English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This article explores the causes for the emergence of &amp;ldquo;corruption-causing factors&amp;rdquo; in judicial acts, indicates correlation between &amp;ldquo;corruption-causing factors&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;private patronage&amp;rdquo; on the part of mafia institution (modern mafia groups), which is the highest &amp;ldquo;specific economic enterprise or industry that produces, encourages, and sells private patronage&amp;rdquo;, including interference in justice through corruption and bribery. The case law on the topic is analyzed. The object of this research is the activity of judges in assessing legally valid circumstances in relation to the responsibility of judges. The subject of this research is the norms of Russian legislation that regulate the activity of judges in assessing legally valid circumstances, as well as the texts of judicial acts on claims under the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, civil and administrative cases of the courts of St. Petersburg, and the responsibility of judges. The author notes the absence of definition of &amp;ldquo;corruption-causing factor&amp;rdquo; in the judicial act, its characteristics, responsibility of the judges for decision-making that contain &amp;ldquo;corruption-causing factor&amp;rdquo;, effective judicial bodies that &amp;ldquo;investigate&amp;rdquo; the disciplinary misconduct of judges. It is underlined that the implementation of the institution of investigative judge was anticipatory. The scientific novelty is substantiated by the fact that this article is first to outline the concept of &amp;ldquo;corruption-causing factor&amp;rdquo; in the judicial act as the grounds for bringing the judge to disciplinary responsibility. The conclusion is made that this is a comprehensive issue; thus, the longer it would take to solve the questions of effective legal regulation of the mechanism of judicial responsibility, the more it would augment the risks of proliferation of the &amp;ldquo;corruption-causing factor&amp;rdquo; in the judicial system, which destroys confidence in the government authorities and deteriorates the state from within.	

Criminogenic role of “private patronage” as a corruption-causing factor in the judicial act in light of the activity of modern “mafia” groups