutorial supervision]. Zakonnost’ [Legality]. № 11.

3. Ergashev E.R., 2018. Prokurorskij nadzor Rossijskoj Federacii [Prosecutor’s Supervision of the Russian Federation]. Ekaterinburg.

4. Pavlov K.A., Sangadzhiev B.V., 2013. Pravovoe regulirovanie v sfere protivodejstviya ekstremistskoj deyatel’nosti [Legal regulation in the field of countering extremist activity]. Istoriya, filosofiya, ekonomika i pravo [History, philosophy, economics and law]. № 2.

5. Skudin A.S., 2010. Preduprezhdenie ekstremistskoj deyatel’nosti [Prevention of extremist activity]. Rossijskij sledovatel’ [Russian investigator]. № 18.

6. Solovcova E.A., 2015. Klassifikaciya administrativno-pravovyh sredstv profilaktiki ekstremizma [Classification of administrative and legal means of preventing extremism]. Aktual’nye problemy sovremennoj nauki. IV Mezhdunarodnaya nauchno-prakticheskaya konferenciya [Actual problems of modern science IV International Scientific and Practical Conference].

7. Tamaev R.S., 2008. Protivodejstvie ekstremizmu sredstvami prokurorskogo nadzora [Countering extremism by means of prosecutorial supervision]. Biznes v zakone [Business in Law]. № 4.

8. Adrian Guelke, 2006. Terrorism and Global Disorder. I.B.Tauris.

9. Archetti C., 2015. Terrorism, Communication and the Media. In C. Kennedy-Pipe, G. Clubb and S. Mabon (eds) Terrorism and Political Violence. London: Sage.

10. Livingston Marius H., 1978. International terrorism in the contemporary world.

11. Cas Mudde, 2016. Оn Extremism and Democracy in Europe. London: Routltdge Focus.

12. Whittaker, David J., 2004. Terrorists and terrorism in the contemporary world. London, New York: Routledge.