Irina Yarovaya, head of the State Duma Committee on Security and Anti-Corruption, submitted a bill on criminal responsibility for crimes directly related to corruption to the lower house of the Russian parliament. What does “contributed” mean? —The reader may wonder — what, until now, has corruption been considered a criminal offense?
In fact, it is not as simple as you might expect. In the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation there is an 290-I article called “Taking a bribe”. According to the clauses of this article, the criminal prosecution expects all those gentlemen who have received a bribe from anyone in the form of funds, shares or other property. The maximum penalty under Article 290 provides for the 6 point - a paragraph about a bribe in especially large amounts (more than 1 million rubles) by an official - up to 15 years imprisonment with a fine of 70 -fold amount of bribe. That is, hypothetically, it is possible to thunder for 15 years for a “taken” million and pay XMUM million fine rubles for their appetites. Is everything so simple?
If we analyze this article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it turns out that a criminal punishment awaits an official in the event that he was frankly given a “paw”. That is, if he decided to launch his own “paw” (by himself, at will), for example, into the regional or state budget, he already has to look for another article here, for this is no longer a bribe ...
Is there such an article? Let's look ... It looks like the article 285-i - "Abuse of office." As an example, which reveals the essence of the article: if such an activity as single or systematic withdrawal of money from their budgets of one or another level does not belong to your authority, and you decided to do the excavation, then theoretically be kind - to the dock ... But abuse because there are different - not only in monetary matters.
In Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, there is a third clause, which defines the maximum penalty for “abuse” in the form of 10 years in prison, and in those cases if the abuse of official authority resulted in serious consequences. Note that according to article 290, the maximum is 15 years, and according to 285, the maximum is already below ...
There are, of course, other, let's say, related articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: hiding money and property, fraud, embezzlement or embezzlement (in the latter case, the maximum penalty is 10 years imprisonment).
In general, we come to the fact that the Russian Criminal Code contains quite a few articles that, as they say, are around and about, but they don’t look at the essence of the problem. In this regard, the initiative of the deputy Irina Spring on the definition of corruption offenses and crimes of corruption and the need to toughen the penalties on these types of illegal actions seems to be correct. But this initiative has its own nuances, which should be paid attention to while work on the adoption of the relevant law is still underway.
So, the head of the relevant Duma committee, Mrs. Yarovaya, whom God himself ordered to work on improving the anti-corruption legislation, introduces a draft law, in which several important points are spelled out. Firstly, at least, the deputy says so, for the first time in Russia, concepts related to corruption offenses and crimes will be defined (definitions are given as the deputy herself gives them):
Corruption offense is a guilty act that violates the legislation of the Russian Federation on combating corruption and entails disciplinary, administrative, criminal and civil liability.
Corruption offense is a socially dangerous deed committed in connection with the unlawful use by an individual of his official position against the legitimate interests of society and the state in order to obtain benefits for himself or third parties or illegal granting of such benefits to a specified person by other individuals prohibited by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation under the threat of punishment.
The second definition looks particularly florid, which, in principle, is characteristic of modern bills ... But now it's not even about that.
Secondly, the new bill speaks of the embezzlement of the budget funds, which can be included in the asset. Only here if a bribe in especially large amounts in the Art. 290 is indicated in the amount of 1 million rubles, then the “extra large size” for embezzlement of budget funds is for some reason six times higher. That is, he pulled out less than six million from the state program - this is not yet a “special size”, according to the authors of the bill ... But if someone excuse me, he grabbed during the implementation of the state program, while fulfilling the state order of budget money worth over six million rubles, here lawmakers are talking about a "substantial harsher punishment." What is it, this tightening is expressed? It is expressed in the fact that for the specified act it is possible to cater for jail for a period from 7 to 15 years with a fine of up to 5 million rubles and an impressive ban on employment, quote: "certain positions."
As a maximum term, 15 years - indeed, quite a lot. But this is still the term of "serving", but what about the direct compensation for the damage caused, with the confiscation of the property of a corrupt official, for example? After all, it is one thing to put the embezzler behind bars (if this is with high-ranking embezzlers in our country today is possible at all), and another thing is to return everything that he stole from the state, from citizens. And, apparently, no confiscation is provided for in the draft law. We are talking about five million rubles of fine ... That is, a precedent can happen: stole a billion, for example, on the implementation of the same state defense order, transferred to mother-nanny svatiev-zyatyov accounts, bought houses, lots, pearl diamonds, spent on elite hotels, saunas, etc., then “by some miracle” he was convicted for a term of seven years, paid a fine of 5 million, and after a short period - an amnesty, you know ... Or parole for excellent behavior and “not heavy” crime. And “our” hypothetical corrupt official went to freedom with a clear conscience. And on the loose: 1 billion minus 5 million fine is equal to 995 million "net profit" (well, minus the money spent on the saunas and pearls mentioned) ... The only thing is that after this you cannot hold "certain" positions for endts years. But only “certain” - which ones? If exactly those that the corrupt official occupied before, then the loophole appears again: if he was the minister or the head of the agency, he would become the head of some company, corporation, or adviser, in the end ... You'll see, somebody will advise something ...
In short, the deputies need to work seriously on this bill. True, this is only if the bill is really aimed at combating corruption. If it is aimed at shaking the air, then he certainly has already done his job - the atmosphere is shaken ...