Responsibility in social security law. Book: Social Security Law. Principles and objectives of compulsory social insurance against industrial accidents and occupational diseases, circle of persons subject to this type of insurance

Autonomous non-profit organization

KALININGRAD BUSINESS COLLEGE

Department of Law

Course work

On the topic: "Responsibility for committing offenses in the field of social security"

According to PM 01: Ensuring the rights of citizens

Completed by a student

group 11-P-2/1

Dyachenko E.I.

Checked by: Andreeva N.I.

Kaliningrad 2012

Introduction

Conclusion

Introduction

Russia in Article 7 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation proclaims itself a social state. But the social nature of the state consists not only in proclaiming itself as such, not only in enshrining social rights in the Constitution of the country, but in effectively guaranteeing and protecting them in a timely manner, which determines the relevance of this work.

Millions of citizens receive various benefits from the social security system, and the right of each of them must be effectively protected. In conditions when there are no norms on legal responsibility in the industry that regulates these social relations, violations of the rights of citizens become not only massive, but also chronic. The main violations are: unreasonable refusal to provide the relevant benefits, their provision not in full or in violation of the established deadlines. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in its acts has repeatedly pointed out that in order to maintain citizens' confidence in the law and the actions of the state, including when changing the current regulation, the legislator is obliged to comply with the constitutional principles of justice, equality, proportionality, as well as stability and security, social rights and cannot carry out such regulation that would infringe on the very essence of these rights and would lead to the loss of their real content. The absence of such guarantees of social rights as the norms of legal liability devalues them and creates grounds for violations.

At the same time in last years Russian society is undergoing changes in all areas of its activity. The social security sector is no exception. The legislator adopts legal norms that terminate the provision of types of social security. Not only the grounds and sizes in which certain benefits are provided under the social security system are changing, but also the very principles of their provision. At the same time, the human right to social security enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation must remain unshakable.

Of particular concern is the fact that in the activities of both law-making and law enforcement bodies in the field of social security, violations of the social rights of citizens are becoming widespread, which indicates the insufficient effectiveness of existing guarantees. constitutional rights citizens.

Objectives: to highlight the basic general concept of legal responsibility and the principles of its implementation, to characterize legal responsibility in the field of social security.

Subject of study: legal relations arising from the commission of offenses in the field of social security.

Object of study: responsibility in the field of social security.

The purpose of the work: to explore the concept of responsibility in the field of social security, its types and legal relations, as a result of which it arises.

Objectives: to characterize legal responsibility in the field and law of social security, describe its types, consider its consolidation in law.

Structure of the work: introduction, three chapters, conclusion, list of references.

Chapter 1. Legal liability in social security

1.1 The concept of legal responsibility in social security

In the modern domestic legal science of social security, the problems of legal liability have not been sufficiently developed. This issue was considered by K.S. Batygin within the framework of state social insurance as a form of social security.

In the legislation on social security, such responsibility is enshrined in numerous norms of legal acts - laws and by-laws.

The place of the norms on legal responsibility in the system of social security law has not yet been determined either.

Study of the norms of international and domestic legislation, judicial practice and offenses in the field of social security law allow us to formulate legal liability as follows.

Legal responsibility in the law of social security is the actual undergoing by the offender of deprivations of a property nature, provided for by the sanction, as a result of violations of the provisions of the norms of social security law, in order to restore the violated right.

Legal liability in social security law is one of the guarantees that ensure the restoration of a violated right. Therefore, due to the specifics of relations regulated by social security law, specific property sanctions should be applied to the offender.

This means that other measures of responsibility are applied to the subjects of these relations, for example: civil liability for violation of obligations, material liability on the basis of labor law in case of violation of their obligations, enshrined in the sources of social security law, is impossible.

Features of the legal responsibility of the subjects of legal relations on social security are determined by the specifics of the subject of social security law. It manifests itself in the following:

)Relations in the law of social security have a distributive character;

2)Although there is no equality in these legal relations, their parties do not bear public law (administrative, criminal liability);

)The recipient of a material benefit under the social security system is an economically dependent party, which limits his property liability;

)In the law of social security, restorative property sanctions should be widely used, designed to serve exclusively the restoration of the violated right of the other party;

1.2 Types of legal liability in social security

The set of norms on the legal responsibility of subjects of material distribution legal relations for social security as a whole forms an independent institution of the general part of the law of social security, since these norms should contain in the special part of the law of social security.

Responsibility in social security law and liability in the field of social security are different legal phenomena. However, they are closely related, since they have a common goal - the protection of the violated right.

Responsibility in social security law must protect and protect the citizen's right to existing species(benefits) under the social security system as an economically weaker side against violations by the obligated body, as well as to guarantee the restoration of this financial source, from which the benefit was illegally obtained. Liability in the area of social security generally protects the public order in this area of law.

In sectoral legislation on legal liability are presented fragmentarily. In addition, laws that contain rules on liability cannot actually protect rights, since the mechanism of liability enshrined in them is rather difficult to apply in practice.

The by-laws regulating social security relations also either do not contain the rules on the responsibility of their parties, or are formulated in such a way that it is impossible to apply them. For example, clause 1 of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of January 19, 1996. "On measures to ensure the timeliness of payment wages at the expense of the budget of all levels, pensions and other social payments" in terms of holding accountable for the delay in social payments is quite difficult, and sometimes impossible to apply in practice.

Absence in by-laws legal mechanism responsibility in the field of social security can be explained by the fact that all major types of social security are defined by law. Consequently, legal liability should be contained only in the norms of federal laws that establish the types of social security of a nationwide nature.

In the law of social security for an offense to citizens, only remedial and right-limiting sanctions are applied.

When applying a remedial sanction, for example, compensation for an illegally paid pension occurs. A special feature of restorative sanctions in social security law is that, while guaranteeing compensation for the damage caused, they provide for its full compensation. However full size does not mean full compensation for damages provided for in civil law(real harm + lost profit).

The norms of social security law do not contain any form of compensation for the unlawful incomplete (untimely) provision of the appropriate type of social security, and in fact only by providing a benefit not received or received in full can one restore property rights their recipient.

The restoration of the right as a type of sanction should also provide for additional compensation in favor of the citizen, consisting not only in compensation moral damage but also in the payment of interest for late provision of the appropriate type of social security.

Chapter 2. Legal liability in social security law

2.1 Types of legal liability in social security law

In social security, the following types of legal liability can be distinguished:

· Constitutional and legal responsibility as a type of legal responsibility is the application to a person (body, state) guilty of violating the prescriptions of constitutional and legal norms, measures of state coercion provided for by the sanction of a legal norm and expressed in negative consequences for him of a personal, organizational or property nature.

· Criminal liability is a type of legal liability; the legal consequence of the commission of a crime, which consists in the application of state coercion to the guilty person in the form of punishment.

· Administrative responsibility is a type of legal responsibility that determines the obligations of the subject to undergo deprivation of a state-imperious nature for a committed administrative offense.

Disciplinary responsibility - a type of legal responsibility<#"justify">The sphere of social security as a complex entity is a set of diverse relations that have a different legal nature: financial, managerial (administrative) and actually distributive. Therefore, legislation in the field of social security, including the norms of administrative law, financial law and social security law, is a complex legal entity. The norms of the first two named legal branches should contain the regulation of issues related to the responsibility of "their" participants in the relationship.

The legal responsibility of subjects in the law of social security exists, although not sufficiently formalized, within the framework of distributive legal relations, functioning regarding:

a) pensions;

b) Social benefits and compensation payments;

c) Social services (services);

e) State social assistance;

f) Social benefits and benefits, etc.;

It can be assumed that each type of social security, being an independent institution of social security law, contains norms of legal responsibility. However, despite the objective need for legal responsibility in social security law (its own sanctions, the need to guarantee observance of the rights of citizens), it has not yet received its sufficient formalization.

Within each type of sectoral social security relations, it is possible to differentiate responsibility according to different criteria, for example:

· on organizational and legal forms of social security (compulsory social insurance and provision at the expense of appropriations from state budget);

· the subject composition (recipients of social material benefits and social security authorities, are obliged to provide it - obligated authorities);

· the object of legal relations (types of provided social material benefits), etc.

Such criteria of differentiation in interconnection with each other allow to provide a holistic legal responsibility, so depending on the organizational and legal forms of social security in the pension system, the norms of legal responsibility are established in the acts regulating relations on compulsory pension insurance and state pension provision, therefore, the circle of subjects of pension legal relations varies depending on the two existing pension systems - insurance and budget. From here it is possible to single out the legal responsibility of two specific subjects - recipients of pensions and obligated bodies, etc.

A similar logical approach to the identification of legal liability and its presentation is possible for other types of social security.

2.2 Enshrining legal liability in social security law

Consider the consolidation and manifestation of legal responsibility in pension provision.

In pension legal relations, there is the following main subject composition:

· Citizens - recipients of the relevant types of pensions;

· Responsible authorities - pension authorities are obliged to provide an appropriate pension to citizens.

In addition to these subjects, there are also private parties in pension legal relations (co-subjects - additional subjects), which both contribute to the realization of the right to receive a pension by citizens, and act as guarantors of the realization of such a right.

These include:

· employers and other equivalent participants;

· the state represented by its bodies and competent organizations.

Within the framework of the insurance pension system, the legal liability of recipients of pensions is provided for by the norms of the federal law "On Labor Pensions".

The main duties of a citizen as a subject of pension legal relations, therefore, the law consists both in submitting the necessary documents to the pension authority, and in timely notification of this authority of all circumstances that may serve as a basis for changing the amount of the pension paid in the direction of reducing or terminating its payment.

Employer (physical and legal entities) are responsible for the accuracy of the information contained in the documents submitted by them for the establishment and payment of a labor pension (the same responsibility is provided for organizations issuing archival documents necessary for the establishment of pensions)

legal liability social security

If the submission of false information, untimely submission of information or improper performance of duties resulted in an overspending on the payment of labor pensions, the guilty persons compensate the PFR for the damage caused by the legislation (clause 1 of article 25 of the Federal Law "On labor pensions")

The normative prescriptions of clause 2 of article 25 of the law establishes responsibility for the provision of false information or untimely failure to provide information provided for in clause 400 of article 23 of the law. At the same time, this norm does not provide for information, for the failure to provide which, responsibility arises, established by paragraph 2 of article 25 of the law. In addition, clause 2 of article 25 of the law establishes that only a pensioner is liable, however, arbitration court practice shows that legal entities are held liable under clause 2 of article 25 of the Federal Law "On labor pensions."

The norm of paragraph 3 of article 25 of the Federal Law "On labor pensions" establishes legal liability for violation of the obligations contained in paragraph 1 of the same article, however, it does not establish any obligations for the violation of which legal entities and individuals can be held liable.

The employer and the pensioner compensate for the damage caused by failure to perform or improper performance of duties. However, it is not clear whether they act as independent subjects of liability or as solidary or subsidiary debtors.

The state, as you know, does not carry out expenses on the insurance pension, therefore it cannot limit the right of the insured person to receive it. However, for example, if a person has caused harm to his health, then he is assigned a social pension instead of a labor disability pension. After all, the deprivation of his right to receive a disability pension is nothing more than an additional punishment not provided for by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the state, represented by the legislature, does not bear any responsibility.

The federal law ("On labor pensions") does not contain rules on the legal responsibility of the obligated body for violating the rights of pensioners. The absence of norms on the responsibility of the obligated body in this institution of social security law exposes the right of citizens to receive a pension, on the one hand, to an unpunished violation, on the other hand, does not guarantee their restoration.

However, the norms of the federal law "On labor pensions" on liability are imperfect from the point of view of legal technique - they often duplicate each other.

Legal liability of pension recipients under budget system has not received its consolidation in any one normative legal act. The main reasons for this state of affairs are the many regulations governing the provision of budgetary pensions, the diversity of their recipients, etc.

Thus, the law of the Russian Federation "On pensions for persons who have served in the military, served in the internal affairs bodies, the State Fire Service, bodies for controlling the turnover drugs and psychotropic substances, institutions and bodies of the penitentiary system, and their families "does not establish legal liability, as such, of pension recipients. There are only separate rules that provide for negative property consequences for pensioners - the recovery of amounts of overpaid pensions due to abuse Concerning the legal liability of the subjects of pension relations under the federal law "On State Pension Provision in the Russian Federation" and relations regarding the life maintenance of judges in accordance with the law of the Russian Federation of June 26, 1992 "On the Status of Judges in the Russian Federation", we note that in These laws lack norms that establish the legal responsibility of both the obligated body and the recipient of a pension, lifelong financial allowance in case of violation of the rights of citizens; they cannot be restored.

The legal liability of recipients of social benefits is provided for by the federal law of May 19, 1995 No. "On State Benefits to Citizens with Children". Thus, in accordance with Article 18 of the law, recipients of benefits are required to timely notify the authorities assigning state benefits to citizens with children of the occurrence of circumstances that entail a change in the size of state benefits or the termination of their payments. Overpaid benefits are withheld from the recipient only if the overpayment was due to his fault. However, the rule on liability is not formulated properly, since the elements of the objective side of the offense are not established in it.

Federal Law of December 29, 2006 No. "On the provision of temporary disability benefits for pregnancy and childbirth of citizens subject to compulsory social insurance" provides for a reduction in the amount of temporary disability benefits in cases where the disease or injury occurred as a result of alcohol, narcotic, toxic intoxication or actions related to such intoxication. However, it is not clear what should be considered intoxication, since the law does not provide for a procedure for establishing such a fact for calculating benefits.

Responsibility of recipients of benefits for pregnancy and childbirth in the federal law of December 29, 2006 is not provided.

In addition to benefits, citizens can be paid other social payments - compensation, subsidies, monthly cash payments - the responsibility of the recipients of these types of social security is either not established at all, or is formulated in general terms.

The legal responsibility of the obligated authorities for violation of the provision of social benefits and other payments in the vast majority of regulations governing these relations does not contain provisions in the case of citizens' rights. If there are such norms, they are fragmentary. For example, in the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 3, 1994 No. "On the approval of the procedure for the appointment and payment of monthly compensation payments to certain categories of citizens" there is clause 7, which refers to responsibility.

The federal law "On Compulsory Social Insurance Against Accidents at Work and Occupational Diseases" only in part 8 of Article 15 provides for the responsibility of the obligated body for violation of the property rights of the insured person.

The legal responsibility of the parties to legal relations in social services should be contained in the Federal Law "On the Fundamentals of Social Services for the Population". However, it does not provide for the norms of legal liability of citizens. The federal law "On Social Services for Elderly Citizens and Disabled People" establishes that social services for elderly citizens and disabled people carried out on non-stationary conditions may be terminated if they violate the norms and rights established by the social service management bodies in the course of providing services (part 6 , article 15).

The legal responsibility of the obligated bodies in the law "On the Fundamentals of Social Services for the Population" does not establish the responsibility of the obligated body for the consequences of their actions dangerous to the life and health of the client of the social service or other violation of his rights. Only the Federal Law "On the Social Protection of the Disabled in the Russian Federation" establishes the responsibility of the obligated authorities for the rehabilitation and maintenance of the life of the disabled.

The legal responsibility of the parties to legal relations for the provision of medical and medicinal care is essentially absent in sectoral regulatory legal acts, so the fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation on protecting the health of citizens speak only of the rights of recipients of medical care. There are no rules about their responsibility for any violations.

The legal responsibility of the obligated authorities in the fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation on the protection of the health of citizens is provided for in cases of harm to the health of citizens: the perpetrators are obliged to compensate the victims for damage in the amount and in the manner established by the legislation of the Russian Federation, and this measure is civil liability, and not liability measures in social law security.

The main violation of the rights of citizens in such legal relations may be the failure to provide medical care, its untimely provision or provision not in full. Measures of responsibility in these cases could be compensation for the citizen's expenses for receiving paid medical care, with the accrual of interest on this amount.

In the field of providing drug care, medical workers are responsible for the unreasonable prescription or prescription of the wrong dosage in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation. Legal responsibility for non-provision of drug assistance, for its provision not in full or untimely provision to citizens has not been established.

The foregoing indicates the need to organize legal norms of legal liability of subjects of legal relations in the system of the branch of social security law.

Legislative changes can be made:

· by amending each normative act of each institution of social security law;

· the adoption of a single normative act that applies to all institutions of social security law. The latter option is more preferable from the point of view of economy.

Hence, all the rules governing legal liability in social security law should be attributed to its general part. This is due to the fact that they are important for each institution of the Special Part of Social Security Law and, as noted earlier, are implemented on the basis of individual principles.

Legal responsibility in the law of social security should guarantee the implementation of the social rights of citizens, enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

The subject of social security law, as already noted, includes material, procedural and procedural relations. Each group has its own content in the form of a set of rights and obligations of the parties.

Within the framework of material legal relations, the social material rights of citizens to receive pensions, benefits and compensation payments of a social nature, social services, social medical and drug assistance, state social assistance, social benefits and benefits are implemented. Therefore, offenses within the framework of these legal relations are the most dangerous, and legal liability measures should be provided for even a minor violation by the obligated authorities.

Offenses within the framework of procedural social security legal relations can also be significant for recipients of certain types of social security. Therefore, legal responsibility should protect not only the rights, but those realized by the parties within the framework of substantive legal relations, but also the rights in procedural relations.

Hence, special attention should be paid to the legislative establishment of the full legal responsibility of the obligated body to the citizen, since violations by the obligated bodies are often serious (often fatal) for citizens. By exercising his right to social security, a citizen thereby exercises his right to life, which, of course, must be protected by all means provided for by the current legal order of Russia.

The foregoing indicates that legal responsibility, as an emerging institution of the general part of social security law, should find its further development and proper consolidation in sectoral legislation.

Chapter 3

The court's conclusion that there are no legal grounds for satisfying the application for inclusion in the special length of service for the period of parental leave after the child reaches the age of one and a half years is based on an erroneous interpretation and application of substantive law.

N. applied to the court to declare illegal the decision of the commission for the appointment and recalculation of pensions of a state institution - the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation in Moscow.

Syzran, Samara Region, dated January 29, 2004, by which she was denied early assignment of a seniority pension due to insufficient special experience. She believed that the commission had unlawfully denied her inclusion in the length of service, which entitles her to an early appointment of a pension as teacher, the period of her stay on parental leave from October 22, 1989 to January 1, 1992.

By the decision of the Syzran City Court of the Samara Region of February 20, 2004, N.'s application was partially satisfied: the state institution - the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation in Syzran was obliged to include in the length of service, giving the right to early appointment of a pension to the plaintiff as a teacher, the period being on leave to care for a child until he reaches one and a half years, i.e. from October 22, 1989 to February 27, 1991; other claims were denied.

On May 24, 2004, the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Samara Regional Court upheld the decision. The Presidium of the Samara Regional Court on 16 December 2004 upheld the said court decisions.

N.'s supervisory complaint raised the issue of canceling court decisions regarding the refusal to satisfy her application for inclusion in the seniority, giving the right to early appointment of an old-age labor pension, the time spent on leave to care for a child after reaching the age of one and a half years.

On December 26, 2005, the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation upheld the supervisory appeal on the following grounds.

Satisfying the application of N. in terms of inclusion in the special length of service, giving the right to early appointment of an old-age labor pension, the period of being on leave to care for a child until he reaches one and a half years - from October 22, 1989 to February 27, 1991, the court correctly proceeded from the fact that the legislation that was in force while N. was on leave to care for a child until he was one and a half years old did not contain a ban on including the time spent on leave to care for a child in the length of service in the specialty for granting a pension for years of service.

At the same time, the court's conclusion that there were no legal grounds for satisfying her application for including part of the parental leave from March 1, 1991 to January 1, 1992 in the special length of service, i.e. after the child reaches the age of one and a half years, cannot be considered correct, since it is based on an erroneous interpretation and application of substantive law.

The court did not take into account that before the entry into force of the Law of the Russian Federation of September 25, 1992 N 3543-I "On the Introduction of Amendments and Additions to the Code of Labor Laws of the Russian Federation", with the adoption of which the period of a woman's stay on parental leave ceased included in the length of service in the specialty in the case of a pension on preferential terms, Article 167 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation provided for the inclusion of the specified period in the special length of service, giving the right to early appointment of an old-age pension.

N. was on parental leave from 22 October 1989 to 1 January 1992, i.e. before the entry into force of the said Law.

In addition, one should take into account the fact that during the period the plaintiff was on parental leave, the Decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR and the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions dated August 22, 1989 N 677 "On increasing the duration of holidays for women with young children", in paragraph 2 of which provided that from December 1, 1989, everywhere the duration of additional leave without pay for caring for a child increased until he reached the age of three years. The specified additional leave was subject to offset in the general and continuous and in the length of service in the specialty.

Since part 2 of article 6, part 4 of article 15, part 1 of article 17, art. Articles 18, 19 and Part 1 of Article 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, in their meaning, imply legal certainty and the predictability of the legislative policy in the field of pension provision, which are necessary for the participants in the relevant legal relations to be able to reasonably foresee the consequences of their behavior and be sure that the right acquired by them on the basis of the current legislation will be respected by the authorities and will be implemented, the period N. was on parental leave from October 22, 1989 to January 1, 1992 was subject to inclusion in the length of service in the specialty under early assignment of an old-age pension, regardless of the time of her application for the appointment of a pension and the time of her right to early assignment of an old-age pension.

In view of the foregoing, the court rulings regarding the refusal to satisfy N.'s claim for inclusion in the length of service, giving the right to early appointment of an old-age labor pension, the time she was on leave to care for a child after reaching the age of one and a half years, were canceled as issued with a significant violation substantive law.

Conclusion

Legal responsibility in the law of social security must perform a very important function - to guarantee the implementation of the social rights of citizens enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Conventionally, legal responsibility in the law of social security can be called responsibility in the field of social rights of citizens and defined as the actual suffering by the offender of property deprivation, provided for by the sanction of the legal norm, due to violations of the provisions of the norms of social security law.

To date, the legislation of the Russian Federation practically does not contain rules on the legal responsibility of the obligated authorities for violations of the social rights of citizens, which creates an atmosphere of impunity and grounds for offenses on their part. One can come to the conclusion about the need to adopt appropriate legal norms. They can be adopted in the form of a single law or included in the relevant federal laws governing the provision of certain types of benefits under the social security system.

The subject of social security law includes relations: material, procedural and procedural. Each of them has its own content in the form of a set of rights and obligations of their parties. Within the framework of material legal relations, the social rights of citizens are realized - they receive pensions, benefits and other benefits. Therefore, offenses within the framework of these legal relations are the most dangerous and legal liability measures should be provided for the slightest violation by the obligated authorities. At the same time, offenses within the framework of procedural legal relations can also be significant for recipients of benefits under the social security system. Therefore, legal responsibility should protect not only the rights exercised by the parties in the framework of material relations, but also their rights in procedural relations.

Legal responsibility must be borne by both the obligated body and the citizen authorized to receive this or that benefit under the social security system. At the same time, the legislator should pay special attention to the responsibility of the obligated body to the citizen, since violations by the obligated bodies are often fatal for citizens. By exercising his social rights, a citizen thereby exercises his right to life, which is unconditionally subject to protection by all means provided for by the current legal order of Russia.

Legal liability in social security law has all the features inherent in legal liability in general. However, the special mutual position of the parties to legal relations in social security law, arising from a special method of social security law, excludes the application of sanctions from other branches of law (civil, labor). In legal relations in the law of social security, the parties, firstly, are not endowed with equality, but are not subordinate to each other, and secondly, their rights and obligations are established only by law, and not by contract, in connection with this, measures of civil liability and material liability to the parties of the relevant legal relationship cannot be applied. In this regard, it is necessary to apply their own sanctions, enshrined in the sources of social security law.

As measures of responsibility of the obligated body, the legislation should fix, firstly, compensation for the non-received benefit of social security, and secondly, interest should be charged on the amount or cost of a particular benefit, as well as compensation for moral damage. Social security benefits are provided to citizens in various forms: monetary, "natural", as well as in the form of various social services. If there are no practical problems in compensating for a monetary good under the social security system and accruing interest on it, then it is not so simple to compensate for benefits in kind or in the form of social services. Here, compensation should be calculated on the basis of market prices, and if a citizen spent his money on the acquisition of a particular good, then on the basis of the citizen's real expenses.

On the basis of the study, it can be said that although the Constitution of the Russian Federation proclaims Russia a social state, enshrines the social rights of citizens, nevertheless, the insecurity of these rights does not allow us to assert that Article 7 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation is not an empty declaration. Then, when the amount of benefits in the social security system reaches an adequate level, when the rights of citizens to receive these benefits will be protected from the slightest violations by the obligated authorities, we can say with confidence that Russia is a truly social state.

List of sources used

1. The Constitution of the Russian Federation, adopted on December 12, 1993, as amended on December 30, 2008 \\ www.consultant.ru/popular/cons/

Code of the Russian Federation on administrative offenses, adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on December 20, 2001, as amended on December 30, 2001 \\ www.consultant.ru/popular/koap/

Labor Code of the Russian Federation, as amended on December 30, 2001, adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on December 21, 2001\\ www.consultant.ru/popular/tkrf/

4. Federal Law of December 17, 2001 N 173-FZ (as amended on July 27, 2010) "On labor pensions in the Russian Federation" \\ www.consultant.ru/popular/pensia/

Federal Law No. 166-FZ of December 15, 2001 (as amended on July 1, 2011) "On State Pension Provision in the Russian Federation" \\ base. consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online. cgi? req=doc; base=LAW; n=115953; dst=0; ts=DB1D8D291AF8BABA43A1B7D06B100F47

Federal Law No. 166-FZ of December 15, 2001 (as amended on July 1, 2011) "On State Pension Provision in the Russian Federation" \\ http://base. consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online. cgi? req=doc; base=LAW; n=115953; dst=0; ts=5FF2DE8697D027ED5C2449E96C563FF1

Law of the Russian Federation of 26.06.1992 N 3132-1 (as amended on 08.12.2011) "On the Status of Judges in the Russian Federation" (as amended and supplemented, effective from 01.01.2012) \\ http://base. consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online. cgi? req=doc; base=LAW; n=121916; dst=0; ts=87172C6599882610BBDDFF924D90B0A8

Federal Law No. 81-FZ of May 19, 1995 (as amended on March 7, 2011) "On State Benefits for Citizens with Children" \\ http://base. consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online. cgi? req=doc; base=LAW; n=111384; dst=0; ts=BE6DC963EBFEFFF2CB8F7747844322EA

Federal Law of December 29, 2006, N 255-FZ "On the provision of temporary disability benefits for pregnancy and childbirth of citizens subject to compulsory social insurance" Adopted on December 20, 2006 \\ www.gdezakon.ru/pregnant

Federal Law No. 125-FZ of July 24, 1998 (as amended on December 3, 2011) "On Compulsory Social Insurance against Industrial Accidents and Occupational Diseases" (as amended and supplemented, effective from January 1, 2012) \\ base. consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online. cgi? req=doc; base=LAW; n=115799; dst=0; ts=967FCE4995811AF11A63C9118B6B05C1

Federal Law No. 122-FZ of August 2, 1995 (as amended on November 21, 2011) "On Social Services for Elderly Citizens and the Disabled" \\ http://base. consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online. cgi? req=doc; base=LAW; n=121898; dst=0; ts=76799928C93CF351218B94FFD1824ACA

Federal Law of November 24, 1995 No. "On the Social Protection of the Disabled in the Russian Federation" \\ http://base. consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online. cgi? req=doc; base=LAW; n=121832; dst=0; ts=F748195810AB07D8400F99AB358A1401

Law of the Russian Federation of February 12, 1993 N 4468-1 (as amended on November 8, 2011) "On pensions for persons who have served in the military, served in the internal affairs bodies, the State Fire Service, bodies for controlling the circulation of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, institutions and bodies of the penitentiary system, and their families" \\ base. consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online. cgi? req=doc; base=LAW; n=117065; dst=0; ts=03114A47AFAB55D5EC44CEC84FBCD84D

Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 3, 1994 No. N 494. "On the approval of the procedure for the appointment and payment of monthly compensation payments to certain categories of citizens" (as amended by the Decrees of the Government of the Russian Federation of 05/21/2012) \\ base. consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online. cgi? req=doc; base=LAW; n=130088; dst=0; ts=3F383F197F8EB3163CCAB8EF28DACD0D

Belyaev V.P. Social security law. Tutorial. 2004

Buyanova M.O., K.N. Gusov. Social Security Law of Russia, ed.K.N. Gusov. 4th ed., revised and supplemented - M .: TK Velby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2007

Buyanova M.O. Social security law. Prospect Edition, Study Guide 2006

Galaganov V.P. Social security law: textbook. - M.: Information Center "Academy", 2009

Zakharov M.L., E.G. Tuchkov. Russian social security law: a textbook for university students studying in the specialty "Jurisprudence", 4th edition, revised and supplemented by Wolters Kluver, 2005

Zakharov M.L., Tuchkova E.G. Social security law. Moscow: publishing house BEK. Tutorial, 2008

Rogachev D.I. Social Security Law Method: Monograph. M.: MAKSPress, 2002.

Jobs similar to - Responsibility for committing offenses in the field of social security

Autonomous non-profit organization

KALININGRAD BUSINESS COLLEGE

Department of Law

Course work

On the topic: "Responsibility for committing offenses in the field of social security"

According to PM 01: Ensuring the rights of citizens

Completed by a student

group 11-P-2/1

Dyachenko E.I.

Checked by: Andreeva N.I.

Kaliningrad 2012

Introduction

Chapter 2. Legal liability in social security law

2.1 Types of legal liability in social security law

2.2 Enshrining legal liability in social security law

Chapter 3

Conclusion

List of sources used

Introduction

At the same time, in recent years, Russian society has been undergoing changes in all areas of its activity. The social security sector is no exception. The legislator adopts legal norms that terminate the provision of types of social security. Not only the grounds and sizes in which certain benefits are provided under the social security system are changing, but also the very principles of their provision. At the same time, the human right to social security enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation must remain unshakable.

Of particular concern is the fact that in the activities of both law-making and law enforcement bodies in the field of social security, violations of the social rights of citizens are becoming widespread, which indicates the insufficient effectiveness of the existing guarantees of the constitutional rights of citizens.

Objectives: to highlight the basic general concept of legal responsibility and the principles of its implementation, to characterize legal responsibility in the field of social security.

Subject of study: legal relations arising from the commission of offenses in the field of social security.

Object of study: responsibility in the field of social security.

The purpose of the work: to explore the concept of responsibility in the field of social security, its types and legal relations, as a result of which it arises.

Objectives: to characterize legal responsibility in the field and law of social security, describe its types, consider its consolidation in law.

Structure of the work: introduction, three chapters, conclusion, list of references.

Chapter 1. Legal liability in social security

1.1 The concept of legal responsibility in social security

In the legislation on social security, such responsibility is enshrined in numerous norms of legal acts - laws and by-laws.

The place of the norms on legal responsibility in the system of social security law has not yet been determined either.

The study of the norms of international and domestic legislation, judicial practice and offenses in the field of social security law make it possible to formulate legal responsibility as follows.

Features of the legal responsibility of the subjects of legal relations on social security are determined by the specifics of the subject of social security law. It manifests itself in the following:

) Relations in the law of social security have a distributive character;

2) Although there is no equality in these legal relations, their parties do not bear public law (administrative, criminal) liability to each other;

) The recipient of a material benefit under the social security system is an economically dependent party, which limits his property liability;

) In the law of social security, restorative property sanctions should be widely used, designed to serve exclusively the restoration of the violated right of the other party;

1.2 Types of legal liability in social security

Responsibility in social security law should protect and protect the right of a citizen to existing types (benefits) under the social security system as an economically weaker party from violations by the obligated body, as well as guarantee the restoration of this financial source, at the expense of which the benefit was illegally obtained. Liability in the area of social security generally protects the public order in this area of law.

The by-laws regulating social security relations also either do not contain the rules on the responsibility of their parties, or are formulated in such a way that it is impossible to apply them. For example, paragraph 1 of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of January 19, 1996 "On measures to ensure the timely payment of wages from the budget of all levels, pensions and other social payments" in terms of holding accountable for delaying social payments is quite difficult, and sometimes impossible apply in practice.

The absence of a legal mechanism of responsibility in the field of social security in by-laws can be explained by the fact that all the main types of social security are defined by law. Consequently, legal liability should be contained only in the norms of federal laws that establish the types of social security of a nationwide nature.

In the law of social security for an offense to citizens, only remedial and right-limiting sanctions are applied.

When applying a remedial sanction, for example, compensation for an illegally paid pension occurs. Special h

Social security as a certain form of life support for people has specific historical types, since it is carried out within the framework of a particular socio-economic formation.

Social security is a form of expression of the social policy of the state, aimed at providing material support for a certain category of citizens from the state budget and special extra-budgetary funds in the event of the occurrence of events recognized by the state as socially significant (at this stage of its development) in order to equalize the social status of citizens compared to the rest members of society.

The peculiarity of the conflict of citizens or other persons with the state, which manifests itself in the form of offenses, is that the subjects act illegally, contrary to the rules of law that prohibit appropriate behavior or oblige to take active actions. Since each rule of law establishes not only duties, but also rights, any violation of a rule of law is an infringement on the rights of others and, therefore, is socially harmful and dangerous.

However, not all harm to another person is an offense. The legislation allows situations in which such actions are recognized as lawful. This, for example, infliction of harm in a state of necessary defense, extreme necessity, with the consent of the victim, in the performance of professional duties, in cases of industrial risk, the detention of a person who has committed a crime, the execution of a lawful order of a head of work, service.

There is no official definition of social security as a multidimensional phenomenon in the legislation. In the scientific and educational literature, the concept of social security is formulated by the authors in different ways, depending on what signs are taken as basic, basic for this phenomenon.

Social security means:

a form of distribution that guarantees citizens a normal level of living and cultural standards in excess of remuneration for work in old age, with the loss of ability to work and the breadwinner;

a system of material support and services for citizens due to age, illness, disability, unemployment, loss of a breadwinner, raising children and in other cases established by law;

a set of social relations that develop between citizens, on the one hand, and state bodies, local governments, organizations, on the other, regarding the provision of medical care, pensions, benefits and other types of support to citizens at the expense of special funds, budgetary funds in the event of life circumstances entailing a loss or decrease in income, increased expenses, low income, poverty, or on the distribution of off-budget social funds and the redistribution of part of the state budget in order to meet the needs of citizens in the event of loss of a source of livelihood, incurring additional expenses or lacking the necessary subsistence minimum for objective reasons. socially important reasons.

Social security is both economic and legal, as well as social categories. As an economic category, social security serves as a certain tool used by society, the state to solve one of the most acute problems - the social problem of inequality of personal incomes of people, which is not a consequence of inequality in labor productivity and production efficiency. At the same time, social security is legal category, since the states implement the policy of redistribution of income through the legal mechanism, fixing the organizational and legal ways of implementing social security in a normative way; the procedure for the formation of the relevant financial systems and them legal status, social security management systems; circle of persons subject to social security; types of security and conditions for their provision; mechanism for protecting violated rights. Social security is also a very important social category, since the provision addressed to a person by society, the state in those cases when, due to circumstances beyond his control, he needs support, guarantees a certain social comfort, restores the status of a full-fledged member of society.

Social security is one of the ways to distribute part of the gross domestic product by providing citizens with material benefits in order to equalize their personal income in cases of social risks occurring at the expense of targeted financial sources in the amount and on conditions strictly regulated by society, the state, to maintain their full social status.

For legal science and practice, it is very important to find out the relationship and relationship between legal liability and state coercion, their common and distinctive features, since in the literature they are often either identified or, on the contrary, contrasted. Legal responsibility is most often determined through various forms of state coercion. This is explained by the fact that legal responsibility is usually considered only in a positive aspect. As a result, the whole problem of responsibility is reduced to the fight against crime. Meanwhile, state coercion is used only with negative (retrospective) liability as an auxiliary tool that cannot be extended to all types of liability. Responsibility is a form of implementation of sanctions of legal norms, while the implementation of sanctions that provide for penalties for offenders is impossible without the use of state coercion. As a result, legal responsibility acts as a legal form of state coercion. Legal responsibility is one of the types of social responsibility, always associated with the possibility of using coercive force of the state.

Millions of citizens receive various benefits from the social security system, and the right of each of them must be effectively protected. In conditions when there are no norms on legal responsibility in the industry that regulates these social relations, violations of the rights of citizens become not only massive, but also chronic. The main violations are: unreasonable refusal to provide the relevant benefits, their provision not in full or in violation of the established deadlines. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in its acts has repeatedly pointed out that in order to maintain the confidence of citizens in the law and the actions of the state, including when changing the current regulation, the legislator is obliged to observe the constitutional principles of justice, equality, proportionality, as well as the stability and guarantee of social rights and cannot exercise such regulation that would encroach on the very essence of these rights and would lead to the loss of their real content. The absence of such guarantees of social rights as the norms of legal liability devalues them and creates grounds for violations.

At the same time, in recent years, Russian society has been undergoing changes in all areas of its activity. The social security sector is no exception. The legislator adopts legal norms that terminate the provision of some types of social security and establish their new types. Not only the grounds and sizes in which certain benefits are provided under the social security system are changing, but also the very principles of their provision. At the same time, the human right to social security enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation must remain unshakable.

Of particular concern is the fact that in the activities of both rule-making and law enforcement bodies in the field of social security, violations of the social rights of citizens are becoming widespread, which indicates the insufficient effectiveness of the existing guarantees of the constitutional rights of citizens. This leads to the fact that these rights are not guaranteed and, if violated, are not restored, since there are no norms in social security law that provide for liability for violating the rights of citizens.

Legal liability in the law of social security is the actual undergoing by the offender of deprivations of a property nature, provided for by the sanction, due to violations of the provisions of the norms of social security law, in order to restore the violated right;

Legal responsibility is not only a guarantee of social rights, but also a guarantee of a person's right to life, since social rights themselves provide a person with this right of a higher order;

Due to the specifics of relations regulated by social security law, specific property sanctions should be applied to the offender. The application to the subjects of these relations of measures of civil liability for violation of obligations, as well as material liability on the basis of labor law in case of violation of their obligations enshrined in the sources of social security law, is unacceptable;

None of the prevailing concepts of legal responsibility can be fully accepted as the only theoretical starting point, on the basis of which the nature of the legal responsibility of subjects of legal relations in social security should be investigated. It is possible to reveal the essence of the responsibility of the parties to legal relations on social security only by synthesizing the provisions of various concepts. At the same time, the specificity of legal liability in social security law is not reflected at all in general theoretical developments.

Features of the legal responsibility of the subjects of legal relations on social security are determined by the specifics of the subject of social security law. First, relations in social security law are of a distributive nature. Secondly, although there is no equality in these legal relations, their parties do not bear public law (administrative, criminal) liability to each other. Thirdly, the recipient of a material benefit under the social security system is an economically dependent party, which limits his property liability. Fourth, restorative property sanctions should become widespread in social security law. Their application should only serve to restore the violated right of the other party.

Responsibility in social security law and liability in the field of social security are not identical phenomena. However, they are closely related, since they have a common goal - the protection of the violated right. Liability in the area of social security generally protects the public order in this area of law. Responsibility in social security law should, first of all, protect and protect the rights of a citizen to certain benefits in the social security system as an economically weaker party from violations by the obligated body, and also guarantee the restoration of the financial source from which funds were illegally obtained good.

Social rights are established and guaranteed by international acts (there are no rules on liability) and national legislation.

The norms on legal liability for violations of the social rights of citizens have different industry affiliations. Accordingly, in case of their violation, the relevant person bears criminal, administrative, civil, material and disciplinary liability. Fragmentary rules on legal liability are also contained in the sources of social security law. However, one of the main problems is the lack of an effective legal mechanism that regulates the responsibility of the parties to social security relations, which, in the face of massive violations of the rights of citizens, does not ensure their full implementation.

The social rights of citizens are guaranteed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation by federal laws, by-laws, as well as acts of the subjects of the federation, while the scope of powers of the subjects of the Russian Federation in the field of social security has increased dramatically.

The federal laws contain a small number of norms on legal liability for violations of the social rights of citizens. At the same time, laws that contain such norms cannot actually protect these rights, because the mechanism of responsibility enshrined in them is not applicable in practice (for example, Article 32 of the Federal Law of November 24, 1995 No. 181 “On the Social Protection of Disabled Persons in the Russian Federation”).

In the by-laws regulating social security relations, the rules on the responsibility of their parties are either practically not contained, or are formulated in such a way that it is impossible to apply them (for example, clause 1 of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated January 19, 1996 No. 66 “On measures to ensure the timely payment of wages from the budgets of all levels, pensions and other social payments”).

The dissertation explains the absence of a legal mechanism of responsibility in the field of social security in the by-laws by the fact that almost all types of social security are established by law, as required by Part 2 of Art. 39 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Based on the principle of separation of powers, by-laws cannot contain provisions on liability for violation of the provisions of the law. These acts should contain norms on legal liability only in those cases when they guarantee observance of the rights of citizens established by by-laws.

The inclusion of norms on legal liability in the normative legal acts of the subjects of the federation is rather an exception than a rule. If the rules on liability are contained in them, then their legal structure is different. At the same time, the norm is either formulated succinctly, without specifying specific types of offenses and sanctions, or it indicates specific types of offenses and certain sanctions for their commission. In the acts of the heads of executive power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, there are practically no norms on liability for violations of the legislation on social security. It must be assumed that liability in case of violation of such acts should come in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation and the subject of the federation.

Rules on responsibility may also be contained in acts of local governments adopted on issues of social support for the population.

In addition, such norms can be included in local regulations.

Special sources of norms on liability in the field of social security are the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. These are the sources of various branches of law.

The type of legal liability of a party to a social security relationship is indicated by the sanction of the norm, which provides for the type of negative consequences for the offender. In the law of social security, only two types of sanctions are applied to citizens for offenses: law-restoring and law-restricting.

When applying a remedial sanction, for example, compensation for an illegally paid pension occurs: for the offender, the possible forcible seizure of his own (as he believes) property as compensation has a sharply negative aspect.

In social security law, repressive sanctions are also often used. They most often complement law enforcement sanctions.

A special feature of restorative sanctions in social security law is that, while guaranteeing compensation for the damage caused, they provide for its full compensation. However, this full amount does not coincide with the full compensation for damages provided for in civil law (actual harm plus lost profits).

The norms of social security law do not contain any form of compensation for the unlawful incomplete (untimely) provision of the appropriate type of social security, and in this regard, it is proved that only by providing a benefit not received or not received in full under the social security system, it is possible to restore the property rights of their recipient.

The restoration of the right as a type of sanction should also provide for additional compensation in favor of the citizen: not only moral damage should be compensated, but also money in the form of interest for the late provision of the appropriate type of social security should be paid.

It is noted that the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation contains a limited number of offenses that entail criminal liability of a person acting on the side of the body obliged to provide social security, and for him: Art. 145.1, Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Criminal liability of a person authorized to receive social security may arise under several articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Article 159, part 1 of Article 327 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

For a person acting in relation to social security on the side of the obligated body, administrative liability may also arise (Article 5.41 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation; the scope of this rule is extremely narrow - liability occurs only for violation of the rights of citizens in the field of burial; Article 15 of the Federal Law of 11/24/1995 No. 181-FZ "On the social protection of disabled people in the Russian Federation", article 5.44 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation).

It is noted that in distributive relations in the field of social security, such measures of constitutional and legal responsibility should be applied that guarantee the restoration of the violated right of a citizen to receive benefits from the social security system: recognition of regulatory legal acts as inconsistent with the constitution, coercion to fulfill a constitutional obligation, compensation by the state for what has been caused damage to the citizen. The application of restorative sanctions of constitutional and legal responsibility should be accompanied by the application of appropriate property sanctions against the state represented by its treasury.

The state must bear constitutional responsibility in all cases when it does not fulfill its obligations, if as a result of this damage is caused to someone.

In the field of social security, the rights of citizens can also be violated by the failure to adopt a law. Bringing the State Duma to constitutional responsibility for not adopting a law should be possible only if the obligation to adopt a law is enshrined either in another law or in an act of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. At the same time, not only the obligation to adopt the law, but also the deadline for its adoption should be fixed. In this regard, a new version of Part 1 of Art. 109 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

In addition to the State Duma, the President of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation, ministries have the authority to adopt normative legal acts. It seems that the issue of the responsibility of these bodies should be resolved in a similar way: if the body authorized to adopt a normative act does not adopt it, it is subject to dissolution (if it is a collegial body, for example, the Government of the Russian Federation) or resignation (if the body is a sole body, for example, the President of the Russian Federation or minister). An example of such an approach is available in the legislation of the Russian Federation (paragraphs “b” and “d”, paragraph 1, article 9 of the Federal Law of October 6, 1999 No. 184-FZ “On general principles organizations of legislative (representative) and executive bodies state power subjects of the Russian Federation).

At this stage of development of the legislation, it does not contain obligations, for the violation of which the constitutional responsibility of citizens in the area under consideration could occur. As a rule, obligations are imposed on citizens by the norms of social security law, and the sources of this industry contain a sufficient arsenal of measures of legal responsibility, the use of which is able to ensure the rule of law in this area.

The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation contains a small number of offenses that provide for liability for offenses in the field of social security. Moreover, these norms providing for the components of crimes can be divided into two groups: the first includes norms providing for liability exclusively in the field of social security (Art. 145.1, Art. 285.2), the second - general norms that can be applied both for crimes in sphere of social security, and in other cases (Art. 159, Art. 286, Art. 293 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

The corpus delicti provided for by the norms of the first group is enshrined in Part 1 of Art. 145.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The social security system provides not only periodic payments, but also lump-sum payments. Criminal liability under Art. 145.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation comes for non-payment of periodic types of social security of both types. The direct object of the crime in this case is public relations in the field of providing any social security payments provided for by law.

According to the literal interpretation of this norm, a necessary condition for the onset of criminal liability is the failure to pay exactly the payments provided for by laws. Providing criminal legal protection only for those types of social security that are established by law is a violation of the equality of citizens and a violation of their right to equal protection.

The objective side of the crime in question is the failure to provide the payments indicated in the disposition for more than two months. The dissertation states that this period is too long. It is dangerous when citizens are not provided with social security for at least more than one month.

At the same time, it is noted that it is very, very difficult to practically prove the motive for this crime. It does not matter at all for what reasons this or that person did not make the corresponding payments. From the text of the article under consideration of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is necessary to exclude the motive as an element of the corpus delicti.

Criminal law protection should guarantee the right of a citizen to receive benefits from the social security system in any form. Moreover, an act should be considered a crime only if it entailed grave consequences. In the absence of such consequences, it is possible to consider such an act as an administrative offense.

The second group of norms providing for offenses includes those that provide for the commission of crimes both in the field of social security, but also in any sphere of society: these are the norms of Art. 159, Art. 286, Art. 293 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for criminal liability for abuse of official powers - the commission by an official of actions that clearly go beyond his powers and entail a significant violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens or organizations or the legally protected interests of society or the state.

In the field of social security law, the realization by citizens of their rights almost always depends on the actions of officials of the obligated bodies both within the framework of procedural legal relations and within the framework of material relations. Here, the question of bringing the relevant officials to criminal responsibility should certainly arise. In the disposition of the norm, Part 1, Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, a condition for bringing to criminal responsibility is a significant violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens or organizations or the legally protected interests of society or the state. According to the dissertation, in the event that a person's right to a type of social security that guarantees his right to life is violated, this should necessarily entail criminal liability of an official. The same criminal law consequences should entail negligence under Art. 293 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation in Art. 5.36 provides for administrative liability for violation of the procedure or deadlines for providing information about minors who need to be transferred to a family or an institution for orphans or children left without parental care.

Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation in Art. 5.41 establishes liability for non-provision of funeral services free of charge, non-payment of social benefits for burial.

The legislator protects the right to receive gratuitous burial services and receive social benefits for burial, although social security law also provides for other social services for citizens, as well as various types of cash payments. Such a one-sided approach to the establishment of administrative responsibility testifies to the lack of consistency in resolving the issue of what types of social security are not provided with administrative responsibility.

Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation in Part 2 of Art. 5.42 establishes responsibility for the unjustified refusal of a disabled person to register as unemployed. Obviously, other citizens who do not have a job and are looking for it also need such registration as unemployed. And they, like the disabled, need such registration; unjustified refusal to register as unemployed also violates their rights. In this sense, the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation needs to be supplemented.

Efficient protection of the violated right of a citizen would be ensured by the establishment of administrative responsibility for offenses within the framework of any type of relationship in social security law: procedural and material.

The greatest effect for the protection of a violated social right can be achieved through the application of property liability.

Property relations in social security law, in contrast to civil property relations, have their own specifics, which cannot but affect the measures of legal responsibility applied to the obligated body.

The norms of social security law, through the imperative method of legal regulation, determine the volume and procedure for providing citizens with material benefits through the social security system. These benefits are either property (money, medicines) or they are not property, but have a value (social services). At the same time, upon the occurrence of legal facts specified in the law, the citizen has the right to demand from the obligated body the provision of the benefits due to him. Thus, a property relationship arises between the obligated body and the authorized citizen regarding the provision of either property or the provision of a service, and the citizen's right to this benefit is property.

The nature of this relationship is not of a civil nature. From the moment when a citizen has the right to demand this or that benefit under the social security system, the obligated body has an obligation to provide this benefit. However, this legal relationship between the obligated body and the citizen is not binding in the civil law sense. A civil law obligation is characterized by the equality of its parties (clause 1, article 1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), in relations in social security law there is no such equality. A citizen is not subordinate to the relevant body, on the other hand, there is no equality between them. A civil law obligation arises, as a rule, by the will of the parties and in their interests. This is not typical for relations in social security law. On the part of the obligated body, the presence of the will and interest to enter into a legal relationship on social security is not at all necessary. By virtue of the law, in the presence of the legal facts listed in it, the body is obliged to enter into an appropriate legal relationship and provide the citizen with a benefit, regardless of his will and his interest. Otherwise, it will be an offense and the public body should be held legally responsible. Finally, civil law obligation relations are private law relations, and relations in social security law are public law relations.

Thus, the legal relations of the parties on social security, although they are property distribution relations, are not obligations in the civil law sense, which leaves an imprint on the property measures of legal liability applied to the parties to these legal relations.

The basis for the property liability of the obligated body to the citizen is the non-payment of the sums of money due to him, the non-delivery of property or the non-provision of the services provided for by law. Since there are no obligations in the civil law sense between the parties to legal relations on social security, the application of measures of civil liability in these legal relations is legally unjustified.

Disciplinary responsibility is the obligation of the employee to be punished, provided for by the norms of labor law, for the guilty, unlawful failure to fulfill their labor duties. Thus, the subject of disciplinary responsibility is the employee.

A disciplinary offense is an unlawful, guilty non-performance or improper non-performance by an employee of his labor duties. The subject of a misdemeanor can only be a person who has an employment relationship with a specific employer and who has violated labor discipline. Disciplinary liability for violations of the legislation on social security shall be borne by persons only on the side of the entities authorized to provide social security, provided that they fail to perform or improperly perform their labor duties.

As a rule, the obligated party in social security legal relations is an authorized state or municipal body that is a legal entity (organization). To carry out their functions, they must have employees in their staff who perform certain labor duties. In the event that an employee improperly performs his duties, he may be subject to disciplinary liability.

The labor obligations of an employee are established by law, job description, individual labor contract. Labor obligations of employees of bodies providing social security may also follow from other regulatory legal acts. In case of violation of these duties, a citizen has the right to appeal to the head of the relevant body with a complaint and the head has the right to bring the guilty employee to disciplinary responsibility. Bringing an employee to disciplinary liability is possible if a citizen applying for or receiving one or another type of social security has performed all the actions provided for by law.

For violation of the social rights of citizens, employees of the obligated bodies may be subject to disciplinary liability.

The possibility of bringing perpetrators to disciplinary responsibility is also established by the legislation of some subjects of the Russian Federation.

The sphere of social security is a complex of diverse relations that have a different legal nature: financial, managerial and actually distributive. Legislation in the field of social security, having in its composition administrative, financial legislation and legislation on social security law, is a complex legal entity.

The branches of law regulating the sphere of social security are public branches of law, therefore the imperative method of legal regulation prevails here. However, the manifestation of this method in the regulation of the corresponding relations is different. It manifests itself differently in legal status participants in the relevant relationship. In relations regulated by the law of social security, there is no subordination of a citizen to a state body.

Within the framework of material legal relations, citizens bear obligations that are in many respects similar to their obligations in procedural legal relations. Basically, they boil down to the fact that a citizen must promptly notify the obligated body of all facts that affect both the change in the size (downwards, of course) of the benefit provided, and the very fact of its provision.

It is noted that, despite the existence of an objective need for legal liability in social security law, the existence of its own sanctions, as well as the need to guarantee the observance of the rights of citizens in this area, legal liability in social security law has not yet formed an independent type of legal liability.

Within the meaning of the Federal Law "On Labor Pensions", the main obligations of a citizen in pension legal relations are to submit the necessary documents, the list of which is established by law, and to timely notify the pension authority of all circumstances that may serve as a basis for changing the amount of the pension paid in the direction of reducing it or termination of payment.

Individuals and legal entities are responsible for the accuracy of the information contained in the documents submitted by them for the establishment and payment of a labor pension. In the event that the submission of false information, untimely submission of information or improper performance of the obligations specified in paragraph 1 of Art. 25 of the Federal Law "On Labor Pensions", entailed an overspending on the payment of labor pensions, the perpetrators compensate the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation for the damage caused in the manner prescribed by law.

The Federal Law "On labor pensions" does not contain rules on the legal responsibility of the obligated body for violation of the rights of pensioners. The dissertation author points out that the absence of norms on the responsibility of the obligated body in this institution of social security law exposes the rights of citizens to receive pensions, on the one hand, to unpunished violations, on the other hand, does not guarantee their restoration.

The complete deprivation of a pensioner's pension in connection with his conviction is not always theoretically justified.

When performing the actions listed in Art. 8 of the Federal Law of December 29, 2006 N 255-ФЗ “On the provision of benefits for temporary disability, pregnancy and childbirth of citizens subject to compulsory social insurance”, the temporary disability benefit is reduced to the amount of one minimum wage. The amount of temporary disability benefit is also reduced if the disease or injury occurred as a result of alcohol, drugs, toxic intoxication or actions related to such intoxication. The rule that the benefit is reduced upon the onset of incapacity for work due to actions related to intoxication does not seem to be fully developed, since it is not clear what should be considered intoxication and the law does not fix the procedure for determining the fact of intoxication for the purpose of calculating benefits.

A person may be completely denied the appointment of benefits in two cases, provided for in Part 2 of Art. 9 of the Law. Against such a norm, the same arguments are given as against the norm of paragraph 4 of Art. 8 of the Federal Law "On labor pensions".

Responsibility of recipients of benefits for pregnancy and childbirth in the Federal Law "On the provision of benefits for temporary disability" is not provided.

Actions that result in the suspension of benefits are mainly related to the job offered. The appearance of the unemployed for re-registration in a state of intoxication stands out from this series. The fact that a person appeared in a state of intoxication for re-registration does not in any way mean that he does not need a job. This norm establishes a measure of punitive liability, which is not typical for social security law.

In addition to benefits, citizens can be paid compensation payments, subsidies, monthly cash payments. The responsibility of recipients of these types of social security is either not established at all, or is formulated in the most general way.

Legal responsibility of the responsible authorities for violations in the provision of social benefits and other payments.

The vast majority of normative acts regulating these relations do not contain rules on the legal responsibility of the obligated body in case of violation of the rights of citizens. The norms on the responsibility of the obligated bodies in this institution of social security law are contained only fragmentarily.

The general procedure for providing medical care to citizens is established by the Federal Law "On the Fundamentals of Protecting the Health of Citizens in the Russian Federation". In this area, citizens have mostly rights, not duties. The Fundamentals of Legislation on the Protection of the Health of Citizens do not contain norms establishing the responsibility of recipients of medical care.

In addition to medical assistance, citizens in need can be provided with sanatorium-and-spa treatment. Sanatorium-and-spa treatment is provided in many cases by the same acts as the payment of certain allowances, compensations, etc. Accordingly, the legal responsibility for violations of the same laws is the same both for recipients of benefits, compensations, etc., and for recipients of sanatorium treatment. However, the norms providing for the legal responsibility of recipients of sanatorium treatment are not contained in all normative acts.

According to Part 1 of Art. 66 of the Fundamentals establishes that in cases of causing harm to the health of citizens, the perpetrators are obliged to compensate the victims for damage in the amount and in the manner established by the legislation of the Russian Federation. This measure is a civil liability, not a measure of liability in social security law.

The main violation of the rights of citizens in this area may be the failure to provide medical care, its untimely provision or provision not in full. Responsibility measures in these cases could be compensation for the citizen's expenses for receiving paid medical care with the accrual of interest on the amount of expenses.

In order for a person to receive medicine for free or at a discount, the actions of an employee of a medical institution and a pharmacy issuing the medicine are necessary. Currently, no legal liability has been established for non-provision of drug assistance, for its incomplete provision or untimely provision of legal liability. According to the author of the dissertation, it is necessary to introduce appropriate norms on the legal responsibility of the bodies involved in the provision of drug care to citizens in the legislation.

Federal Law "On Social Services for Elderly Citizens and Disabled People" in Part 6 of Art. 15 establishes that social services for elderly citizens and the disabled, carried out in non-stationary conditions, may be terminated if they violate the norms and rules established by the social service management bodies when providing this type of service. The listed offenses are perhaps the only violations of their duties by citizens authorized to receive social services. Norms similar to Part 6 of Art. 15 of the Federal Law "On Social Services for Elderly Citizens and Disabled People" must be included in every regulatory act that provides for the provision of benefits under the social security system in the form of social services. Legal liability of the responsible authorities. The dissertation author notes that the Federal Law “On the Fundamentals of Social Services for the Population” does not actually establish the responsibility of the obligated body for the consequences of their actions that are dangerous to the life and health of the client of the social service or other violation of his rights.

The relationship of legal responsibility in social security law must find its place in the structure of this branch of law.

According to the object of the legal relationship on legal liability are similar to material relations in the law of social security and can be considered as their independent type.

Legal responsibility in social security law should guarantee the implementation of the social rights of citizens enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Conventionally, legal responsibility in social security law can be called responsibility in the field of social rights of citizens and defined as the actual suffering by the offender of property deprivation, provided for by the sanction, due to violations of the provisions of social security law, in order to restore the violated right.

Legal liability in social security law has all the features inherent in legal liability in general. However, the special mutual position of the parties to legal relations in social security law excludes the application of sanctions from other branches of law (civil, labor). In relations in social security law, the parties, firstly, are not endowed with equality, but are not subordinate to each other, and secondly, their rights and obligations are established only by law, and not by contract, in connection with this, measures of civil liability and material liability to the parties of the relevant legal relationship cannot be applied. In this regard, it is necessary to apply special sanctions enshrined in the sources of social security law.

As measures of responsibility of the obligated body, the legislation should establish the right of a citizen to compensation for a non-received benefit under the social security system, as well as the right to receive interest accrued on the size or cost of this benefit and the right to compensation for moral damage. The benefits of the social security system are provided to citizens in various forms: monetary, "in kind", as well as in the form of various social services. If there are no practical problems with the compensation of a monetary good under the social security system and the accrual of interest on it, then the situation is not so simple with the compensation of benefits in kind or in the form of social services. Here, compensation should be calculated on the basis of market prices for a particular good, and if a citizen spent his money on its acquisition, then its value should be calculated on the basis of the citizen's real expenses.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

Chapter 2. Legal liability in social security law

2.1 Types of legal liability in social security law

2.2 Enshrining legal liability in social security law

Chapter 3. Analysis of law enforcement practice in the field of social protection and pension provision of citizens

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

Of particular concern is the fact that in the activities of both law-making and law enforcement bodies in the field of social security, violations of the social rights of citizens are becoming widespread, which indicates the insufficient effectiveness of the existing guarantees of the constitutional rights of citizens.

Objectives: to highlight the basic general concept of legal responsibility and the principles of its implementation, to characterize legal responsibility in the field of social security.

Subject of study: legal relations arising from the commission of offenses in the field of social security.

Object of study: responsibility in the field of social security.

The purpose of the work: to explore the concept of responsibility in the field of social security, its types and legal relations, as a result of which it arises.

Objectives: to characterize legal responsibility in the field and law of social security, describe its types, consider its consolidation in law.

legal responsibility social

Chapter 1. Legal liability in social security

1.1 The concept of legal responsibility in social security

The study of the problem of responsibility should begin with its definition, but it should be noted that the development of such a definition presents certain difficulties. At the level of everyday consciousness, everyone knows what responsibility is, the meaning of which is easily grasped from the context. However, the usual use of the term "responsibility" in a particular science is no longer enough. Meanwhile, at the first attempt to give a scientific definition of the concept of responsibility, it turns out that this concept is quite ambiguous, and the problem of responsibility itself is very multifaceted. Thus, within the framework of even one science (in sociology, psychology, jurisprudence, etc.), the term “responsibility” is used to characterize various phenomena and to describe various aspects of the behavior of subjects.

R.O. Halfina rightly believes that: “in recent years, attempts have been made to interpret this term from the point of view of its philological meaning.” Further, she points out that in law the term “responsibility” has long acquired a well-defined content, which differs from the commonly used one. The meaning of this concept lies, in her opinion, in the negative consequences for the person or organization that committed the illegal act. Based on this definition of the content of legal liability, R.O. Khalfina concludes that liability is a special term that has nothing to do with its common understanding.

However, the “common” understanding of responsibility is a capacious concept and includes, in addition to the positive aspect, also a retrospective aspect.

Both meanings of the term “responsibility” have long been used in science and are equally widely used in legislation.

The modern traditionally established idea of legal responsibility involves considering the latter as responsibility-punishment, sanction. However, although retrospective responsibility is concentrated in legal responsibility, the latter is not limited to it, just as the “common” understanding of responsibility extends not only to social, but also to legal responsibility.

Legal responsibility is one of the types of general social responsibility and, accordingly, in all the main significant points, it has the inherent properties of the latter. Therefore, addressing the problem of social responsibility in the study of legal responsibility is certainly necessary, since it provides the necessary methodological premises for a deeper, fundamental study of the phenomenon under study. Therefore, the general concept of social responsibility is methodological framework on which, in our opinion, the construction of legal responsibility should be built.

Responsibility is a phenomenon that objectively exists as a mandatory manifestation of the orderliness of social relations; it reflects the objective need to coordinate the behavior of the subjects of social communication.

Social responsibility, its existence is determined by the need to subordinate, coordinate and correct in the process of joint activity the actions of each with the actions of others, harmonize private interest with the general. Therefore, even when there is an interaction in simplest form- two people connected by one thing, even then a situation arises that can be spoken of as a relation of responsible dependence.

The objective need to streamline and regulate relations between people, which is realized in proper behavior, accumulates the content of social responsibility. The form of its expression is social norms, which find their consolidation not only in legal acts - codes, laws, but also in the charters of public organizations, programs, rules of social communication.

“Necessity, which manifests itself as a social norm, is a subjectively appropriated necessity, therefore, it has changed the form of its being, and has become a necessity for us.”

Social norms are authoritarian, which means the nature and extent of the norm's correspondent being bound by its requirements. Each rule has a corresponding sanction, which ensures that the requirement is translated into reality. social norms, and, therefore, is also a means of ensuring the responsible behavior of the individual.

Therefore, responsibility is nothing more than the fulfillment of regulatory requirements, and normativity itself is an indispensable property of responsibility.

The structure of social responsibility includes the following elements: objective and subjective sides, subject and object. Of course, we are entitled to speak about responsibility in the unity of all these elements only when the latter is considered by us in dynamics. The objective side of responsibility acts as a set of requirements imposed by society on its members or teams in the form of principles, norms, expressing social necessity. Moreover, the degree of responsibility of the subject depends on the social significance of his behavior, and therefore on his social position, profession and other social roles in which he acts in different areas of his activity.

However, it is obvious that "the objective content of responsibility will not fulfill its social purpose if it is not processed by the consciousness of the individual and does not result in a behavioral decision."

The subjective side of social responsibility is manifested as the subject's awareness of social reality, where the basis subjective side social responsibility stands for the presence of human free will.

The category of free will in philosophy expresses the subjective component of the expedient social activity of an individual, which is organically connected with his understanding of responsibility for the results of his activity. F. Engels rightly noted that “it is impossible to talk about morality and law without touching on the question of the so-called free will, the sanity of a person, the relationship between necessity and freedom.”

Social responsibility, any kind of it, is based on the ability of an individual to consciously and voluntarily follow the requirements, to coordinate his activities and actions with them.

In the behavioral act of a person, the objective and the subjective merge into a single whole, and thus responsibility is seen as the proper performance of what is due.

One cannot agree with the authors who see in social responsibility only its subjective nature. So, K.A. Novikov writes that "responsibility is an individual's understanding of the social consequences of his actions, the management of behavior in accordance with the proper and, consequently, the transformation of the proper into an internal motivation." It is clear that with such an interpretation of responsibility, its primary moment, the objective one, goes out of sight, and the emphasis is thus placed on the internal psychological side of responsibility.

The subject of social responsibility is the individual, the team, social communities (people, social groups, class), society as a whole and its representative bodies. The object of social responsibility is the various acts of activity that are realized through a system of social relations covering the whole society. Consequently, society as a whole and each of its constituent parts (element) has social responsibility.

In socio-philosophical literature, everything said above about responsibility forms its so-called positive aspect. Meanwhile, in social responsibility, along with a positive aspect, there is also a retrospective aspect. Social retrospective responsibility is the responsibility for the committed violation of social norms. Its implementation entails adverse consequences for violators of social rules of conduct. It expresses a reaction to the fact of violation by society, the state. Moreover, the main characterization of responsibility in all cases is a positive meaning.

Since legal responsibility is a kind of social responsibility and differs from all other types of social responsibility (political, moral, etc.) only in that it is based on regulatory requirements, provided, if necessary, by state coercion, it also has a unity of positive and retrospective aspects.

Therefore, the tendency to characterize legal liability not only in retrospective terms, but also in a positive aspect, clearly visible in the legal literature, should be recognized as generally constructive. This is due to the fact that the study of the nature of legal responsibility is carried out in this case, based on its socio-philosophical understanding. This method allows, along with the common for all types of social responsibility, to highlight that special, individual and essential that distinguishes only legal responsibility.

At present, many scientists - specialists in the general theory of law and in branch legal sciences - defend the idea of constructing legal liability in a broad sense, i.e. beyond the scope of considering it only as a consequence of the offense. “It can be argued,” notes M.S. Strogovich, - that legal responsibility is, first of all, a responsible attitude of a person to his duties, responsibility for the correct fulfillment by a person of the duties assigned to him by law ... If the duty is not fulfilled, responsibility comes in its, so to speak, negative meaning - coercion, penalty, punishment, etc.” According to P.E. Nedbailo, a person's positive responsibility "arises already when he starts to fulfill his duties, and not only when he does not fulfill them or begins to act contrary to them."

B.L. Nazarov characterizes the positive aspect of responsibility "not by the consequences of a violation of the order, but by the quality of a stimulant, necessary, from the point of view of the interests of society and fellow citizens, behavior, performance of duty, assigned duties, positive social roles." Somewhat differently considers the positive responsibility of V.N. Smirnov, believing that the implementation of the latter occurs not simply through the fulfillment of the duties assigned to the person, but through their exemplary performance.

It is known that legal responsibility is based on such a main property of law as coercion, which means the possibility of state enforcement of legal norms in case of their violation. In this regard, numerous disputes have arisen in the legal literature regarding how and to what extent “compulsory” implementation of positive legal liability is possible. Since this “coercion” does not exist, then, as some authors believe, positive liability cannot be recognized as legal.

It is absolutely true that the possibility of using state coercion arises in connection with the commission of an offense, however, the security of the coercive power of the state is a sign inherent in law in general, and, consequently, in each legal norm separately.

On this occasion, in general, the correct position is taken by N.A. Bobrova and T.D. Zrazhevskaya, who write that “the validity of legal liability is by no means limited to law enforcement legal relations, but extends to the entire scope of law, and in this capacity it contributes to its effectiveness (positive aspect). The sanction, therefore, is only an “extreme”, “final” expression, a “clump” of legal responsibility, but not the only sphere of its manifestation, just as the possibility of state coercion is only ultimately behind every legal norm.

However, such a view cannot be recognized as fair for all cases of manifestation of positive legal responsibility, the reality of which is embodied in various types of lawful behavior.

V.N. Kudryavtsev distinguishes two types of lawful behavior - this is permissible behavior, which corresponds to the legal support of the actions performed and socially useful behavior, the consequence of which is legal encouragement (stimulation).

V.N. Smirnov, criticizing this classification of types of lawful behavior, distinguishes, in turn, normal and exemplary behavior in lawful behavior. He correctly notes that “permissible behavior must have a certain degree of social utility. Otherwise, it makes no sense to maintain such social relations through legal regulation that can be realized through behavior that has no public benefit.

The division of lawful behavior into normal and exemplary (or, what is the same, socially active) is the most general. Meanwhile, socially active (exemplary) behavior can act in the form of labor merit, civil or military feat. As for normal behavior, it manifests itself in the form of: positive (habitual), conformist and marginal behavior.

The division of lawful behavior, first of all, into socially active and normal (satisfying the usual requirements) is of fundamental importance both in the analysis of positive legal responsibility and in understanding legal responsibility as a single category, which also includes a retrospective aspect. The fact is that positive responsibility, actualized through these two types of lawful behavior, accordingly has a different degree of intensity, different shape of your being. “Positive responsibility is immanent in lawful conduct. In this case, the degree of responsibility may be different (more or less high). In other words, it is a question of the quality of lawful conduct.”

In view of the foregoing, it seems appropriate to consider positive responsibility from two sides: moderate, when responsibility is manifested through normal lawful behavior (performance), and the active side, where it is expressed through socially active activity (exemplary, exemplary). It should be noted that the legal mediation of the two sides of positive responsibility has a significant difference. In practice, this is due to the fact that the dynamic part of positive responsibility, its driving principle, is only the active side of this responsibility.

Positive responsibility embodies the involvement of the subject in a system of certain social relations, which requires the activity of performing socially useful actions, concern for achieving optimal results of the undertaken case. Naturally, the vigorous activity of a person, aimed at achieving optimal results, cannot be other than exceeding the usual requirements, i.e. should be exemplary, exemplary, good.

Legal means are objectively unable to ensure exemplary behavior under pain of punishment; on the contrary, such a threat can only hinder the social activity of the individual. In this regard, O.E. Leist that creative work is hardly possible only under the threat of sanctions for the very reason that the fear of punishment inevitably fetters creative initiative. The role of positive legal responsibility in its active form is precisely to stimulate an active life position of the individual through the provision of a wide range of rights.

Supporters of the position, according to which only retrospective liability is legal responsibility, refer to the fact that positive responsibility in its active manifestation is moral responsibility, the essence of a category of legal consciousness. And one cannot disagree with them if we consider active positive responsibility only as a duty, because the latter is not provided by state coercion and, therefore, there is nothing legal in it.

However, the situation changes radically, if the essence of the active subspecies of positive responsibility is considered as the right to exercise it in exemplary behavior, then there will be a basis for the emergence of positive legal responsibility and the possibility of applying sanctions if the correspondent fails to fulfill the obligation to ensure the implementation of the subject of his right. Thus, the state, establishing in the norms of law the encouragement of a person for achieving high results in his activities, undertakes not only to encourage him if the relevant requirements provided for in these norms are met, but at the same time imposes on state bodies and organizations the obligation to create conditions (organizational, financial -technical, etc.), providing the opportunity to operate at the optimally required level.

In turn, the person, accepting the conditions of the norms of encouragement, begins to perform tasks, the implementation of which is associated with creative, initiative, maximum effort, etc. attitude to the matter, i.e. there is exemplary behavior through which, in fact, the implementation of positive legal responsibility in the active sense takes place.

The right, and not the obligation, is the creativity of innovators and inventors, participation in law-making activities, for example, in the discussion of laws and decisions, making proposals for legal matters to state bodies, to the editorial offices of newspapers, etc.; participation in law enforcement and law enforcement activities of various kinds of public organizations (in the work of the trade union committee, comrades' court, people's squads for the protection public order etc.).

In the legislation, one can find a clear fixation of two subspecies (parties) of legal positive liability. So, for example, in Art. 309 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation states the following: obligations must be properly performed in accordance with the terms of the obligation and the requirements of the law, other legal acts, and in the absence of such conditions and requirements - in accordance with the customs of business or other usually imposed requirements. In turn, Part 2, Article 118 of the Fundamentals of Civil Legislation of the USSR and the Republics refers to the actions of a person to prevent the threat of damage to someone else's property without appropriate authority.

Obviously, Art. 309 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation reflected moderate positive legal liability, and in part 2 of Art. 118 of the Fundamentals of Civil Legislation - positive legal responsibility in its active manifestation.

From the moment of the emergence of lawful behavior (normal or exemplary), a state of positive legal responsibility sets in. Therefore, lawful behavior is also its basis.

The peculiarity of positive legal responsibility implies the specifics of its subjects: it also applies to persons who are indelicate by age, who not only must comply with the requirements of the law, but can also actively participate in their implementation.

When implementing different subspecies of positive legal liability, the content of legal relations arising in this regard has significant differences. So, the content of the legal relationship, through which moderate positive responsibility is implemented, is the obligation of a person to act in accordance with the requirements of the rule of law, which corresponds to the right of the state and society in the person of certain organizations and officials to demand the proper fulfillment of this obligation, and in case of evasion from its execution apply coercion.

The content of legal relations looks different when there is an actualization of active positive legal responsibility. Here, the right of a person to exemplary behavior corresponds to the obligation of the state to promote this type of socially useful behavior.

At the same time, it should be taken into account that “the right of the subject to socially active behavior corresponds to the duty of other persons not to interfere with the realization of this right, not to violate it. It is protected from being violated by the coercive power of the state.”

Of particular note is the importance of positive legal responsibility in the field of international relations, which is growing significantly. This is due to the fact that the legal regulation of relations between states is based on the principle of coordination, not subordination.

Due to the sovereign equality of the state in international relations act as equal parties, over which there are no authorities capable of influencing the line of their behavior. “States are themselves creators, distintors and guarantors international law". Precisely because of these factors, the scope of the emergence of the positive responsibility of the state, understood in the above sense, is greatly expanding. Therefore, L.V. correctly points out. Speranskaya, what if in domestic law one can speak of free will individual in the choice of one or another line of conduct as a prerequisite for positive responsibility, then in international law such a prerequisite is the sovereignty of the state, as well as the sovereign equality of states.

In the literature on international law, the concept of positive responsibility is, in principle, treated in the same way. So, V.A. Vasilenko writes: “The positive responsibility of the state, as a consequence of the lawful exercise of its freedom of will, is the duty of this state to properly fulfill the duties assigned to it by the norms of international law, and also to participate in the creation of new norms that contribute to the strengthening of the international legal order.” The position of L.V. Speranskaya.

It follows from the foregoing that positive responsibility in international legal relations is understood by the named authors in the inseparable unity of moderate and active forms of its manifestation.

True, V.A. Vasilenko to a certain extent singles out its active side in positive responsibility, giving it priority and a leading role. This happens when he points to the obligation, implemented by states in their international relations, to negotiate with a view to working out agreements on general and complete disarmament, on the creation of effective systems of collective security, on the protection of environment etc.

Specific relations develop when a third state joins an already concluded treaty.

According to Art. 34 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969 (entered into force in January 1980), a treaty does not create obligations or rights for a third state without its consent. This rule is generally accepted principle international law. It directly follows from the principle of respect for the sovereignty of all states, the essence of international law and international treaty, which are based on the voluntary agreement of sovereign states.

Thus, through the act of agreeing to be bound by a treaty already concluded by other states, the state has the opportunity, exercising this right, to act responsibly in an active sense, provided that the treaty itself is progressive.

A special form of manifestation of active positive responsibility can be unilateral legal acts of states, for example, acts that create new obligations for the state (“promise”, “recognition”), acts by which the state waives certain subjective rights in any area (“refusal ”).

Thus, an analysis of the relations that develop both within the state and in the international sphere indicates that positive responsibility, understood as the quality (or character) of the subject's normal or socially active behavior, is an undoubted social value and, therefore, is necessary for practices.

So far, we have been talking about positive legal responsibility, the essence of which lies in the normal or active fulfillment of the requirements of legal norms. Obviously, the failure to fulfill a legal obligation, i.e. A crime is an act of irresponsible behavior. And, naturally, the violation of a certain order of social relations regulated by law must be eliminated, and the rule of law restored.

In this situation, as soon as the fact of an offense takes place, it becomes necessary to apply retrospective liability to the subject who violated the regulatory requirements. This responsibility is ambiguously understood by legal scholars.

The most common is the interpretation of retrospective legal liability as a measure of state coercion, as a reaction to a committed offense.

So, according to the position of I.S. Samoshchenko, legal responsibility is, first of all, state coercion to fulfill the requirements of law, containing the condemnation of the deeds of the offender by the state and society.

Adjacent to this concept is the understanding of responsibility as the implementation of the sanctions of legal norms, the supporters of which are L.S. Yavitch and O.E. Leist.

The originality of the concept of S.N. Bratusya lies in the fact that he substantiates and defends the understanding of legal responsibility as a state of state (or public) within the framework established by law, coercion to fulfill a violated obligation, as the fulfillment of a legal obligation under the influence of state coercion.

S.S. Alekseev points out that within the framework of the concept of “legal responsibility”, the point of view shifts from sanctions as such to their infliction, to the obligation of the offender to endure certain hardships, expressing the damage that has occurred to him. And the most important distinguishing feature legal responsibility is the undergoing of sanctions, which are predominantly punitive in nature.

Despite some minor differences, the authors of these concepts agree on almost everything that matters. So, all of them are unanimous in the fact that legal retrospective liability is associated with the application of the sanction of a legal norm; that it is a form of coercive measures; bringing a person to legal responsibility entails his state or public condemnation; legal liability arises in connection with the violation of a legal obligation; the basis of legal liability is an offense.

However, on such cardinal issues, which are of exceptionally fundamental importance for establishing the true nature of retrospective legal liability, both about the fault of the subject of the offense and about additional burdens (adverse, negative consequences) that the offender is obliged to bear, there is no unanimity of opinion.

Defending the point of view that guilt is a necessary condition for the emergence of retrospective legal liability, we will not specifically dwell on this problem, since it deserves special consideration. In turn, regarding the issue of adverse consequences associated with an offense, it should be noted that some authors already consider the very fact of state coercion, the performance of duties under duress against the will of the offender, at the same time as deprivation in a certain form. As they write I.S. Samoshchenko and M.Kh. Farukshin, from the fact that the offender does not have new obligations, and he does not lose these or those rights, it does not at all follow that he does not bear any hardships. Since he is forced to perform his duties, it means that he is first asked for a report on the committed act, he is condemned for this act, if there is guilt, they are forced to fulfill a legal obligation against his will. However, one can hardly agree with such an opinion without reservations. If we stand consistently on the point of view of the authors, then we can conclude that the offender bears double responsibility: as a result of state coercion to perform the duty and in the restriction of rights or the imposition of additional duties on him. This contradiction, as applied to the economic sphere, was rightly drawn to the attention of N.S. Malein, who noted: “Any rule of law is provided by state coercion, but it does not follow from this that all rules of law are an institution of responsibility. Otherwise, there would be an identification of legal regulation in general and responsibility as one of the institutions of legal regulation.” Agreeing with N.S. Malein that the enforcement of an obligation in itself is not a responsibility, we must make a reservation that the collection of fines, penalties, etc., which can be characterized as measures of responsibility or measures of bringing to responsibility, is not a responsibility either.

In turn, S.N. Bratus, when determining responsibility, focuses on coercion to perform duties: “The main purpose of responsibility is state coercion to actually perform duties, and not the imposition of additional duties on a person who has committed an unlawful act.” In his opinion, property penalties, administrative and disciplinary sanctions play only a secondary role.

There is no doubt that retrospective legal responsibility is entirely based on such an important and specific property of law as coercion. For law "is nothing without an apparatus capable of forcing compliance with the rules of law." In the light of the foregoing and in relation to legal retrospective liability as one of the most important means of enforcing compliance with the rules of law, questions arise of the following kind: compliance with which legal norms is ensured with the help of legal retrospective liability and how is enforcement of the requirements of law carried out?

It should be agreed that “the content of retrospective liability shows that, ultimately, it is, on the one hand, forcing the violator by a certain social entity (society, class, state, etc.) to comply with the social norms corresponding to the interests of the latter and, on the other hand, the subjugation of the offender to this compulsion, enduring it.

The main social and functional purpose of legal responsibility is to enforce compliance with the rules of law governing positive social relations, i.e. those relationships that are in the interests of the class or society as a whole. As for the “submission of the violator to this coercion, enduring it,” this is only a means, a method for achieving the main goal of legal responsibility, and this is the answer to the questions posed. Therefore, if we remove the possibility of imposing additional duties on the offender, how will it be possible to force him to actually fulfill his duties? It seems that there are no other ways; the exception is measures for the protection of subjective rights, which will be discussed in (2 of this chapter).

It is necessary to distinguish between two types of coercion in the case of bringing to legal responsibility: this is coercion to comply with regulatory requirements and coercion to negative consequences established by the rule of law (deprivations of a different nature). And if the first type of coercion is the goal of retrospective legal responsibility, then its second type is the way through which the social purpose of responsibility is realized, its goals are achieved.

Concerning the issue of the difference between property liability and liability for violation of criminal and some administrative prohibitions, S.N. Bratus writes that “in case of violation of these prohibitions, as a rule, it is not about coercion to fulfill a specific unfulfilled duty (it is no longer possible to do this), but about the fulfillment of a new obligation to suffer punishment for what has been done, about restrictions on personal and property, about general and special prevention, re-education, etc.”

From the foregoing, we can conclude that the author, in fact, reduces criminal and administrative responsibility only to the second type of coercion, thus turning it into an end in itself. Whereas the knowledge of the nature of retrospective legal liability consists in taking into account the unity of the two types of coercion. The approach proposed above will make it possible to single out as signs inherent in all types of retrospective legal liability, such as: the incurring of negative, disadvantageous consequences and guilt, since it is pointless to force compliance with legal requirements by punishing an innocent person.

So, the essence of retrospective legal liability is the involvement of a person by methods of state coercion to comply with regulatory requirements, i.e. lawful and responsible behaviour. We can say that retrospective responsibility is the same positive responsibility, but only under duress, this is the same performance of duty, but in a state of coercion. In this regard, S.N. Bratus, in principle, correctly interprets retrospective legal liability as the enforcement of a positive obligation. However, this view is limited only to property liability. In addition, he, considering legal liability too broadly, does not make the necessary distinction between liability and protection measures. As a result, such common signs for all types of legal liability as the guilt of the subject, responsible, and disadvantageous consequences for the offender.

It is very important to find out what duty and in what way the subject is forced to perform in case of violation of the requirements of the norms of various branches of law.

So, in the field of civil law regulation, a person is forced to fulfill a positive obligation by such means as paying a fine, penalty interest, and compensation for losses. The situation is somewhat different when a person is brought to criminal responsibility, to administrative or disciplinary responsibility. S.N. Bratus believes that with these types of responsibility, we are talking about the fulfillment of a new obligation to suffer punishment, etc., and not about coercion to fulfill an unfulfilled obligation, and this is their essential and even fundamental difference from property liability.

Meanwhile, is it not possible to see the general, which is inherent in both fines, penalties, and measures of criminal law, administrative law, as well as disciplinary measures that force the fulfillment of an unfulfilled positive obligation. Penalty measures taken against a faulty counterparty, for example, in case of short delivery of goods (products) on time, is his new obligation, which encourages correct, responsible behavior.

Of course, the undelivered goods can be delivered, albeit belatedly, and thereby fulfill a positive obligation. Another thing is when, for example, a person is fined for traveling without a ticket on transport or is subject to disciplinary liability for being late for work. In the above examples, it is really impossible to force the fulfillment of a specific duty, since the ticket was not taken, a delay was allowed, which led to the imposition of penalties. However, by this very subject is forced to pay for travel on transport, to observe labor discipline, i.e. we are essentially talking about coercion to perform the same duties, only in the future.

However, is it possible to unconditionally agree that in the event of a violation contractual obligations really performed under duress “specific unfulfilled duty?” After all, it must be borne in mind that contractual conditions that are not fulfilled on time violate the harmony of the mechanism of economic relations, lead to a failure of production processes, and therefore a duty fulfilled with a delay is most often no longer able to fully fulfill its originally intended role. Based on the fact that there is a role modification of duty, we can say that the duty, which is performed under duress after some time (ie, in the future), becomes somewhat different. In turn, only for the fulfillment of unfulfilled obligations in the future, the provision enshrined in Part 2 of Art. 396 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for the release of the debtor from the performance of an obligation in kind in the event of compensation for losses and payment of a penalty.

Thus, it should be emphasized that both with property liability and with other types of retrospective legal liability, a person is involved in responsible behavior, i.e. to the observance for the future of those positive obligations which are not performed voluntarily.

Consequently, with the help of measures of state coercion, which are punitive and educational in nature and addressed to the offender, the latter, through undergoing these measures, is attracted to responsible behavior. Naturally, coercion to lawful behavior must have certain time limits. These are after the imposition of penalties (determination of punishment) the term of administrative or disciplinary punishment, the state of a criminal record. For organizations after the imposition of penalties, such a period of punishment is limitation of actions; in cases of compensation by the organization for property damage, liability is limited to this action (recovery of damages) and private preventive action, the period of influence of which has no clear time limits.

Based on the fact that the prerequisite for the emergence of retrospective liability are punitive measures and the fact that responsible behavior is due to coercion, we believe that, in accordance with the actual nature of this liability, it should be called (which will be done in the future) either punitive or compulsory legal liability. .

In addition to state coercion, another important sign of retrospective legal liability is public condemnation of the behavior of the offender.

Since only guilty behavior is subject to public condemnation, then prosecution “can occur only if there is such a sign as socially condemned, guilty behavior of the offender.” At the same time, it should be noted that public condemnation of unlawful behavior has its origin and manifests itself through adverse consequences for the offender, which, as already indicated, are also a necessary sign of punitive legal liability.

As a single category, legal responsibility performs a number of functions, the nature, nature and number of which is determined by its social purpose, the essence of which, in turn, is primarily to enforce and stimulate the execution and implementation of the rule of law.

In the legal literature, the number and nature of the functions of punitive legal liability are defined differently. So, S.S. Alekseev, emphasizing that the purpose of legal responsibility is the moral re-education (rebirth) of the personality of the offender, identifies two of its functions: penal and law-restorative.

N.S. Malein, along with repressive (punitive) and compensatory (restorative), also distinguishes between preventive (warning-educational) and signaling functions.

The position of B.T. Bazylev, who traces a close connection between the goals of compulsory legal liability and its functions, based on the fact that "the goals of the institution of legal responsibility determine its functions." So, based on the immediate goal of retrospective legal responsibility, which consists in punishing the offender, he singles out the punitive function. Further, emphasizing that punishment is not an end in itself, but becomes a means to achieve higher goals, including general and particular warnings, B.T. Bazylev speaks of a preventive function.

However, the chain of goals of punitive legal liability does not end here and, in his opinion, consists in not only introducing into the consciousness of the subject the motives of outwardly lawful behavior in the future, but turning these motives into convictions, into motives of one’s own conscience, into internal regulators of behavior in society. In other words, the task of punishment in society lies in a greater or lesser moral restructuring of the personality, in the formation of truly social attitudes of behavior in a person who has violated the law. This is the long-term goal and function of the institution of legal responsibility.

To a greater extent, one could agree with B.T. Bazylev, if he considered a promising goal and function as belonging not to compulsory liability, but to a positive aspect of a single category of legal liability, since it was correctly noted in the literature that correction and re-education involves the transformation of a convicted person (as well as any offender) into such a member of society , which not only does not cause harm to society by its behavior, but also, if possible, brings some benefit. Raising the consciousness of all citizens to the level of the most active advanced members of our society is carried out by means that have nothing to do with punishment.

Thus, B.T. Bazylev imposes on compulsory legal responsibility the purpose and function that are not characteristic of it.

Indeed, the goals of legal responsibility determine its functions, but, in turn, the functions ensure the achievement of the goal.

Since we proceed from the fact that punishment (punishment) is a means of ensuring coercively lawful (responsible) behavior, it is clear that this behavior is also the goal of coercive legal responsibility. The purpose of this responsibility is also to educate the person who committed the offense in the spirit of compliance with Russian laws and preventing the commission of offenses both by that person and others.

Comparing these goals, it is easy to see that it is the second goal that is the ultimate goal of compulsory legal liability. Since the immediate, rather than final goals express the specifics of specific types of legal regulation, therefore, the main goal of compulsory legal liability is the first goal.

From the content of the goals of punitive legal liability, it already becomes obvious that punitive, educational and preventive functions are necessary to achieve them. And if coercive lawful behavior as a goal is realized with the help of a punitive function within the framework of a state of punishment, coercion, then the achievement of the ultimate goal of educating an offender and preventing offenses is already associated with the area of positive legal responsibility, or rather, with its moderately positive aspect.

The ultimate goal of compulsory legal liability is, in turn, the immediate and main goal of moderately positive legal liability.

Obviously, to maintain the stability of the noted target result, which determines voluntary lawful behavior, two functions are sufficient: preventive and educational (which already operate outside of real coercion). However, along with the immediate goal, moderately positive legal responsibility is also characterized by the ultimate goal: socially active lawful behavior, the achievement of which presupposes the disappearance of the warning function and the emergence of a stimulating function. This function is manifested when the legislator, determining the legal conditions (facts) for the emergence of the rights and obligations of subjects, other legal consequences, encourages the use of the desired methods to achieve a socially beneficial result.

It is clear that the ultimate goal of moderately positive legal liability is also the immediate (main) goal of actively positive legal liability. Here the target result (socially active lawful behavior), its constancy can be maintained only by two functions - educational and stimulating. As for the ultimate goal of active-positive legal responsibility, it goes beyond the legal impact.

The shown relationship and interaction of goals and functions indicates a close relationship between different aspects and subtypes of legal liability, which serves as one of the arguments confirming the need to consider liability as a single category (in the unity of all its aspects).

Focusing on the functions of compulsory legal liability, they should also include a compensatory function, since liability measures of a property nature combine not only punitive elements, but also compensatory ones, designed to ensure the violated interest of the victim, restoring his property sphere.

A separate allocation of the signaling function, which makes it possible to judge omissions in the work, and also affects the choice of measures of influence against persons previously brought to compulsory legal responsibility, is not required, since the noted function has no other content than education and warning.

Summarizing what has been said above about compulsory legal liability, the latter can be defined as a state of coercion to lawful, and therefore responsible behavior, achieved through the incurring of adverse consequences, the imposition of which is associated with the condemned, guilty and unlawful (irresponsible) behavior of certain persons, which has the final goal: education of offenders in the spirit of compliance with Russian laws, as well as preventing them and other persons from committing new illegal acts.

1.2 Types of legal liability in social security

The by-laws regulating social security relations also either do not contain the rules on the responsibility of their parties, or are formulated in such a way that it is impossible to apply them. For example, paragraph 1 of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of January 19, 1996 "On measures to ensure the timely payment of wages from the budget of all levels, pensions and other social payments" in terms of holding accountable for delaying social payments is quite difficult, and sometimes impossible apply in practice.

Responsibility in social security law. Book: Social Security Law. Principles and objectives of compulsory social insurance against industrial accidents and occupational diseases, circle of persons subject to this type of insurance

Jobs similar to - Responsibility for committing offenses in the field of social security

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar Documents