Some problems of criminal-legal qualification of speech aggression of young people in the digital environment

The subject of this article is the contentious issues of criminal law qualification of youth verbal aggression in the digital environment, including such forms of destructive communicative behavior as mobbing and cyberbullying. The primary emphasis is placed on normative gaps in qualifying these acts, given the increasing relevance of the problem in recent years against the backdrop of the rapid development of digital communication platforms. The research is based on an analysis of current criminal legislation (in particular, Articles 128.1, 280, 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), administrative law norms, as well as judicial and investigative practice regarding cases of verbal aggression in the digital environment. The theoretical foundation consists of scientific concepts of verbal aggression presented in the works of Yu.V. Shcherbinina, K.F. Sedov, T.A. Vorontsova, L.V. Enina, alongside empirical data on the prevalence of various forms of cyberbullying and mobbing on modern digital platforms. In the course of the research, the following methods were used: formal and dialectical logic; analysis of statistical data from digital platforms (TGStat, VK Tech Report, TikTok), revealing the actual scale of aggressive content dissemination; the comparative legal method, enabling the comparison of qualification approaches for similar acts in different jurisdictions; and structural-functional analysis to identify the features of the digital communication environment and its influence on the legal qualification of acts. Based on the findings, the author concludes that there is no unified legal regime for qualifying verbal aggression in the digital environment. Three key problems have been identified: 1. The problem of qualifying the feature of "public nature" in the context of online communications, where a dynamic blending of private and public content status occurs, and traditional categories of public nature ("mass media," "public speeches," "printed publications") do not align with the specifics of digital platforms. 2. The problem of establishing the subjective aspect (mens rea) of verbal aggression within the context of youth digital subculture, where direct intent is often masked as a "joke" or "irony," realized through specific polycode means (emojis, memes, slang expressions). 3. The problem of procedural fixation and proof of instances of verbal aggression in the digital environment, including the lack of unified approaches to the collection and procedural legitimization of digital evidence. The author acknowledges that the complete eradication of verbal aggression in digital space is likely impossible; however, it is necessary to develop effective legal mechanisms for its regulation and control. The author declares no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References