CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR RECURRENT PROVISION OF PREMISES FOR THE CONSUMPTION OF DRUGS, PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES OR THEIR ANALOGUES (ARTICLE 232 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

The article is devoted to the study of criminal responsibility issues for the systematic provision of premises for the consumption of drugs, psychotropic substances or their analogues (art. 232 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The author gives a historical analysis of responsibility issues for the act in question in the legislation of the Soviet period in the history of criminal law. Due to the fact that there was no regulation on responsibility for the systematic provision of premises for the consumption of drugs, psychotropic substances or their analogues until 2013 the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation , the history of the draft law brought in the State Duma of the Russian Federation on the establishment of appropriate criminal responsibility is studied in the article. The authors research responsibility issues for systematic provision of premises for the consumption of drugs, psychotropic substance in the criminal law of certain post-Soviet countries (The Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan). Conclusions were made on the fact that the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in its development lags far behind the legislation of the countries stated above in responsibility regulation for the provision of premises for the consumption of drugs, psychotropic substances or their analogues. During the research based on the study of materials of judicial practice, the problem of distinction between the terms "maintenance of a den" and "recurrent character of provision of premises" is identified. In addition, the authors studied the question of time limits needed to determine the recurrent character of provision of premises for consumption of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances or their analogues. Based on this the authors made a conclusion about the imperfection of the notes to the Art. 232 of the Criminal Code and the need to establish time limits for the determination of the regularity of the provision of the premises.