Decontamination of soils with complex pollution using natural strains of microorganisms is a matter of great importance. Here we report that oil-oxidizing bacteria Rhodococcus erythropolis AC-1514D and Rhodococcus ruber AC-1513D can degrade various organophosphorous pesticides (OP). Cell-mediated degradation of five different OP is apparently associated with the presence of N-acylhomoserine lactonase, which is pronouncedly similar (46-50 %) to the well-known enzyme organophosphate hydrolase (OPH), a hydrolysis catalyst for a wide variety of organophosphorous compounds. Additionally, we demonstrated the high lactonase activity of hexahistidine-tagged organophosphate hydrolase (His6-OPH) with respect to various N-acylhomoserine lactones, and we determined the catalytic constants of His6-OPH towards these compounds. These experimental data and theoretical analysis confirmed the hypothesis about the evolutionary proximity of OPH and lactonases. Using Rhodococcus cells, we carried out effective simultaneous biodegradation of pesticide paraoxon (88 mg/kg) and oil hydrocarbon hexadecane (6.3 g/kg) in the soil. Furthermore, the discovered high lactonase activity of His6-OPH offers new possibilities for developing an efficient strategy of combating resistant populations of Gram-negative bacterial cells.
This article examines the institution of exemption from criminal liability as an alternative to criminal prosecution and correlation with the principle of presumption of innocence on the basis of current criminal procedure legislation, scientific researches and judicial practice (case law). It is established that the initial position of scholars, who adhere to the opinion of contradiction of the institution of exemption from criminal liability with the principle of presumption of innocence, is that, in itself, the fact of exemption from criminal liability indicates a guilty plea and requires sentencing in accordance with Part 1 of the Article 62 of the Constitution of Ukraine. It was found out that reference of some scholars to commitment of a crime by a person is possible only due to availability of guilty verdict, not a court ruling. Because, there are many norms in legislation which may restrict certain citizens’ rights on the basis of ceasing a criminal case under «non-rehabilitative» circumstances. Other ones propose to abandon the institution of exemption from criminal liability in general and advocate expanding the scope of the institution of release from punishment, improving other means of criminal law regulation of the crime which is established by a guilty verdict of a court. It is being proved that the principle of presumption of innocence while exempting from criminal liability is not restricted: the prescriptions of presumption of innocence should be assessed, firstly, as not included into the mechanism of criminal liability, and secondly – as criminal law measures which are an alternative to punishment. Exemption of a person from criminal liability remains to be an effective means to resolve a criminal law dispute in cases prescribed by law. A person who has committed a criminally punishable act is, in no way, limited in their rights, much less in the right to implement the principle of the presumption of innocence. Key words: alternative, liability, exemption (release), punishment, presumption of innocence.
This article is researching an institution of exemption from criminal liability as an alternative to criminal prosecution on the basis of current criminal procedure legislation, scientific researches and judicial practice. It was found that some researchers of exemption from criminal liability refer it to the forms of criminal liability, consider exemption from criminal liability as an institution of criminal law that differentiates liability; a radical means of differentiating a criminal liability; a legal fact that terminates a criminal legal relationship, which exempts a person from adverse legal consequences, etc. Having analysed the positions of foreign and domestic scholars, it can be concluded that the norms which provide for exemption from criminal liability should be considered as «an alternative to criminal prosecution». Exemption from criminal liability is provided for in the criminal law due to the fact that in some cases there is no point in subjecting a particular person to criminal liability, as criminal liability, being lawful, is considered as an inexpedient one. The state responds to a criminal act not leaving it without consequences, but reacts in another, «alternative» form, reaching a justified legal compromise in such cases. It is proved that the institution of exemption from criminal liability is implementing a desire of the state to effectively and rationally fight against crime without punishment and in general without a guilty verdict (conviction). This institution is simultaneously implementing the principles of economy of criminal repression, humanism and individualization of liability. Thus, the legislator has provided an alternative to criminal prosecution in the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Criminal Code. This alternative in certain cases includes a compromise – a person who first time committed a criminal offense or negligent minor offence, except for corruption offenses, is being exempted from criminal liability if this person: has sincerely repented after commitment of offence, has actively contributed to the disclosure of the criminal offense and has fully reimbursed the damage caused by it or has eliminated the damage (Article 45 of the Criminal Code); has reconciled with the victim and has reimbursed the damage caused by such a person or has eliminated the damage (Article 46 of the Criminal Code); when transferring on parole to the staff of the enterprise, institution or organization within a year from the date of parole such person will justify the trust of the staff, will not evade educational measures and will not violate a public order (Article 47 of the Criminal Code). Key words: alternative, liability, exemption, compromise, punishment.
The article examines the prerequisites for the use of alternative methods of resolving criminal law and / or criminal procedure conflicts. It is stated that the use of alternative dispute resolution in criminal proceedings is possible only if changes or differentiation of the criminal procedure form, taking into account the interests of participants in criminal law and / or criminal procedure conflict. A positive consequence of the use of alternatives is procedural economy and speed of criminal proceedings, with an unconditional guarantee of achieving the objectives of the criminal process and ensuring the protection of the rights and legally protected interests of persons in criminal proceedings in their application. It is noted that at the present stage of development of criminal procedure legislation the differentiation of procedural forms is one of the priority conditions for the rational use of procedural means, contributes to greater efficiency and effectiveness of criminal proceedings with significant procedural savings. The bases and criteria of differentiation of the criminal-procedural form are investigated. It is noted that compromise constructions are the result of a combination of two principles of the criminal process - public and dispositive, and their application is possible only in a competitive process. The material and practical component of the differentiation of the criminal procedure form is singled out, and attention is focused on the division of the criminal procedure form when applying alternatives to the simplified and complicated forms depending on the law enforcement. Based on the study, it was concluded that the implementation of conciliation procedures in the system of alternative resolution of legal conflicts (disputes) in criminal proceedings largely depends on the differentiation of criminal procedure, procedural economy, speed of criminal proceedings, as well as taking into account the interests of criminal and procedural conflicts. Key words: criminal process, procedural economy, procedural form, conflict, compromise, differentiation, interest, alternative.
У статті проаналізовано кримінальне процесуальне законодавство та нормативно-правові акти, якими регламентується врегулювання кримінально-правових спорів за допомогою медіативних процедур у Федерати вній Республіці Німеччина, Австрії та Швейцарії. Зроблено висновок, що в різних країнах такі примирювальні процеси відбуваються по різному, в більшості в позитивному аспекті. Хоча, наприклад, така успішна й економічно розвинута держава як Швейцарія визнає медіацію недоцільною та невиправданою в економічному плані. У ФРН та Австрії примирювальні процедури, навпаки, застосовуються ефективно ще з кінця минулого століття.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.