Substances and Methods Prohibited for Use in Sport: Object or Means of Committing Crimes?

Countering doping in modern sport plays an important role. In order to effectively apply various types of legal liability, it is necessary to determine what substances and methods are prohib­ited in sport. Since the advent of full-fledged anti-doping rules (1967), the list of such substances and methods, as well as the doping control system, have been dynamically changing. The anti-doping system received significant development after the formation of the World Anti-Doping Agency (1999). For the purposes of bringing to criminal responsibility, there is a list, initially somewhat reduced, sub­sequently substantially supplemented. The legislator's decision to create a special list raises questions. Therefore, the Author considers various approaches to such substances and methods and determines their place in the crime. In the first part of the work, prohibited substances and methods are analyzed and their characteristics are given. In the second part, the Author explores the need for a specific list of prohibited substances or methods for the purpose of criminalizing anti-doping rule violations. In ad­dition, it distinguishes between narcotic, psychotropic, potent substances, on the one hand, and prohib­ited substances, on the other. The Author comes to the conclusion that the existence of a special list for the purposes of implementing Art. 2301 and 2302 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is inap­propriate due to the specifics of the acts themselves, as this limits the possibility of being held liable for the use of analogues of substances. In the third part of the work, the Author explores the understanding of prohibited substances or methods as the subject of a crime. It is concluded that to consider prohibited substances or methods as the subject of crimes under Art. 2301 and 2302 of the Criminal Code of the Rus­sian Federation is impossible, since the crime is not directly directed at them. Accordingly, in the fourth part of the work it is substantiated that such substances and methods constitute the means of committing a crime. As a result, the Author comes to the conclusion that it is necessary to change the legislative regulation of criminal liability for violation of anti-doping rules

Проблемные аспекты предоставления субсидий субъектам предпринимательской деятельности: российский опыт

The subject of the paper is Russian the legal framework and law enforcement practice con-cerning granting subsidies to business entities.The purpose of the paper is to identify the legal problems of state support for small and medium – sized businesses by granting subsidies.The methodology of paper includes the formal logical interpretation of Russian legislation, systematization of the court practice concerning application of art. 15.15.5 (pt. 2) Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation and other regulations.The main results and scope of their application. The legal basis of providing subsidies is characterized. The business support programs in Russia are analyzed. The author's ap-proach to the distinction between the concepts of "terms of granting subsidies”, “terms established when granting subsidies" and the "terms of using subsidies" is substantiated. The valid and invalid conditions for the granting of subsidies as well as the reasons for their return are proven. The results of research may be used as the basis of correction of Russian and foreign legislation concerning granting subsidies to business entities as well as step in future legal research in this sphere.Conclusions. Public authorities and local governments do not take into account differences between the terms "conditions for granting subsidies" and "conditions for the use of subsi-dies", unreasonably apply civil law norms to the rules for granting subsidies. Regional au-thorities do not effectively use the legal opportunities provided to them by the Federal leg-islator, as well as often allow the abuse of power.Выявляются правовые проблемы государственной поддержки малого и среднего биз-неса в форме предоставления субсидий. Охарактеризована правовая основа предо-ставления субсидий. Проведен анализ программ поддержки предпринимательства. На основе систематизации судебной практики применения ч. 2 ст. 15.15.5 КоАП РФ и иных норм предложен авторский подход к разграничению понятий «условия предо-ставления субсидий», «условия, установленные при предоставлении субсидий» и «условия использования субсидий», а также обоснованы допустимые и недопусти-мые условия предоставления субсидий, основания для их возврата

An Epididymis-Specific Secretory Protein HongrES1 Critically Regulates Sperm Capacitation and Male Fertility

Mammalian sperm capacitation is an essential prerequisite to fertilizion. Although progress had been made in understanding the physiology and biochemistry of capacitation, little is known about the potential roles of epididymal proteins during this process. Here we report that HongrES1, a new member of the SERPIN (serine proteinase inhibitor) family exclusively expressed in the rat cauda epididymis and up-regulated by androgen, is secreted into the lumen and covers the sperm head. Co-culture of caudal sperms with HongrES1 antibody in vitro resulted in a significant increase in the percentage of capacitated spermatozoa. Furthermore, the percentage of capacitated spermatozoa clearly increased in rats when HongrES1 was down-regulated by RNAi in vivo. Remarkably, knockdown of HongrES1 in vivo led to reduced fertility accompanied with deformed appearance of fetuses and pups. These results identify HongrES1 as a novel and critical molecule in the regulation of sperm capacitation and male fertility

On the Appropriateness of the Use of the Term “Inducement” in Article 230¹ of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

The problem of prohibited substances (methods) abuse in sport has existed for quite a long time. On the one hand, by criminalizing certain anti-doping rules violations, legislation expanded the liability limits of coaches, sports medical personnel, and of other specialists in the field of sports, which can be regarded positively. On the other hand, it made certain mistakes which impeded the effectiveness of these laws enforcement. Among other things, there is a problem with definition of the term “inducement”. The term itself is defined in the note to article 2301 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code, but there is a controversy in demarcation of inducement. methods. While deception, the use of violence and instructions as inducement methods are socially dangerous at substantial level and can be regarded as methods of committing the crime, the provision of information or the prohibited substances themselves (means of using methods) cannot be regarded as methods of committing the crime. Such a definition of inducement means also leads to contradictions with the corpus delicti under Article 2302 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code. In addition, there are also different interpretations regarding the methods of inducement, coercion, involvement in the other corpus delicti, which, all together with the lack of a unified interpretation of the terms affects the possibility of bringing the guilty persons, especially coaches, sports medical personnel and other specialists in the field of sports, to criminal responsibility. The survey conducted among lawyers also has revealed difficulties in distinguishing these terms in practice. Based on the criminal legislation analysis, the author comes to the conclusion that the amendments in the Russian Federation Criminal Code are necessary

On the Appropriateness of the Use of the Term “Inducement” in Article 230<sup>1</sup> of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

The problem of prohibited substances (methods) abuse in sport has existed for quite a long time. On the one hand, by criminalizing certain anti-doping rules violations, legislation expanded the liability limits of coaches, sports medical personnel, and of other specialists in the field of sports, which can be regarded positively. On the other hand, it made certain mistakes which impeded the effectiveness of these laws enforcement. Among other things, there is a problem with definition of the term “inducement”. The term itself is defined in the note to article 2301 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code, but there is a controversy in demarcation of inducement. methods. While deception, the use of violence and instructions as inducement methods are socially dangerous at substantial level and can be regarded as methods of committing the crime, the provision of information or the prohibited substances themselves (means of using methods) cannot be regarded as methods of committing the crime. Such a definition of inducement means also leads to contradictions with the corpus delicti under Article 2302 of the Russian Federation Criminal Code. In addition, there are also different interpretations regarding the methods of inducement, coercion, involvement in the other corpus delicti, which, all together with the lack of a unified interpretation of the terms affects the possibility of bringing the guilty persons, especially coaches, sports medical personnel and other specialists in the field of sports, to criminal responsibility. The survey conducted among lawyers also has revealed difficulties in distinguishing these terms in practice. Based on the criminal legislation analysis, the author comes to the conclusion that the amendments in the Russian Federation Criminal Code are necessary.</jats:p

Problematic issues of granting subsidies to business entities: Russian experience

The subject of the paper is Russian the legal framework and law enforcement practice con-cerning granting subsidies to business entities.The purpose of the paper is to identify the legal problems of state support for small and medium – sized businesses by granting subsidies.The methodology of paper includes the formal logical interpretation of Russian legislation, systematization of the court practice concerning application of art. 15.15.5 (pt. 2) Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation and other regulations.The main results and scope of their application. The legal basis of providing subsidies is characterized. The business support programs in Russia are analyzed. The author's ap-proach to the distinction between the concepts of "terms of granting subsidies”, “terms established when granting subsidies" and the "terms of using subsidies" is substantiated. The valid and invalid conditions for the granting of subsidies as well as the reasons for their return are proven. The results of research may be used as the basis of correction of Russian and foreign legislation concerning granting subsidies to business entities as well as step in future legal research in this sphere.Conclusions. Public authorities and local governments do not take into account differences between the terms "conditions for granting subsidies" and "conditions for the use of subsi-dies", unreasonably apply civil law norms to the rules for granting subsidies. Regional au-thorities do not effectively use the legal opportunities provided to them by the Federal leg-islator, as well as often allow the abuse of power

Problematic issues of granting subsidies to business entities: Russian experience

The subject of the paper is Russian the legal framework and law enforcement practice con-cerning granting subsidies to business entities.The purpose of the paper is to identify the legal problems of state support for small and medium – sized businesses by granting subsidies.The methodology of paper includes the formal logical interpretation of Russian legislation, systematization of the court practice concerning application of art. 15.15.5 (pt. 2) Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation and other regulations.The main results and scope of their application. The legal basis of providing subsidies is characterized. The business support programs in Russia are analyzed. The author's ap-proach to the distinction between the concepts of "terms of granting subsidies”, “terms established when granting subsidies" and the "terms of using subsidies" is substantiated. The valid and invalid conditions for the granting of subsidies as well as the reasons for their return are proven. The results of research may be used as the basis of correction of Russian and foreign legislation concerning granting subsidies to business entities as well as step in future legal research in this sphere.Conclusions. Public authorities and local governments do not take into account differences between the terms "conditions for granting subsidies" and "conditions for the use of subsi-dies", unreasonably apply civil law norms to the rules for granting subsidies. Regional au-thorities do not effectively use the legal opportunities provided to them by the Federal leg-islator, as well as often allow the abuse of power.</jats:p