The fight against terrorist recidivism in Russia and China in the global context
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36097/rsan.v1i27.841Keywords:
terrorism, terrorist crimes, counterterrorism, general recidivism, special recidivismAbstract
In the modern world, the prevention of terrorist attacks is one of the most complicated and relevant challenges facing society. International organizations (NATO, the UN, the Council of Europe, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization) are actively fighting against terrorism. This study analyzes the fight against terrorism in Russia and China, with regard to global trends. The study involves a comparative analysis of the criminal laws of Russia and China in the field of counterterrorism. The criminal laws of Russia and China do not provide a clear definition of the concept of a terrorist crime. However, this gap is bridged by explanations provided by appropriate authorities and agencies. The study investigates the peculiarities of the establishment of recidivism and special recidivism based on the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The study focuses on the understanding terrorist crimes and figuring out the range of concrete actions that are classified as terrorist crimes. The study analyzes changes made to the criminal laws of Russia and China, which enhance responsibility for committing second terrorist offenses.
Downloads
References
Resolution of Plenum of Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated February 9, 2012 No. 1 “On Certain Issues of Judicial Practices Involving Criminal Cases on Terrorist Crimes” // Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Bulletin. No. 4.
Giles, K. (2012, June). Russia's public stance on cyberspace issues. In Cyber Conflict (CYCON), 2012 4th International Conference on (pp. 1-13). IEEE.
Ibragimov, M. R., & Matsuzato, K. (2014). Contextualized violence: politics and terror in Dagestan. Nationalities Papers, 42(2), 286-306.
Zemin, J. (2012). Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China. Chinese L. & Gov't, 45, 53.
Criminal Code of the Russian Federation dated June 13, 1996 (amended and supplemented as of 21.07.2014) // Official legal information web-portal. – www.pravo.gov.ru
Federal Law dated May 5, 2014 No. 130-FZ “On Amendments to Certain Legal Acts of the Russian Federation” // Rossiyskaya Gazeta (Russian Newspaper). May 7.
Heazle, M., & Knight, N. (Eds.). (2007). China-Japan relations in the twenty-first century: creating a future past?. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Kern, M. (2004). The poetry of Han historiography. Early Medieval China, 2004(1), 23-65.
Lowe, D. (2016). The European Union’s Passenger Name Record Data Directive 2016/681: Is It Fit for Purpose?. international criminal law review, 16(5), 856-884.
Battersby, John (2017): Terrorism Where Terror Isn't: Australian and New Zealand Terrorism Compared, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, DOI: 10.1080/1057610X.2017.1287501.
Cherney, A., & Murphy, K. (2013). Policing terrorism with procedural justice: The role of police legitimacy and law legitimacy. Australian & New Zealand journal of criminology, 46(3), 403-421.
Ash, K. (2016). Representative democracy and fighting domestic terrorism. Terrorism and Political Violence, 28(1), 114-134.
Singh, C., & Bedi, A. S. (2012). ‘War on piracy’: the conflation of Somali piracy with terrorism in discourse, tactic and law. ISS Working Paper Series/General Series, 543(543), 1-44.
Badar, M. E. (2016). The road to genocide: The propaganda machine of the self-declared Islamic State (IS). international criminal law review, 16(3), 361-411.
Davis, J. (2016). Uncloaking secrecy: international human rights law in terrorism cases. Human rights quarterly, 38(1), 58-84.
Kydd, A. H., & Walter, B. F. (2006). The strategies of terrorism. International Security, 31(1), 49-80.
Francesca Galli, Valsamis Mitsilegas & Clive Walker (2016) Terrorism investigations and prosecutions in comparative law, The International Journal of Human Rights, 20:5, 593-600, DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2016.1162407.
Grozdanova, R. (2015). The United Kingdom and Diplomatic Assurances: A Minimalist Approach towards the Anti-Torture Norm. international criminal law review, 15(3), 517-543.
Hewitt, C. (2014). Law enforcement tactics and their effectiveness in dealing with American terrorism: Organizations, autonomous cells, and lone wolves. Terrorism and Political Violence, 26(1), 58-68.
Klein, G. R. (2016). Ideology isn't everything: transnational terrorism, recruitment incentives, and attack casualties. Terrorism and Political Violence, 28(5), 868-887.
Monteleone, C. (2016). Do terrorism, organized crime (drug production), and state weakness affect contemporary armed conflicts? An empirical analysis. Global Change, Peace & Security, 28(1), 35-53.
Reeves, J. (2016). Ideas and influence: scholarship as a harbinger of counterterrorism institutions, policies, and laws in the People's Republic of China. Terrorism and political violence, 28(5), 827-847.
Scott, D. (2016). NATO and Japan: A strategic convergence? Post cold-war geopolitics: Russia, China, anti-piracy and anti-terrorism. International Politics, 53(3), 324-342.
Tschantret, J. (2018). Repression, opportunity, and innovation: The evolution of terrorism in Xinjiang, China. Terrorism and political violence, 30(4), 569-588.
Wallace, T. (2014). China and the Regional Counter-Terrorism Structure: An Organizational Analysis. Asian Security, 10(3), 199-220.
The United Nations Organization Fights Terrorism // http://www.un.org/ru/counterterrorism/legal-instruments.shtml.
