Artyukhova V. Hooliganism: Criminal and Criminological Understanding

The research support an approach, according to which public order is recognized as an immediate object of hooliganism. The author agrees with the position, according to which the only possible form of committing hooliganism is an action. Characteristics of an action include its “extreme impertinence” and “exceptional cynicism”. Comparative analysis of these characteristics is presented, based on the results of which it is suggested they should be replaced with such characteristics as “extreme impudence”. The author furthermore mentioned a legislative gap in a definition of hooliganism that leads to an ambiguous understanding of a phrase “grave disruption of public order” both as an action and as a consequence of the former. Arguments are provided for a legislative change of the current formal elements of hooliganism for material elements; respective wording of Part 1 Article 296 of the Criminal Code is suggested as well as a note to be added to the article.