Abstract. Taking into account that the problem of illegal forest felling in Russia has not been solved so far, the reasonableness of criminalization of illegal forest felling in considerable amount provided for under Part 1, Article 260 of the Criminal code of the RF (“simple” illegal felling of forest plantations) has been researched in the article. According to Criminal law theory de facto such offence aspires to complete or partial decriminalization, however, de jure such offence has been significantly criminalized.

Referring to the theory of criminalization and decriminalization, the authors defined that criminal public danger possesses 2 subsystems (object and danger) whereas “simple” illegal felling has got only one so-called subsystem- valuable object. The authors determined the significant amount of illegal felling by analyzing the judicial practice which in turn fails to the requirements of the legislation. In order to prosecute somebody for illegal felling it is enough to prove that the only one pine tree 26 cm in diameter and 16 meters high has been illegally cut.

Offenders are more often prosecuted for illegal felling in significant amount (P.3, Article 260 the Criminal Code of the RF) than for offence provided for under Part 1, Article 260 of the Criminal Cde of the RF. As for the total number of verdicts rendered based on Part 2 and Part 3 of the given article, they are twice higher than the number of verdicts based on Part 1, Article 260. Nevertheless, the circumstances that are being implemented into this law as qualifying cannot go with the absolute majority of offences and to become a kind of “standard norm” for them. The elements which characterize the overwhelming majority of the certain types of offences should be acknowledged as the essential elements of an offence. In this context authors assume that such indicator as the significant amount of felling should be considered as criminalizing element of illegal felling. “Simple” illegal felling is to be decriminalized, so that sanctions of Part 1 and Part 2 of Article 8.26 of the Code of Administrative offences are to be amended as well: fines should be increased, basic alternative kind of punishment should be implemented such as community service as well as supplementary punishment in a form of confiscation of work tool or the target of administrative offence.