ISSUES OF DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN MASS RIOTS AND GROUP HOOLIGANISM
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61796/ijblps.v2i7.329Keywords:
Hooliganism, Riots, Public order, Public safety, Hooliganism motive, Qualification, Criminal law measuresAbstract
Objective: This study aims to clarify the legal boundaries between group hooliganism and mass riots, analyze their compositional elements under criminal law, and propose scientifically grounded criteria for their differentiation. Method: A legal analysis was conducted, examining the overlapping features of mass riots and group hooliganism, including their subjective motives, objective signs, and mass participation concepts. The study used existing legal norms and judicial practices as the basis for the analysis. Results: The research identifies key differences between these crimes, focusing on motives, the scale of disorder, crowd composition, spontaneity, and the primary object of criminal encroachment—public order versus public safety. Despite shared features such as violence and group participation, clear distinctions can be made based on these criteria. Novelty: The study proposes refined differentiation criteria that account for both objective and subjective elements, offering a systematic interpretation of these crimes that can contribute to legislative clarification and improved legal accountability. The findings emphasize the need for enhanced training for law enforcement and judicial bodies to prevent misclassification.
References
D. Karaketova. Unreliable qualification of criminal offences // Journal of Jurisprudence - 2021 / 4 - B.46
Oliy Sud Plenumining of 14 June 2002, Decision of the Oliy Sud "On the assessment of criminal offences in the court"
Volzhenkin B. Hooliganism // Criminal Law. 2007. No. 5.
Abdulmanov A. Responsibility for mass riots // Russian Justice. 1996. No. 1.
Veklenko S.V., Ragozina I.G. Criminal liability for hooliganism. Omsk, 2008.
Volkov B.S. Motive and qualification of hooliganism. Kazan, 1968.
Demidov Yu.N. Mass riots: criminal-legal and criminological aspects. Moscow, 1994.
Zhikh Yu.I. Criminal liability for group hooliganism: Abstract of Cand. Sci. (Law) dissertation. Volgograd, 1998.
Aistova L.S. Qualification of hooliganism: Textbook and practical manual. St. Petersburg, 1998.
Zhunusova G.B. Criminal liability for hooliganism under the legislation of the Kyrgyz Republic: Abstract of Cand. Sci. (Law) dissertation. Bishkek, 2006.
Borisov S.V., Zherebchenko A.V. Qualification of crimes of an extremist nature: A tutorial. Moscow, 2010.
Borisov S.V. Hooliganism: criminal-legal and criminological aspects. Diss…cand. jurid. sciences. Moscow, 2005.
Pashkin D.S. Qualification of hooliganism: A tutorial. Chelyabinsk, 2006.
The verdict of the Oktyabrsky District Court of Yekaterinburg dated April 9, 2007 on the fact of participation in mass riots in order to seize the powers of the management of OJSC Oboronsnabsbyt and LLC RK Oboronsnabsbyt.
Karpovich O.G. Types of fraud. Raiding // Taxes. 2010. No. 25.
Manakhov S.A., Akzhigitov R.I., Sychev P.G. Investigation of crimes related to the illegal seizure of enterprises // Methodological review. M.: Investigative Committee of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, 2005.
Soloviev I.N. Legal basis for combating raiding // Jurist. 2011. No. 1.
Zh. Dzhavkashev. The importance of criminal prosecution in the field of criminal justice. Central Asian Research Journal for Interdisciplinary Studies (CARJIS) // Google Scholar Universal Impact Factor: 7.1 ISSN:2181-2454 // VOLUME 2 | ISSUE 2 | 2022 – B.535-541
Ilyasov A.Z. Criminal-legal and criminological problems of mass riots: Diss… Cand. legal Sci. Makhachkala, 1999.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Aliyev Assilbek Kadirovich
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
