ISSUES OF DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN MASS RIOTS AND GROUP HOOLIGANISM

Objective: This study aims to clarify the legal boundaries between group hooliganism and mass riots, analyze their compositional elements under criminal law, and propose scientifically grounded criteria for their differentiation. Method: A legal analysis was conducted, examining the overlapping features of mass riots and group hooliganism, including their subjective motives, objective signs, and mass participation concepts. The study used existing legal norms and judicial practices as the basis for the analysis. Results: The research identifies key differences between these crimes, focusing on motives, the scale of disorder, crowd composition, spontaneity, and the primary object of criminal encroachment—public order versus public safety. Despite shared features such as violence and group participation, clear distinctions can be made based on these criteria. Novelty: The study proposes refined differentiation criteria that account for both objective and subjective elements, offering a systematic interpretation of these crimes that can contribute to legislative clarification and improved legal accountability. The findings emphasize the need for enhanced training for law enforcement and judicial bodies to prevent misclassification.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Business Law and Political Science
Published
2025-04-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.61796/ijblps.v2i7.329
Primary Topic
Sociology and Norbert Elias
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

ISSUES OF DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN MASS RIOTS AND GROUP HOOLIGANISM

Aliyev Assilbek Kadirovich
International Journal of Business Law and Political Science
Sociology and Norbert Elias
article

ISSUES OF DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN MASS RIOTS AND GROUP HOOLIGANISM

Aliyev Assilbek Kadirovich
article en

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to clarify the legal boundaries between group hooliganism and mass riots, analyze their compositional elements under criminal law, and propose scientifically grounded criteria for their differentiation. Method: A legal analysis was conducted, examining the overlapping features of mass riots and group hooliganism, including their subjective motives, objective signs, and mass participation concepts. The study used existing legal norms and judicial practices as the basis for the analysis. Results: The research identifies key differences between these crimes, focusing on motives, the scale of disorder, crowd composition, spontaneity, and the primary object of criminal encroachment—public order versus public safety. Despite shared features such as violence and group participation, clear distinctions can be made based on these criteria. Novelty: The study proposes refined differentiation criteria that account for both objective and subjective elements, offering a systematic interpretation of these crimes that can contribute to legislative clarification and improved legal accountability. The findings emphasize the need for enhanced training for law enforcement and judicial bodies to prevent misclassification.

International Journal of Business Law and Political ScienceVol. 2(7)
Tashkent State University of Law (UZ)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Sociology and Norbert Elias
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.