The Zadrynsk prosecutor opened a criminal case against a group of skinheads who broke into a building belonging to the local branch of Jehovah´s Witnesses, broke up the ritual utensils, and dispersed the crowd. The case was brought under article 148 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - “Obstruction of the exercise of the right to freedom of conscience”.
The defender of the accused said that the case should be dismissed, since the Constitution does not disclose the concept of “right to freedom of conscience” and does not define religious rituals. Actions performed by members of Jehovah´s Witnesses are not a religious rite. In addition, the Constitution does not contain a sanction for violation of the norm on freedom of conscience, and therefore there is no sanction in the composition of this norm in the presence of a hypothesis and disposition.
Is the case subject to dismissal on the basis of the above reasons for the defense? Solve the case. Do the norms of the Constitution have the properties of direct action?
After payment you will be available a link to the solution of this problem in the file of MS Word. It should be noted that the problem solutions put up for sale were successfully handed over in the period 2009-2019 and could be outdated. However, the general algorithm will always remain true.
No feedback yet