4. Kaftannykov A.A. Yurydycheskoe lytso kak subiekt uholovnoi otvetstvennosty v zakonodatelstve zarubezhntikh stran // Mezhdunarodnoe y natsyonalnoe uholovnoe zakonodatelstvo: problem« yurydycheskoi tekhnyky. Materyalu III Mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-praktycheskoi konferentsyy, sostoiavsheisia na yurydycheskom fakultete MHU ym. M. V. Lomonosova, 29-30 maia 2003 h., s. 410.
5. Sofronova S.A. Yurydycheskoe lytso kak subiekt uholovnoi otvetstvennosty v zarubezhnom prave // Uholovnoe nakazanye v Rossyy y za rubezhom: teoryia y praktyka. Sbornyk materyalov mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-praktycheskoi konferentsyy. Volohda, 7 dekabria 2004 h., s. 16.
6. Abashyna L.A., Nazarenko H.V. Yurydycheskoe lytso kak subiekt uholovnoi otvetstvennosty: opwt zarubezhntikh hosudarstv y perspektyvbi rossyiskoho zakonodatelstva: Monohrafyia. Orel: ORAHS, 2009, s. 23-30.
Aliyeva Halima Rashid kizi.
THE LEGAL ENTITY AS CRIMINALLY PURSUED SUBJECT IN MODERN LAW
Despite the fact that the issue of criminal liability of legal entities in the post-Soviet space has become relevant in recent years, this institute has been known to comparativist researchers for a long time, since years earlier it was enshrined in the criminal laws of a number offoreign countries. For example, in 1976 in Holland, in 1991 in Norway, in 1992 in France, in 1997 in the People's Republic of China, etc., the institution under consideration was implemented at the legislative level.
Commercial companies usually have the largest government contracts, and such companies play a crucial role in the most significant sectors of the economy. Therefore, the most serious economic as well as corruption crimes are committed by legal entities (companies, corporations and non-profit organizations) or under their cover. In this regard, maintaining in criminal law the focus on criminal acts exclusively of natural persons and the application of punishment exclusively of natural persons seems inappropriate. Therefore, since the last decade of the 20th century, international legal instruments and laws of individual countries, in addition to the responsibility of individuals, increasingly provide for corporate responsibility. The legal systems of European countries remain somewhat heterogeneous in terms of the type of liability of legal persons for crimes.
Since 2012, the institution of corporate criminal responsibility has also been introduced into criminal law in the Republic of Azerbaijan. Thus, Chapter 15-2 of the Criminal Code is devoted entirely to criminal legal measures applied to legal entities. The Criminal Code provides for a certain list of crimes in the order of numerus clausus for the commission of which criminal prosecution of legal entities is allowed. The Criminal Code provides for the following types of criminal legal measures applicable to legal entities: fine; special confiscation; depriving a legal entity of the right to engage in certain activities; liquidation of a legal entity. It should also be noted that, according to the criminal legislation of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the application of criminal legal measures to a legal person does not exclude the criminal liability of an individual who has committed this act or participated in any form in its commission. In turn, the termination of criminal proceedings against an individual, in cases established by law, does not prevent the application of criminal legal measures to a legal person.
In this article, the author attempted to highlight the current problem of bringing legal persons to criminal responsibility in a comparative context. At the same time, the resource offoreign criminal legislation, foreign criminal law doctrine and the theoretical base of scientists who analyzed this issue in their writings was used.
The author concludes that along with the Azerbaijani model of the concept of corporate criminal responsibility, in world practice, one can also find unique models of the analyzed institute. For example, German criminal law offers a completely different approach to the issue under consideration. The fact is that German criminal law strictly adheres to the doctrine of punishment for guilt, therefore, in German criminal law a legal person cannot be assessed as a subject of a crime, since the criminal law of Germany (including Austria) does not provide for the institution of corporate guilt. But the uniqueness of the German model of corporate criminal responsibility lies in the fact that although a corporation is notformally recognized as the subject of a crime, nevertheless, various criminal legal measures can be applied to it. For example, according to German criminal law, if the unlawful act of representatives or executives of a corporation violates certain legal obligations of the corporation or brings financial benefit to the company (or intended to bring financial benefit to the company), as well as in case of illegal actions of the company's employees that could be prevented by its head, that is, in the absence ofproper control, a system of imposing fines not only on individuals, but also on corporations is applied. A similar form exists in the Austrian Criminal Law, which states that if a legal person is enriched by the commission of a crime by an individual or by property obtainedfrom a crime, he is sentenced to pay a sum of money corresponding to the cost of unjustified enrichment.
Key words: comparative jurisprudence, criminal law, criminal procedure, legal entities, corporate criminal liability, models.