Receipt of illegal remuneration by an ex-officer: law, theory, practice

A. Ivanchin
{"title":"Receipt of illegal remuneration by an ex-officer: law, theory, practice","authors":"A. Ivanchin","doi":"10.18287/2542-047x-2021-7-2-57-62","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article deals with the issues of criminal-legal assessment of situations when an official for a specified remuneration performs the necessary actions (inaction) in the service, and the remuneration itself is received after the loss of the officials status (deferred bribe). The author criticizes the established judicial practice of qualifying such cases as the final receipt and giving of a bribe, since it directly violates the provisions of Articles 3, 8, 29, 290, 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. If the recipient of the remuneration is not an official, then his act cant be qualified as a completed bribe-taking by an official by virtue of the law. The article proves that the only correct variant of the criminal-legal assessment of the offense in such cases is the imputation for the ex-official the preparation for receiving a bribe under Article 290 of the Criminal Code with reference to Part 1 of Article 30 of the Criminal Code. Equally, in the actions of the bribe-giver in the analyzed situation from the standpoint of the current version of the criminal law, the author sees only a conspiracy with an official to give-receive a bribe, that is, preparation for giving a bribe, qualified under Article 291 of the Criminal Code with reference to Part 1 of Article 30 of the Criminal Code. In conclusion, it is stated that the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation has an obvious gap in investigated part, which requires elimination by amending the criminal law (after a thorough and balanced discussion of their draft).","PeriodicalId":406056,"journal":{"name":"Juridical Journal of Samara University","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Juridical Journal of Samara University","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18287/2542-047x-2021-7-2-57-62","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article deals with the issues of criminal-legal assessment of situations when an official for a specified remuneration performs the necessary actions (inaction) in the service, and the remuneration itself is received after the loss of the officials status (deferred bribe). The author criticizes the established judicial practice of qualifying such cases as the final receipt and giving of a bribe, since it directly violates the provisions of Articles 3, 8, 29, 290, 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. If the recipient of the remuneration is not an official, then his act cant be qualified as a completed bribe-taking by an official by virtue of the law. The article proves that the only correct variant of the criminal-legal assessment of the offense in such cases is the imputation for the ex-official the preparation for receiving a bribe under Article 290 of the Criminal Code with reference to Part 1 of Article 30 of the Criminal Code. Equally, in the actions of the bribe-giver in the analyzed situation from the standpoint of the current version of the criminal law, the author sees only a conspiracy with an official to give-receive a bribe, that is, preparation for giving a bribe, qualified under Article 291 of the Criminal Code with reference to Part 1 of Article 30 of the Criminal Code. In conclusion, it is stated that the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation has an obvious gap in investigated part, which requires elimination by amending the criminal law (after a thorough and balanced discussion of their draft).
前公务员收受非法报酬:法律、理论、实务
该条涉及对获得特定报酬的官员在服务中采取必要行动(不作为)以及在失去官员地位(延期贿赂)之后才收到报酬的情况进行刑事-法律评估的问题。发件人批评将这类案件定性为最后收受和给予贿赂的既定司法惯例,因为这直接违反了《俄罗斯联邦刑法》第3、8、29、290和291条的规定。如果收受贿赂的人不是官员,那么根据法律,他的行为不能被认定为完全的官员受贿行为。本文证明,在这种情况下,对犯罪的刑事-法律评价的唯一正确变体是参照《刑法》第30条第1部分,根据《刑法》第290条将前官员准备收受贿赂归责。同样,从现行刑法的角度来看,在所分析的情况下,行贿人的行为中,笔者认为只有与官员串通收受贿赂的行为,即准备行贿的行为,参照刑法第30条第1部分,符合刑法第291条的规定。最后指出,俄罗斯联邦刑法在被调查部分存在明显的空白,需要通过修改刑法(在对其草案进行彻底和平衡的讨论之后)来消除这一空白。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信