Information and reference material
Federal Law of 27.07.2004 N 79-FZ "On the State Civil Service of the Russian Federation" // SZ RF. 2004. N 31. Art. 3215; Federal Law of 02.03.2007 N 25-FZ "On Municipal Service in the Russian Federation" // SZ RF. 2007. N 10. Art. 1152; Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 10.02.2000 N 6 "On judicial practice in cases of bribery and commercial bribery" // BVS of the Russian Federation. 2000. N 4; Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of October 16, 2009 No. 19 "On judicial practice on cases of abuse of authority and exceeding official powers" // BVS of the Russian Federation. 2009. N 12.

Literature

Volzhenkin B.V. Official crimes: comment by legislation and judicial practice. SPb., 2005.

§ 1. Concept, general characteristics and types of crimes against state power, public service and services in local government bodies

The Criminal Code does not contain definitions against state power, public service and service in local governments (official crimes), it is developed by the theory of criminal law.

Crimes against state power, interests of the civil service and service in local governments are socially dangerous unlawful acts encroaching on a normal, regulated by law and the activities of the Company's development of public authorities and management committed by officials using their official powers or thanks to official Regulations, as well as in cases provided for by the criminal law other special subjects.

Species object Official crimes should be recognized by the Normal, regulated by the law and the activities of the public authority, which personifies the government agencies of the legislative, executive and judiciary, local government agencies, as well as the Office of Management in the Armed Forces, other troops and military formations of the Russian Federation, or activities Contracts for state or municipal institutions, state corporations.

Direct objects Relations are in various fields of individual units of the office of public authorities. In addition, in some cases, official crimes may have an additional immediate object - protected by law and the interests of citizens or organizations or the laws protected by law or the state. The content of these relations is due to the legal nature of the specific crime provided for in Ch. 30 of the Criminal Code, which is determined on the basis of the regulation of signs of the crime. For example, as a result of exceeding official powers, the rights of individual citizens may be violated.

In some official crimes, their subject should be allocated. As such recognize:

- budget funds consumed by the misuse (Art. 285.1 of the Criminal Code);

- funds of state extrabudgetary funds (art. 285.2 of the Criminal Code);

- Unified state registries;

- documents on the basis of which the entry was made to the specified unified state registers;

- Documents, on the basis of which a change was made to the specified unified state registers (Art. 285.3 of the Criminal Code);

- information (art. 287 of the Criminal Code);

- bribe in the form of money, securities, other property, benefits of property character, other property rights (art. Art. 290, 291, 291.1 of the Criminal Code);

- Official document (Art. 292 of the Criminal Code);

- passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation; Documents necessary for obtaining citizenship of the Russian Federation (art. 292.1 of the Criminal Code).

Objective side The absolute majority of official crimes may be performed in the form of action, for example, the misuse of budgetary funds (Art. 285.1 of the Criminal Code); Incoming spending of funds of state extrabudgetary funds (Art. 285.2 of the Criminal Code); introduction to unified registers of obviously unreliable information (Art. 285.3 of the Criminal Code); Excess official powers (Art. 286 of the Criminal Code); Assignment of authority of an official (Art. 288 of the Criminal Code); illegal participation in business activities (Art. 289 of the Criminal Code); obtaining a bribe (art. 290 of the Criminal Code); giving bribe (Art. 291 of the Criminal Code); Mediation in bribery (Art. 291.1 of the Criminal Code); Illegal issuance of a passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation, but equal to the introduction of knowingly false information into documents, which caused the illegal acquisition of the citizenship of the Russian Federation (part 1 of article 292.1 of the Criminal Code); Service face (Art. 292 of the Criminal Code).

The way both actions and inaction can be made: abuse of official powers (Art. 285 of the Criminal Code); refusal to provide information to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation or the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation (Art. 287 of the Criminal Code); illegal issuance of a passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation, but equal to the introduction of knowingly false information into documents, which caused the illegal acquisition of the citizenship of the Russian Federation (part 2 of article 292.1 of the Criminal Code); negligence (Art. 293 of the Criminal Code).

Only by inaction, only one crime of the considered type is carried out - non-fulfillment by the employee of the order of the order (Art. 286.1 of the Criminal Code).

Official crimes are characterized by the generality of the following signs:

1) Act is committed by an official using their official authority; officer thanks to the office position; short face, but conjugately with the use of public service activities;

2) Act is committed against the interests of the service.

For many years, by a majority theorists were recognized that various types of official abuse form the perpetrators of acts when using the official position.

The commission of acts using their official authority means the condition of action by the official position of the person. It should be borne in mind that receipt of a bribe is possible by committing the guilty act by virtue of the official position.

The act in official crimes is committed against the interests of the service. The official formally acts as part of official authority, but, in essence, these actions are not caused by the interests of the service and therefore are illegal in their content.

According to the design of the objective side, part of official crimes has the formal composition of the crime (Art. Art. 285.1, 285.2, 285.3, 287, 289, 290, 291, 291.1, part 1, 292.1 and Art. 292 of the Criminal Code).

Crimes provided for by Art. Art. 285, 286, 286.1, 288, part 2 Art. 292.1 and art. 293 of the Criminal Code, have a material composition. For most of them (Art. Art. 285, 286, 288 and 293 of the Criminal Code), the law denotes socially dangerous consequences in the form of a significant violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens or organizations or protected by the law of the interests of society or the state (the consequences and in the qualified part of the service forgery - part 2 of article 292 of the Criminal Code).

The significance of the violation of these interests is an estimated category and does not have officially established quantitative criteria for its calculus. As explained the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in paragraph 18 of the Resolution of October 16, 2009 No. 19 "On judicial practice on abuse of abuse of authority and exceeding official powers", "under a significant violation of the rights of citizens or organizations as a result of abuse of officials or exceeding official powers You should understand violation of the rights and freedoms of individuals and legal entities guaranteed by the generally accepted principles and norms of international law, the Constitution of the Russian Federation (for example, the rights to respect for the honor and dignity of the personality, personal and family life of citizens, the right to the integrity of the dwelling and the secret of correspondence, telephone conversations, Postal, telegraph and other messages, as well as legal protection rights and access to justice, including the right to an effective remedy in the state body and compensation for damage caused by the crime, etc.). When evaluating the materiality of harm, it is necessary to take into account the degree of negative impact of an unlawful act on the normal work of the organization, the nature and size of material damage incurred by it, the number of victims of citizens, the severity of physical, moral or property harm caused to them, etc.

Under a violation of the legitimate interests of citizens or organizations, as a result of the abuse of official powers or exceeding official powers, one should understand, in particular, the creation of obstacles in satisfaction with citizens or organizations of their needs that do not contradict the norms of law and public morality (for example, creating an obstacle officer restricting the opportunity to choose In cases provided for by law, at its discretion, the organization for cooperation) ".

Subjective side All the crimes under consideration, except for negligence (Article 293 of the Criminal Code) and its species stipulated in Part 2 of Art. 292.1 of the Criminal Code, characterized by a deliberate form of guilt. The abuse of official powers (Art. 285 of the Criminal Procedure) and the service forge (Art. 292 of the Criminal Code) are also characterized by a special motive - self-relocative or other personal interest.

Subject of crimeIn addition to the cottage of bribes (Art. 291 of the Criminal Code) and mediation in bribery (Art. 291.1 of the Criminal Code), special.

The varieties of a special subject of crimes, which are provided for by ch. 30 CC, are:

- officer (Art. Art. 285, 285.2, 285.3, 286, 289, 292, 292.1, 293);

- the official of the recipient of budget funds (Art. 285.1);

- a job officer who is obliged to provide information to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation or the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation (Art. 287);

- Foreign official (Art. Art. 290, 291, 291.1);

- the official of the public international organization (Art. Art. 290, 291, 291.1);

- a public servant, not related to the number of officials (art. Art. 288, 292);

- employee of local governments, not related to the number of officials (art. Art. 288, 292);

- public servant (Art. 292.1);

- officer of the internal affairs bodies (Art. 286.1).

From Notes 1 to Art. 285 of the Criminal Code, where the legal definition of an official should be given, it follows that the functions performed by the employee are followed; Time and place of their execution.

One of the categories of an official is representatives of power. This concept is given in a note to Art. 318 CC. According to paragraph 3 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of October 16, 2009 No. 19 "The authority of the representative of the authorities should include persons endowed with the rights and obligations to implement the functions of legislative, executive or judicial authorities, as well as on the basis of the note to Article 318 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation other persons of law enforcement or regulatory bodies endowed with the manner prescribed manner in relation to persons who are not from them in official addiction or the right to make decisions that are mandatory for the execution by citizens, organizations, institutions regardless of their departmental affiliation and forms of ownership. "

The most common category of officials constitutes persons endowed with organizational and administrative or administrative and economic functions.

Under the organizational and administrative functions of the official should be understood as the authority associated with direct management of people, a plot of work, a production process (through other persons). In the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of October 16, 2009, No. 19 states that under them It should be understood "the powers of an official who are associated with the management of the labor collective of the state body, a state or municipal institution (its structural unit) or in their official subordination to individual employees , with the formation of personnel composition and the definition of labor functions of workers, with the organization of the procedure for serving, the application of measures of promotion or awarding, imposing disciplinary penalties, etc.

Organizational and administrative functions include the authority of decision-making persons with legal importance and entailing certain legal consequences (for example, on issuing a medical personnel of temporary disability, establishing an employee of the institution of medical and social examination of the fact that a citizen of disability, receiving examinations and assessments of the member State examination (attestation) commission) "(p. 4).

Administrative and economic functions are associated with direct disposal and management of state or municipal property, the organization of obtaining or leave for material values \u200b\u200band control over these operations, etc. Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in paragraph 5 of the Resolution of October 16, 2009 No. 19 indicated: "As an administrative Economic functions should consider the powers of an official in the management and disposal of property and (or) with funds on the balance sheet and (or) bank accounts of organizations, institutions, military units and divisions, as well as for the commission of other actions (for example, to make decisions about Accrual of wages, premiums, monitoring the movement of material values, determining the order of their storage, accounting and controlling their spending) ".

Officials recognized by the subjects of CH. 30 of the Criminal Code can perform the indicated functions for remuneration or free of charge, constantly or temporarily. Their implementation by special authority means "that the person performs the functions of the representative of the authorities, performs organizational and administrative or administrative and economic functions entrusted to him by law, other regulatory legal act, order or order of a higher officary person or eligible to the authority or official ( For example, the functions of the jury). The officials of the official for special powers can be carried out for a certain time or once, and can also be combined with the main work "(paragraph 6 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of October 16, 2009 No. 19).

Species of a special subject of crimes envisaged in ch. 30 of the Criminal Code are a foreign official and an official of the public international organization (Art. Art. 290, 291, 291.1). In a note 1 to Art. 290 of the Criminal Code it is said that under a foreign official, any appointed or elected person is being understood by a position in the legislative, executive, administrative or judicial authority of a foreign state, and any person who performs any public function for a foreign state, including For a public office or public enterprise.

The official of the international public organization is an international civil servant or any person who is authorized by such an organization to act on its behalf.

In Note 4 to Art. 285 of the Criminal Procedure states that citizens who are not officials and employees of local governments carry criminal liability on the norms of ch. 30 of the Criminal Code only in cases where it is provided by Art. Art. 292, 292.1 of the Criminal Code.

The concept of a civil servant is given in the federal law of 27.05.2003 N 58-FZ "On the system of public service of the Russian Federation" (Article 10) and in the Federal Law of July 27, 2004 No. 79-FZ "On the State Civil Service of the Russian Federation" ( . 13), and the municipal employee - in the federal law of 02.03.2007 N 25-FZ "On the municipal service in the Russian Federation" (paragraph 1 of Art. 10).

The employees of the internal affairs bodies (Art. 286.1 of the Criminal Code) include citizens of the Russian Federation, consisting in the positions of the ordinary and the superior composition of the internal affairs bodies or in the personnel of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, which in the established procedure are given special ranks of the ordinary and superior composition of the internal affairs bodies.

Crimes against state power, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments can be divided into two types:

1) General Official Crimes (Art. Art. 285, 286, 293 of the Criminal Code);

2) Special crimes (Art. Art. 285.1, 285.2, 285.3, 286.1, 287, 289, 290, 292, 292.1 of the Criminal Code).

The danger of individual crimes against state power, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments increases due to the size of the subject of the crime, the particularly dangerous consequences of the crime, the specifics of the subjects of the crime, etc.

For some acts, responsibility is differentiated depending on the size of the subject of the crime. So, in the presence of a particular large size, the dedicated is covered, respectively, in parts of the second century. Art. 285.1 and 285.2 of the Criminal Code. In a note to Art. 285.1 of the Criminal Procedure indicates that in relation to these articles, a large amount recognizes the amount of budgetary funds exceeding 1 million 500 thousand rubles, and a special large scale - 7 million 500 thousand rubles.

Bribe size (Art. Art. 290, 291, 291.1 of the Criminal Code) also affects its qualifications. A significant amount of bribes is distinguished (part 2 of article 290, Part 2 of Art. 291 and part 1 of article 291.1 of the Criminal Code); A large size of a bribe (paragraph "b" part 5 of article 290, paragraph "B" Part 4 of Art. 291 and paragraph "B" Part 3 of Art. 291.1 of the Criminal Code) and especially large (part 5 of Art. 290, part 5, Art. 291 and Part 4 of Art. 291.1 of the Criminal Code). Significant size in accordance with the note to Art. The amount of money, the cost of securities, other property, property services, other property rights, exceeding 25 thousand rubles, a large size - exceeding 150 thousand rubles, a large size - exceeding 1 million rubles.

The danger of individual crimes under consideration increases due to the specifics of their subject. The commission of acting by the state office of the Russian Federation or the state position of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation is equal to the head of local self-government acts as qualifying signs of crimes provided for in Part 2 of Art. 285 of the Criminal Code and Part 2 of Art. 286 of the Criminal Code, or especially qualifying signs of the crime provided for in Part 4 of Art. 290 CC. The commission of acting by the person who occupies the state office of the Russian Federation or the state position of the subject of the Russian Federation, acts as a qualifying sign of a crime under Part 2 of Art. 287 of the Criminal Code.

State positions of the Russian Federation and state positions of the subjects of the Russian Federation are defined in Art. 1 of the Federal Law "On the State Civil Service of the Russian Federation". These include posts established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal laws for the direct execution of powers of federal state bodies, and posts established by constitutions (charters), the laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation for the direct execution of the powers of state bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

Under the head of the local government, it is necessary to understand the head of the municipality - his highest official, endowed with the charter of the municipal education authority to address local issues (Article 36 of the Federal Law of 06.10.2003 N 131-FZ "On the General Principles of Local Government Organization in the Russian Federation ").

Grave consequences are provided as a particularly qualified feature of some official crimes envisaged by Part 3 of Art. 285, Part 3 Art. 285.3, Part 3 Art. 286, Part 2 Art. 286.1, Part 3 Art. 287 of the Criminal Code. The question of what to consider such consequences should be solved depending on the actual circumstances of the case. In the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of October 16, 2009 N 19, they are recommended to include "the consequences of committing a crime in the form of large accidents and a long-term stopping of transport or production process, other violation of the activities of the organization, causing significant material damage, causing death by negligence, sa (... ) or attempt on sa (...) of the victim, etc. " (p. 21).

Acts committed on the preliminary conspiracy group of individuals form qualified or especially qualified types of official crimes provided for by paragraph "A" part 2 of Art. 285.1, p. "A" Part 2 of Art. 285.2, Part 2 Art. 285.3; h. 2 tbsp. 286.1, paragraph "B" Part 3 of Art. 287, p. "A" Part 5 of Art. 290, p. "A" Part 4 of Art. 291, p. "A" Part 3 of Art. 291.1 CC.

The organized group is recognized as a qualifying or particularly qualifying sign of official crimes provided for in Part 2 of Art. 286.1, paragraph "B" Part 3 of Art. 287, p. "A" Part 5 of Art. 290, p. "A" Part 4 of Art. 291, p. "A" Part 3 of Art. 291.1 CC.

Part 3 of Art. 286 of the Criminal Code as a special aggravating circumstance of exceeding official powers is provided for the use of violence or the threat to its use, the use of weapons or special means.

The use of physical violence covers such actions of the guilty as beatings, torturing, causing the lung, moderate gravity and serious harm to health and death by negligence.

The deliberate causing death by the victim should be qualified by the aggregate from Art. 105 and p. "A" Part 3 of Art. 286 CC.

Under the use of weapons or special tools, intentional actions are to be understood due to the face of the affecting properties of these items, or the use of them for its intended purpose (paragraph 20 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of October 16, 2009 No. 19).

Refusal to provide information to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation or the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation (paragraph "A" Part 3 of Art. 287 of the Criminal Code) implies the commitment of the acts provided for by Part 1 and 2 of Art. 287 of the Criminal Code, if they are conjugate with the concealment of offenses committed by officials of state authorities. The guilty must be associated with the concealment of offenses (it may be an offense of any kind), which are committed as an official itself, it is obliged to provide information to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation or the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation and any other official of state authorities.

§ 2. Types of crimes against state power, public service and service in local governments

Specific forms abuse authority (art. 285. Uk) May be different. In paragraph 15 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of October 16, 2009 No. 19, it is indicated: "Under the use of the official of their official authority, contrary to the interests of the service (Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), the courts should be understood by the commission of such acts that, although they were directly related to the implementation of official The face of their rights and obligations, however, was not caused by official necessity and objectively contradicted both the general tasks and requirements for the state office and the apparatus of local governments and the goals and objectives, to achieve which the official was endowed with the relevant official powers. In particular, the abuse of officials should be qualified by the officials of an official, which from mercenary or other personal interest makes partners of its official powers in the absence of mandatory conditions or grounds for their commission (for example, the issuance of a driver's license to persons who did not pass the mandatory exam; Acceptance of persons who actually do not perform labor responsibilities; liberation by commander (supervisors) subordinates from the execution of official duties entrusted to them with a direction for work in commercial organizations or the arrangement of personal home ownership).

The responsibility of Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation also comes for intentional failure to be the official of his duties in the event that such inaction was committed from mercenary or other personal interest, objectively contradicted the purposes and objectives, to achieve which the official was endowed with the relevant official authority, and He led to a significant violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens or organizations or protected by the law of the interests of society and the state. "

Objective side of misuse of budget funds (art. 285.1 Uk) It is characterized by the expenditure of budget funds for the purposes that do not meet the conditions of obtaining them, which are defined by the approved budget, budget painting, notice of budget allocations, estimates of income or expenses or otherwise foundation for budget funds (for example, paying a budget institution of wages to their employees , payment of utility, transport services and communication services, purchase of supplies and consumables, etc.). The procedure for spending budget funds is resolved by the RF Budget Code.

The essence of the crime provided for art. 285.2 UK, lies in inappropriate expenditure of state extrabudgetary funds. The execution of the budgets of state extrabudgetary funds is carried out by the Federal Treasury of the Russian Federation.

State extrabudgetary fund - fund of funds, formed outside the federal budget and budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and intended for the implementation of the constitutional rights of citizens to pension provision, social insurance, social security in the event of unemployment, health and medical care. The costs and revenues of the state extrabudgetary fund are formed in the manner prescribed by the Federal Law, or in a different procedure provided for by the Budget Code of the Russian Federation.

State extrabudgetary funds are: Pension Fund of the Russian Federation; Social Insurance Fund of the Russian Federation; Federal Fund of Compulsory Medical Insurance; State Employment Fund of the Russian Federation.

The objective side of the introduction into unified state registers is obviously unreliable information (art. 285.3. Uk) It is characterized by alternatively specified actions:

- introducing unreliable information to one of the unified state registers;

- forgery of documents, on the basis of which the entry was recorded in the specified unified state registers;

- the profound of documents, on the basis of which a change was made to the specified unified state registers;

- the destruction of documents, on the basis of which the entry was made to the specified unified state registers, if the mandatory storage of these documents is provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation;

- the destruction of documents, on the basis of which a change was made to the specified unified state registers, if the mandatory storage of these documents is provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation.

The most characteristic species exceeding official powers (art. 286. Uk) In the decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of October 16, 2009, the actions are indicated that:

- belong to the powers of another official (higher or equal in status);

- they themselves can be made by themselves only if there are special circumstances specified in the law or a sub-banner (for example, the use of weapons against a minor, if its actions did not create real danger to the lives of other people);

- no one and no circumstances have the right to perform (in particular, the use of painful and insulting personal dignity of victims);

- can only be implemented collegially or in accordance with the procedure established by law, in coordination with another official or body, and were committed by an official solely.

Common for all of these cases is that an official performs actions clearly overlooking the rights and powers granted to him by law. The volume of rights and powers of the subject is determined by its job competence, which is enshrined in various regulatory acts (charters, regulations, instructions, orders, etc.).

Failure to fulfill the officer of the organization's internal affairs (art. 286.1 Uk) It is an inaction - non-fulfillment of the order of the chief, given in the prescribed manner and not contrary to the law, if there is a duty to act in one way or another.

When qualifying, acts must be installed: whether it was entrusted to the employee the obligation to fulfill the order of the chief; whether the order was given in the prescribed manner and did not contradict the law; What specifically the order of the head was not executed; Whether it was possible (objective and subjective) to execute a given order.

Public danger of refusal to provide information to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation or the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation ( art. 287. Uk) It is that the Federal Assembly, which is a representative and legislative body of Russia is provided with incomplete or false information, which may be based on the laws and regulations that determine the life of the country and entail serious consequences for society. When such inaccurate information is provided with the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation, which is a permanent body of state financial control, then the normal activity of this state body is violated and its tasks cannot be performed.

Assignment of authority of an official (art. 288. Uk) It is that the guilty, in violation of the established procedure or not having a properly decorated special powers (Self), by deception issues himself for the representative of the authorities or other official and implements the functions of them (the representative of the authorities, organizational and administrative, administrative and economic ).

The deception can be perfect in any form, including by simply default, when the guilty enjoys the delusion of others, mistakenly considering it a representative of the authorities or a different officer. As a means of deception can be used substrate identity cards or uniforms.

The assignment of the authority of an official can also be expressed in the actual implementation of powers peculiar to the official and without the use of a particular title.

Illegal participation in business activities (art. 289. Uk) - Establishment by an officer of an organization engaged in entrepreneurial activities and participation in managing such an organization personally or through an intermediary who contribute to the development of corruption. Therefore, in various legislative and other regulatory acts of the Russian Federation, it contains a ban on officials to engage in entrepreneurial activities.

A feature of the crime under consideration is the use of an official of its official authority to provide an organization engaged in the entrepreneurial activity that it has created or in the management of which participates, benefits and advantages or patronage in another form.

Receiving a bribe (art. 290. Uk) carried out:

1) in the form of action (inaction), if such actions (inaction) are included in the official authority of the official;

2) in the form of action (inaction), if the person by virtue of the official may contribute to such actions (inaction);

3) in the form of general patronage or connivance in service.

The essence of the first form of the act is concluded in the conditionality of the actions committed by the official position of the person. The second form of receiving a bribe involves obtaining it for action (inaction) in favor of the bribener or those represented by him, if the guilty can contribute to the actions (inaction) from another official who does not know about obtaining illegal remuneration. In such cases, the guilty itself makes specific actions in the interests of the giving, and the other person at the request of the bribe.

During the patronage and connivance, the bribe is transmitted, as a rule, the official person of a higher authority, institutions, their structural unit, on which, in particular, the material and technical, financial and other resource support of the control and accountable organization depends.

Under the receipt of a bribe, it is necessary to understand the real possession of the official values \u200b\u200bgiven by the official property, and if we are talking about the services of the same nature, then the actual use of them. Therefore, the receipt of a bribe is recognized as a crime from the moment of acceptance by the official of one or another material remuneration. At the same time, it does not matter, received a person with the whole pre-agreed amount of money or only part of it, since already the first fact of real possession of values \u200b\u200bforms the finished composition of the crime.

If the bribe has not been obtained in circumstances that do not depend on the will of the bribefiber (for example, due to the crime of the crime by police officers), they should be qualified as an attempt on receiving a bribe.

As obtaining a bribe for illegal actions (part 2 of article 290 of the Criminal Code), the following should be understood:

1) An official for a bribe makes unlawful actions (inaction) who are not a crime (for example, an extraordinary provision of an apartment, connivance in connection with admitted string, etc.). Such actions are covered by the composition under consideration, additional qualifications do not require;

2) For a bribe, an official commits a crime. In such cases, the deed qualified for the totality of crimes.

The extortion of the bribe means the requirement of a bidder under the threat of actions that may cause damage to the legitimate interests of the person who needs it or the deliberate supply of the latter in the conditions under which he is forced to give a bribe to prevent harmful consequences for its law enforceable interests.

If the bribener is interested in the unlawful behavior of an official, seeks to bypass the law established by the order, to meet his legitimate interests, to obtain illegal benefits, to get away from well-deserved responsibility, etc., extortion as a qualifying sign of receiving a bribe is missing. For such paths, judicial practice is also in solving this issue.

When analyzing the objective side of the giving bribes (art. 291. Uk) There is no need to dwell on common with the composition of the receipt of a bribe signs (the concept of the bribe, the condition of a bribe (inaction) of an official, the use of official authority in the commission of action for a bribe (inaction), etc.).

In order to increase the effectiveness of struggle against bribery, the criminal law provides for exemption from criminal liability for the cottage of bribes under the conditions specified in the note to Art. 291 of the Criminal Code: "A person who has gone bribe is exempt from criminal liability if there has been extortion of a bribe from an official or if the person voluntarily reported a body that has the right to arouse a criminal case, about the country of bribes." Exemption from responsibility for the gift of bribes may be in the presence of one of these conditions.

The fact of the liberation from the criminal liability of the person who has given a bribe does not mean the absence of a bribe in the actions of this person. The presentation of a bribe, at least as a result of extortion, is criminal.

The voluntary statement of the country of bribes means that the bribener reports the country of bribes on its own initiative. According to paragraph 22 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 10.02.2000 N 6 "On judicial practice on bribery and commercial bribery" "Message (written or oral) should be recognized as voluntary independently of the motives that the applicant followed." This means that voluntariness is not excluded in cases where the application for the country of bribes is made as a result of coercion from other persons, such as relatives, acquaintances, etc.

The liberation of bribes based on a voluntary report on the commission of a crime does not mean the absence of a crime in their actions. "Therefore, it is noted in the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 10.02.2000 N 6, - they cannot recognize the victims and not have the right to claim themselves to return the values \u200b\u200btransmitted in the form of bribes. Money and other values \u200b\u200bwill not be turned into income in cases where the claims of bribes have been filed with respect to the person ... If the person has voluntarily announced this to the authority that has the right to initiate a criminal case and transfer of money, securities, Other property was undergoing their control to detention with the political person who declared such requirements. In these cases, money and other values \u200b\u200bthat appeared to the subject of a bribe ... are subject to returning their owner. "

In order to increase the effectiveness of struggle against bribery, the Criminal Code is supplemented by the norm on the responsibility for mediation in bribery(Art. 291.1).

Objective side Includes:

1) the transfer of bribes on the instructions of the bribener;

2) the transfer of bribes on the instructions of the bribe roll;

3) other promotion of the bribe into the achievement of an agreement between them on obtaining and the country of bribes;

4) other promotion of the bribe into the achievement of an agreement between them about receiving and the country of bribes;

5) other promotion of a briber and bribe into the achievement of an agreement between them about obtaining and the country of bribes;

6) other promotion of a bribe in the implementation of the agreement between them on obtaining and the country of bribes;

7) other promotion of the bribe into the implementation of the agreement between them on obtaining and the country of bribes;

8) other promotion of a bribe and bribe into the implementation of the agreement between them about receiving and the country of bribes.

The transfer of a bribe means the transition of a bribe to the official or partially. Other promotion of a bribe and (or) bribe into achieving an agreement between them to obtain and the country of bribes in a significant amount may be expressed in a variety of actions that contribute to the implementation of the Parties to make a concrete act (actions of either inaction) bribe into the interests of a bribe, but from the side of the briberator - Action for transferring to the bribe tool.

Other promotion of a bribe and (or) bribe into the implementation of the agreement between them on obtaining and the country of bribes in a significant amount may be expressed in a variety of actions that contribute to the facilitation of the parties to the contract to perform a specific act (actions or inaction) bribe into the interests of the bribener, and from Bribelectric - actions for transmitting to the bribe.

Part 5 Art. 291.1 of the Criminal Code contains independent compositions of crime:

- promise of mediation in bribery;

- Proposal of mediation in bribery.

The promise of mediation in bribery is an obligation to bring a bribe, bribe and other actors representing their interests, make an act in any form specified in Part 1 of Art. 291.1 of the Criminal Code; The offer of mediation - the undertaking or initiative of the face becoming a mediator between the bribener and bribefiber or other entities representing their interests, make an act in any form marked in part 1 of the title article.

The law provides for exemption from criminal responsibility for mediation in bribery (note to Art. 291.1 of the Criminal Code).

Essence of socially dangerous actions when committing service life (art. 292. Uk) It consists in falsifying official documents.

Under the official document refers to the material carrier recorded in a specific form, prepared by the competent state bodies, local governments, state (municipal) institutions and their officials certifying the circumstances or facts that are of legal significance.

The subject of the service life may be official documents, as well as private documents certified by the competent state bodies, local governments, state (municipal) institutions and their officials.

A service life may have two independent forms:

1) Instructions in official documents are obviously false information, i.e. The guilty produces a record of the information that does not correspond to the true document, which at the same time retains all the signs and the details of the present (the so-called intellectual forge);

2) introduction to official documents of corrections that distort their actual content, i.e. The guilty modifies the document, physically affecting it by cleaning, corrections, the etchings of the text, etc. (the so-called material fear).

Article 292.1 The Criminal Code (illegal issuance of a passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation, but equally introducing obviously false information into documents that caused the illegal acquisition of citizenship of the Russian Federation) in each of its parts contains independent compositions of crimes.

The crime specified in Part 1, with objective side Described in two forms:

1) illegal issuance of a passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation;

2) Making knowingly false information into documents entailed the illegal acquisition of the citizenship of the Russian Federation.

In both cases, the illegality is referred to as a necessary sign of the composition of the crime under consideration.

The objective side of the crime in its first form is expressed in action - providing a state service for issuing a passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation to a person who has not acquired in the prescribed manner of citizenship of the Russian Federation before receiving a passport. Under such conditions, the issuance of a passport is illegal. The crime is completed at the time of issuing a passport.

A feature of the composition is that the passport must be intended to be a foreign citizen or a stateless person. The illegal issuance of a citizen of the Russian Federation does not form the composition of the crime under consideration.

The act in the second form of the objective side is formed by the so-called intellectual claim - the introduction to documents on the basis of which citizenship of the Russian Federation is provided, knowingly false information. The crime is over since the adoption by the authority of the Russian Federation, the decision to acquire citizenship.

In h. 2 tbsp. 292.1 of the Criminal Code are presented varieties of negligence. The objective side of this crime is characterized by the following signs: Act in the form of action (improper performance of the guilty of their duties) or inaction (non-fulfillment of their responsibilities); the consequence of illegal issuance of a passport of a citizen of the Russian Federation to a foreign citizen or a person of civility or the illegal acquisition of citizenship of the Russian Federation; causal bond between act and consequence.

To distinguish between the negligence (Art. 293 of the Criminal Code) and its varieties (part 2 of Art. 292.1 of the Criminal Code) follows the rules of competition with common and special norms.

FROM objective side negligence (art. 293. Uk) It is expressed in:

- default guilty of their duties, which means its inaction in the presence of the obligation to perform certain functions arising from its official position;

- improper performance by the guilty of their duties, which comes down to incomplete, untimely, wrong, inaccurate execution.

To bring to criminal liability for negligence, it is necessary to establish which specific obligations were assigned to this official (the responsibilities of the official are determined by laws, subtitle acts, labor agreements or order of a higher person); that exactly from these duties was not fulfilled or improperly; Did this impact the consequences in the form of a major damage to the law protected by the law, benefits and interests; Whether this official had the opportunity (objectively and subjectively) to properly fulfill official duties and prevents this major damage.

Check questions and tasks

1. What are the general signs inherent in all official crimes?

2. Give the concept of an official, select and expand its signs.

3. In which formas can be mediation in bribery?

Maintenance

In accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, legislative, executive and judicial authorities, as well as local governments, function in our country. These bodies implement public power, i.e. endowed with the right to accept volitional solutions dictated by public needs. Since public authorities operate for public purposes, and its decisions are generally obligatory, the postolon of the Constitution and the legislation of each state establish certain frameworks, the rules for its implementation. In general, it can be said that the main requirement for public authorities, its authorities is the requirement of legality. Violation of the principle of legality in any form not only makes it difficult to implement the tasks of public authorities, but also calls for its right to make mandatory requirements for citizens and monitor their correct implementation, undermining its authority. Separate violations of the normal functioning of public authorities have such a high degree of public danger that the fight against them is impossible without the use of criminal repression.

Crimes against state power, public service and service in local government bodies are provided for ch. 30 of the Criminal Code Publicly Dangerous Affairs committed contrary to the interests of the public service using the guilty official position and causing either the direct threat of causing significant harm to the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations, society and the state.

Giving a social characteristic of these crimes, it is necessary to note the following. The problem of corruption in Russia and in the world acquires threatening. Corruption was distributed in all branches of government, it is amazed by all areas of society. The crimes of public servants committed by them using their official position threaten the rule of law, human rights, undermine the moral authorities of society, confidence in power, the principles of government, equality and social justice. The special danger of such crimes is due to the fact that they are committed by persons who, by the nature of their activities, are obliged themselves to fight various offenses and ensure the rule of law in a particular sphere.

The Russian Federation in terms of corruption occupies one of the first places in the world. According to experts, in this respect, Russia stands in one row with such states as Colombia, Nigeria and Bolivia. Crimes against public authorities, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments are increasingly often committed in the interests of illegal business and organized crime - the concept of the "iron triangle" began to be used in criminology.

In 2008, 20,444 crimes against state authorities, public service interests and services in local governments were registered, which is 12.7% above the 1998 level. In the general array of registered crime, the proportion of the considered group of crime amounted to 5.4%.

The projected trends of the dynamics of this kind of crime also do not inspire optimism. For example, in the near future, an increase in the activity of formed by large-scale vertical corruption relations is expected, an increase in the amount of criminal partnership by state and municipal employees of their activities with work in controlled commercial structures, the growth in the participation of officials using their powers in the organization and management of commercial structures, to ensure they are illegally obtained Benefits, use of the position of an official in the continuing process of privatizing state enterprises in order to acquire real estate and movable property, shares, illegal transmission using the status of an official to commercial organizations of public finances intended for social needs. In this regard, the struggle against corruption and other crimes in the studied area remains one of the priorities of criminal policy

During the period of indigenous restructuring of all areas of social life, conducting legal reforms, the construction of a democratic state that meets all the requirements of civil society, the development of the economy is a very important role belongs to the authorities of state and management, as well as local governments. It is from the functioning of the civil service, the clarity and responsibility of its representatives, the solution of large-scale tasks facing the state depends in many ways. In connection with these increased dangers, crimes are submitted among the employees themselves in the field of authorities and management. Due to a number of reasons, crime penetrated many areas of socio-political life of society and the state as a whole, including its power structures, in civil service, local governments. A number of representatives of these bodies are affected by corruption, bribery, protectionism and other negative phenomena, violating the normal activities of state power.

Recently, the problem of combating corruption not only attracted close attention to the media and wide segments of the population, but also began, finally, the subject of professional analysis of Russian specialists. When evaluating the effectiveness of legal mechanisms aimed at combating corruption, there are two fundamentally different approaches. In one case, the so-called narrow understanding was found, which is predominantly involved in the punitive aspect and provides for the creation of a system of additional restrictions and prohibitions.

The second case provides "soft" methods of struggle, such as, for example, personal politics, organizational and cultural development, as well as certain control mechanisms.

It should be noted that both methods apply in the struggle against different states against corruption. So, for this purpose, television and radio broadcasts, social campaigns, training courses, public information, legal acts, corruption studies, information booklets, add-ons to laws, etc. In most Western states, laws that regulate anti-corruption activities are similar in significant Parts. One of the largest fighters for punishment for corruption actions and the appointment of equivalent punishment for them is OECD. Their goal is to provide the principle in accordance with which the bribemer should not remain unpunished in one state, if in the neighboring state of punishment is very severe. They are also trying to ensure that all the allied states acted for officials similar requirements. However, a clear position, which of the methods of anti-corruption is the most productive, does not exist. The same methods should not be suitable for different cultures.

In principle, the fight against corruption, understood in a narrow sense, is quite adequately regulated by the existing regulatory framework, which needs only in separate clarifications.

The object of the study is a combination of social relations settled by legal norms that develop in the field of crimes against state power.

The subject of the study is the legislation of the Russian Federation, judicial practice, special scientific legal literature.

The purpose of the study is to identify the features and analyze the crimes committed against state power to improve current legislation and law enforcement practice.

The implementation of this goal required solutions to the following tasks:

consider the history of the development of criminal legislation in the field of crimes against state power;

give a general criminological and criminal law characteristic of crimes against state power;

analyze the legal composition of these crimes;

identify and analyze the types of crimes against state power, as well as identify the problems associated with such a classification;

consider the problematic issues of criminal liability within the framework of the topic under study;

In the course of the study, general scientific and private methods of knowledge were used: formally legal, logical methods, induction and deduction methods and others.

Under the Propertywork, the work consists of introduction, two chapters, six paragraphs, a list of used literature, applications.

crime State Power Lesson

1. Retrospective and criminological characteristics of crimes against state power

1.1 The history of the development of Russian criminal law on liability for crimes against state power

In the criminal legislation of Russia, the institution of crimes against state authorities acted as the basic protection of the country's political and legal system. The allocation of crimes against the state in a separate category is traced in the Pskov vessel diploma and judicens 1497 and 1550. It should be noted that in the Cathedral Covering of 1649. At this type of crime, an encroachment on the life, health and power of the king, uprising against local authorities were attributed; In the military charter, 1715 - an insult or condemnation of actions and intentions of the emperor and his family members, the creation and distribution of writings, appeals, appeals, etc. against government.

It should be especially noted that state crimes were systematized in the legislation of the XIX - early XX centuries. So, in 1860-1870. The reforms in Russia served as a reason to change, and in some places and additions to the deposits in 1885, which contained the section "On crimes and misconduct in the State and Public Service", which covered a significant number of chapters and articles. We emphasize the fact that the concept of an official was not yet known to the criminal law doctrine, respectively, it was not used in prisoners, and therefore, in each composition of official crimes, the subject was determined specifically, in relation to perfect act, for example, the guilty , official, employee, etc. The section "On Crimes and Disposher's Public and Public Service" began the head of the responsibility of serving for non-fulfillment and / or violation of the applicants and regulations, and the section contained the chapters establishing the responsibility of officials and serving for the excess of their authority; for careless storage, for use, embezzlement, assignment, shortage of entrusted material values; For the service life. Bribery, referred to as a few articles, a few articles were devoted to bribery. Separately presented the compositions of obtaining a bribe personally by an official or through someone - reward bribes. The bribe, perfect by extortion, differed depending on its motives, conditional covers, etc. In the deposition, the responsibility was envisaged and for the cottage of the bribe.

In 1903, a criminal case was adopted, which also contained a chapter on state crimes, containing 51 composition. However, here it should be borne in mind that the mentioned criminal code was not available on the entire territory of the Russian Empire, but only on the territory of the Baltic States. On the rest of the territory of the Empire, the laws "On Bunte against the Supreme Power" were applied, "On State Treason".

Note that the criminal Code of 1903 in part 4 of Art. 636 gave the legislative definition of the employee, pointing out that it is a person carrying responsibilities or an interim order for the service of state or public, as an official, or a police officer, or other guards, or a minister, or the face of the rural or social management. The law did not allocate any signs of the subject, but made an emphasis on some types of posts. Thus, chapter 37 provided for the person responsible for the face of the actions not included in its competence and not provided by law. Responsibility for these acts was differentiated depending on the form of guilt. A separate norm of the law gave the provision that such unlawful actions cannot be considered for the exception of power, when they are committed in emergency circumstances. However, what exactly to understand under such circumstances, the law did not specify.

The Code also contained several compositions of crimes concerning official inaction to which it belonged to the guilty measures to prevent and suppress the harm to the threatening order of management or statement, public interest; disappointment of guilty measures to publishing, declaring or enabling the law or other of the highest commandation, compulsory ordinance; does not bring to the attention of its bosses about receiving incoming paper, while it followed important damage to the order of management; inappropriate, contrary to the obligations, their superiors, police or judicial authority about the struggle crimes; And some others. In the same section, independent compositions were established, which in relation to modern criminal legislation characterize crimes against the order of management and justice.

Responsibility for bribery was contained in two articles of deposition, while one of them provided for the adoption of bribe-bribe, and the other for the country's remuneration bribe. The same article was the responsibility for the extortion of the bribe. Note that the law also established responsibility and for such an action as mediation when transferring a bribe.

As you know, in the period from 1917 and to 1922, the criminal legislation of Russia was not codified, and the sources of criminal law were the appeals of the government to the population, various decrees issued by the authorities, etc., which contained instructions for certain types of official crimes without defining Signs of their compositions. For the first time about official crimes mentioned in Art. 8 SNK decree dated November 24, 1917 "On the Court", according to which cases about the abuse of officials were attributed to the competence of workers and peasant revolutionary tribunals.

During the existence of the USSR, under state crimes, such socially dangerous acts were understood, which were directed against the foundations of the Soviet system or the foundations of its management and economic power. In accordance with the Regulations on state crimes approved by the USSR CEC in 1927, there were two main groups of the institution of crime under consideration: counter-revolutionary crimes and crimes against the procedure for management in the USSR. Subsequently, a law on state crimes of 1958, which was reproduced in the criminal codes of the Union republics. It should be noted that the Criminal Code of the RSFSR shared crimes against state power into particularly dangerous and otherwise.

The next stage in the development of legislation on crimes against state power is already reflected in the current Code of the Russian Federation, which contains a special section of "crimes against state power", classifying such acts on:

Thus, as the result of the issues considered in this paragraph should be noted:

1. In the history of Russian legislation, one of the first references to criminal liability for official crimes is found in the Pskov vessel diploma and judicens 1497 and 1550.

2. In the course of further development, the content of the norms providing for criminal liability for crimes against state power has repeatedly changed.

3. In the development of legislation on state crimes, the following steps can be distinguished:

5. Currently, the degree of public danger of crimes against state power, among other things, is determined by:

- the fact that it is precisely the normal functioning of society and the state as a whole largely on the laws of the targeted and qualitative activities of the state apparatus.

- the character and severity of the consequences;

- reasonable alarm of citizens, creating an atmosphere of psychological tension, which is reflected primarily on the relationship between state bodies.

1.2 Criminological characteristics of crimes against state power

In recent years, there has been an extremely high degree of affect of public authority, civil service and services in local self-government bodies with corruption and other types of criminal acts. This is recognized not only by the media, state and public figures, but also by all the segments of the Russian population. The acuteness of the problem of criminal law counteraction to the further negative development of the situation in the sector under consideration is primarily in the fact that, firstly, this sphere, like any other social activity, is subject to criminal encroachment, in defense of which it needs, secondly This is the sphere of activity whose condition significantly reduces or strengthens the criminality of society as a whole, actively affects the dynamics, structure and crime rate, thirdly, the system of state power is the main subject of the fight against crime, ensuring the law enforcement function of the state.

In 2008, 20,444 crimes against state authorities, public service interests and services in local governments were registered, which is 12.7% above the 1998 level. In the overall array of registered crime, the share of the considered group of crime amounted to 5.4% 2.

The projected trends of the dynamics of this kind of crime also do not inspire optimism. For example, in the near future, an increase in the activity of formed by large-scale vertical corruption relations is expected, an increase in the amount of criminal partnership by state and municipal employees of their activities with work in controlled commercial structures, the growth in the participation of officials using their powers in the organization and management of commercial structures, to ensure they are illegally obtained Benefits, use of the position of an official in the continuing process of privatizing state enterprises in order to acquire real estate and movable property, shares, illegal transmission using the status of an official to commercial organizations of public finances intended for social needs. In this regard, the fight against corruption and other crimes in the studied area remains one of the priorities of criminal policy.

It should be noted that at the meeting of the Federation Council, the General Protection Center noted a significant increase in the number of crimes against state power in 2008. More than 28 thousand were recorded in these crimes last year. According to the report of the Prosecutor General, recently there has been an increase in the number of offenses committed by law enforcement officers, the number of bribery has been halved.

The current criminal legislation does not contain the definition of the concept of crimes against state power, the interests of the civil service.

In the previously operating criminal law, Russia, the considered group of acts was called official crimes, i.e. criminal encroachments, perfect officials in connection with the occupied position. Official crimes include abuse of official authority, exemption of official powers, refusal to provide information to the Federal Assembly or Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation, illegal participation in business activities, receiving a bribe, negligence.

At the same time, the commission of the service life is provided for both by an official and other civil servants or employees of the local government. The assignment of the authority of an official can be carried out only by a civil servant or employees of a local government body that is not an official, the cottage of the bribes is committed by a common subject.

In Note 4 to Art. 285 of the Criminal Code is explained that civil servants and employees of local governments that are not related to the number of officials carry criminal liability under the articles of chapter 30 of the Criminal Code in cases specifically provided for by the relevant articles.

The above wording equates in order to exclude individual acts not officials provided for by Art. 292, 288 of the Criminal Code, to Official Crimes. Consequently, the composition included in the chapter 30 of the Criminal Court against State Power, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments includes official crimes and equal to them in order to exclude the act of civil servants and employees of local governments that are not officials, as well as acts committed by other persons. Based on the underlying crimes against state authorities, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments, it should be understood as a group of criminal acts encroaching on the procedure for the implementation of state authorities, civil service and services in local governments committed by officials in connection with the occupied position , as well as in exceptional cases provided for by criminal law, civil servants and employees of local authorities who are not related to the number of officials or other persons.

It should be noted that for most persons who committed crimes in the sector under consideration are characterized by a predetermined intent. For example, when receiving a bribe, a person who receives such a bribe is in the conditions of choice when there is a possibility to be in adverse conditions.

According to Art. 12 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in Russia is recognized and local self-government is guaranteed, which is carried out within its powers independently.
In accordance with the Federal Law "On the Fundamentals of the State Service of the Russian Federation" of July 31, 1995, the public service means professional activities to ensure the fulfillment of government authorities.

The public service includes: 1) the federal civil service under the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation; 2) the public service of the subjects of the Russian Federation, which is in their jurisdiction.

The functions of civil service are carried out by civil servants, which are recognized by citizens of the Russian Federation, performing in the manner prescribed by the Federal Law, the obligations of the public service for the monetary remuneration, which is paid at the expense of the federal budget or budget of the relevant subject of the Russian Federation. The right to enter public service only citizens of the Russian Federation have reached the age of eighteenth.

In accordance with the Federal Law "On the General Principles of Local Self-Government Organization in the Russian Federation", local governments are elected and other bodies endowed with the authority to solve local issues and not included in the system of state authorities. The law recognizes the issues of direct provision of the vital activity of the population of the municipality, attributed to its charter.

According to the Federal Law "On Fundamentals of the Municipal Service in the Russian Federation" dated January 8, 1998, 2 under the Municipal Service means paid professional activities to ensure the powers of local governments, which are carried out by municipal employees.

It should be noted that at present, special attention is paid to the issues of classification of various categories. This is explained by the fact that they serve as one of the most frequently used legal and technical techniques in the right. The classification allows you to identify certain phenomena on various distinctive features, to establish their characteristics, signs, the functional direction to expand the boundaries of knowledge. All this contributes to their deep and comprehensive research.

Indeed, in order to fully, comprehensively and objectively imagine any system, use such a scientific method as the classification of its components. It is not an exception and criminal law institution of crimes against state power. In this case, one of the most important aspects of his in-depth study is the problem of classification. With the help of the classification, not only reflects the signs of all those included in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Crime against State Power" of the Four Chapters, their diversity, the features of each of them, but also disclose the issues of improving law enforcement practice, since each object under review receives a certain assessment. According to the famous Russian scientist S.V. POSONSHEVA Classification as a technical and legal admission has a dual value for a scientific researcher: from the outside, this is a reception that makes a system and order to study; From the side of the inner, this is a reception that predetermines the completeness and correctness of the study conclusions.

The legislator, based on the democratic principles of criminal law and reassessment in connection with these priorities, as well as the generic facility of the Crimination Group in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation included four chapters:

crimes against the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state;

crimes against government, interests of civil service and service in local governments;

crimes against justice;

crimes against the order of management.

Thus, the chief criterion of criminal law and the framework of classification is public relations, which ensure the stability of the state, the normal, legislatively regulated functioning of state power and its individual components: institutions and bodies.

It should be noted that the criminal law regulations included in this section provide for the responsibility for socially dangerous acts encouraging the activities of state authorities, state and local governments, conjugate with damage to the rights of the rights and legitimate interests of society. and states or mighty to undermine their authority, as well as violate the rights and interests of citizens.

Before pressing the problem of the problem of the classification of crimes against state power, it is necessary to formulate the following definition of crimes against state power. Under the crimes against state power should be understood - deliberately committed socially dangerous acts aimed at undermining the foundations of the constitutional system and the weakening of state power in the person of legislative, executive and judiciary.

Section X of the Criminal Code begins with chapter 29, which provides for the responsibility for committing crimes against the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state. The foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation were regulated in Chapter 1 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which enshrines the initial principles of the constitutional system, economic relations, the political system of society, they are priority, basic, defining legal provisions that are described above, to ensure the normal functioning of state power.

The public danger of crimes against the foundations of the constitutional system and security of the state is that they undermine the constitutional system, the socio-economic and political and legal system of the state, its safety, internal and external stability, weaken the security of vital goods and personal interests, society from outgoing Threats.

Thus, the species object of these crimes are the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state. The main direct object is the specific public relations, which they encourage the relevant crimes of the chapter under consideration, causing them damage, harm. In scientific and educational literature, various classifications of crimes are offered against the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state.

So, A.I. Rarog, depending on the direct facility, the considered group of crimes classifies the types of crimes against:

political system of the Russian Federation;

economic security and defense capability of the Russian Federation;

constitutional principle of preventing propaganda or agitation, exciting social, racial, national or religious hatred or hostility;

the preservation of state secrets.

Based on the direct object A.V. Naumov All crimes against the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state proposed to classify as crimes against:

external security of the Russian Federation;

legitimacy of state power;

political diversity and multiparty;

economic security and defense capability of the Russian Federation;

constitutional ban on inciting racial, national and religious retail.

The classification proposed by the scientific public was subjected to a demanding criticism by S.V. Dyakova considers that such a classification is vulnerable for a number of reasons.

First, it does not view a single base of classification, without which it is deprived of scientific clarity.

Secondly, the crimes provided for in paragraph 2 encroach on the legitimacy of state power, but on the internal security or political system of the Russian Federation.

I do not agree to S.V. Dyakov and with the classification of the disclosure of state secrets and the loss of documents containing the state secret, to crimes encouraging economic security and defense capability, as the state secret takes place not only in the fields of economics and defense. In our opinion, you can agree with the proposals expressed, regarding the assignment of state secrets into the said group on the assumption that the state secret form other areas of interests protected by the state.

It should be noted that researchers consider the acquisition of crimes encouraging for the safety of state secrets into a separate group. In this case, their allocation to a separate independent group will occur at the expense of crimes encouraging and on external security, and economic, and for defense capability. According to scientists, this will not contradict the basic principles of classification, based on its alignment and relativity, although in some cases this convention may acquire the nature of necessity and inevitability. For example, in cases of transition of one base of classification to another, or when one base of the classification is included in the content of several items.

According to S.V. Borodin In general, the classification of state crimes can be represented as crimes encroaching on:

external security;

on internal security;

on economic security.

Suggested S.V. Borodin classification also did not solve the problem of classifying Art. 283 and Art. 284 of the Criminal Code in the specified group, moreover complicated it. In the scientific and educational legal literature, proposals were made on the premises of Art. 283 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Declections of State Secrets" and Art. 284 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "The loss of documents containing state secrets" in chapter 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on crimes against state power, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments, based on the species object of the service interests.

So, according to Professor N.F. Kuznetsova equalization of state treason with careless loss of documents containing state secrets means to retreat from the criteria for the structuring of the special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for generic and species objects.

A.V. Naumov his disagreement with S.V. Dyakov expresses and about replacing the internal security or political system of the Russian Federation legitimacy of state power, arguments that there are no contradictions between these objects, they coincide in their own content.

V.V. Lunev, in turn, all state crimes divides into two large groups of crimes: against the foundations of the constitutional system and against the external security of the state.

N.I. Winds All crimes under consideration classified by type.

A.S. Gorelik, depending on the more specific objects of the encroachment, allocates crimes that encroach on: external security; on the foundations of constitutional system and internal security; constitutional foundations of national, legal and religious relations; The preservation of state secrets.

We emphasize that in the Criminal Code, namely, the chapter on crimes against the foundations of the constitutional system and security of the state by the Federal Law of December 8, 2003 No. 162-FZ were made changes in principle, which led to a significant transformation of the objective side of the crime provided for by Art. 280 of the Criminal Code, in addition, the legislator also included two new articles in it, Art. 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

Thus, due to legislative amendments, it is necessary to formulate the classification of the crimes under consideration. The authors propose to classify crimes included with the legislator to chapter 29 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as follows: crimes encouraging for external security; crimes encroaching on internal security; Crimes encroaching on the constitutional foundations of national, legal and religious relations.

Note that the legislator in chapter 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation included 11 articles containing a description of the signs of crimes committed by a special category of subjects - officials.

The public danger of the analyzed crimes is that as a result of their commitment, the regulatory, regulated by the law, the activities of the apparatus of legislative, executive and judiciary, as well as local governments are violated.

Under the crimes against state power, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments, it is necessary to understand intentional or careless socially dangerous acts encroaching on public relations regulating the normal management of the public administration of the public administration committed by officials in connection with the performance of their official powers. , as well as in exceptional cases provided for by criminal law, civil servants and employees of local authorities that are not related to the number of officials or other persons who cause significant harm to state and public interests, the interests of the public service or service in local self-government bodies or protected by law Rights and interests of individual citizens, or containing a real threat to causing such harm.

The formulated definition reflects the three most significant features characteristic of all official crimes:

encroachment on the same species object;

performing only a special subject - a job officer;

completion using official authority or thanks to the service provision.

We emphasize that it is the combination of these signs and constitutes the content of an official crime.

Taking into account qualified species, this chapter contains a description of 25 compositions of official crimes. Based on the legislative provisions enshrined in Art. 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation considered a group of crimes can be classified on: crimes of small gravity, moderate gravity, serious, especially serious.

In theory and practice, there is still no obvious opinion on the nature of the ratio of official encroachments with other crimes, perfect officials and civil servants. The classification of crimes is of interest depending on the criminal law status. All of them are divided into three groups:

common crimes, which can be committed in any field of activity of the state office and local governments and responsibilities for which provided by the norms of this chapter;

special officials who can be committed by persons in individual links and fields of activity of the state apparatus and local government bodies and only by officials identified by special features;

alternative crimes that can be made by both officials and private individuals.

The legislator all crimes of chapter 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, based on the subject, proposed to classify into four groups:

perfect only by officials, 285, 286, 287, 289, 290, 293 of the Criminal Code);

committed by officials, civil servants and employees of municipal authorities;

committed by employees of state and municipal authorities;

performed by the general subject.

It should be noted that the head of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Crime against Justice" includes 23 articles containing a description of 48 compounds.

The public danger of crimes against justice is that they violate the rights and freedoms of human and citizen guaranteed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, cause irreparable damage to the interests of justice, law and order, society and the state.

The crime against justice is the deliberate socio-dangerous illegal acts that affect the public relations in the field of administration of justice committed by officials specified by the authorities and other persons designed to provide or promote the tasks and objectives of this activity.

In scientific and educational legal literature, scientists offer various grounds for the classification of crimes against justice.

At the same time, several approaches to the classification of these crimes are allocated: according to the subject of the crime, based on the direct object, in the similarity of the signs of the objective side, as well as on the basis of their object of encroachment.

On the subject of the crime, all formulations are against the order of justice S.S. Rashkovskaya divided into two groups:

against justice committed by officials - employees of the bodies of inquiry, investigators, prosecutors, judges;

against justice committed by other persons.

VC. Glystin, in turn, highlight three groups:

crimes committed by officials of the bodies of inquiry, investigators, prosecutors and court;

crimes committed by private persons involved in the administration of justice;

crimes, which are evasion from serving a sentence.

It will be quite relevant to the classification proposed by Yu.A. Beautiful. According to the subject of a crime, he divides the crime against justice to the officials of the court, investigators, inquiry and prosecutors and all other crimes against justice.

According to M.N. Golodnyuk, the most successful is the classification of crimes against justice in a direct object, since it reflects those social relations that certain groups of crimes are harmful. According to the direct object of crime against justice, it differentiates as follows: encroaching on life, health, honor and dignity of persons who are doing justice; preventing execution of law enforcement officers their responsibilities for the implementation of the goals and objectives of justice; Performed in the process of administering justice officials; preventing the execution of punishment or compensation for harm caused by a crime.

It seems that the proposed classification is distinguished by inconsistency: as the basis of the classification is taken, firstly, various criteria integrate acts on the basis of a special subject); Secondly, the concept of persons engaged in justice.

According to A.S. Gorelika Classification of crimes against justice, should also be based on specific types of relations that constitute the normal work of the bodies of justice. Based on this, it offers the following classification system of crimes against justice in the field of:

ensuring the independence of judges and the protection of their personal security, honor and dignity;

proper administration of justice officials of the bodies of justice;

fulfillment by citizens of obligations to promote or not to impede the implementation of justice;

execution of sentences, decisions and other acts of justice bodies.

The chapter 32 "Crimes against Management Procedure", the legislator included 16 articles containing a description of 30 crime compositions. The public danger of crimes against the management procedure is that the crimes of this group counteract normally legislative regulation of the activities of state authorities and local self-government, undermines the fundamentals of management activities, destabilize the work of the law enforcement agencies, disorganizes the activities of the criminal executive bodies, weakens the established state border regime.

Under crimes against the order of management, it is necessary to understand the perpeturately perfect socially dangerous acts, encroaching on normal management activities and harm or caused damage to protected relations.

A fairly extensive domestic literature is devoted to the legal analysis of the compositions of crimes against the order of management. If you apply to the analysis of specific criminal laws included in the chapter of the data in educational and scientific literature under consideration, then various classifications can be detected.

So, for example, Yu.Yu. Hisheva classifies crimes against justice who encroach on: authority of state power; normal activities of state bodies and local governments; established procedure for maintaining, use, appeal official documentation; inviolability of the state border.

A.V. The masonry, depending on the direct object of the crime against the order of management, is divided into the following types:

encroachment on representatives of the authorities and other persons in connection with the management activities of state bodies;

encroachment on the inviolability of the state border of the Russian Federation;

encroachment on the order of applying official documents and state awards;

encroachment on the order of the military and alternative civil service;

encourse on the order of contested rights.

We believe that based on the direct object, crime against the management order can be classified into the following three groups of crimes:

It seems that the proposed classification of crimes against the order of management is most preferred, as it allows us to take into account the peculiarity of the crimes included by the legislator in chapter 32 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, their legal nature, the mechanism of damage to relationships in the process of adopting management decisions.

Thus, as the result of the criminological characteristics of crimes against state power, it is necessary to note the following.

1. During the reform of the Russian economy, the number of registered crimes against state power is expressed in the following figures. Thus, in 2008, 20,444 crimes against state authorities, public service interests and services in local governments were registered, which is 12.7% above the 1998 level. In the general array of registered crime, the proportion of the considered group of crime amounted to 5.4%. In the period 1998-2008 The total total number of detected crimes against justice amounted to 39394, among the identified persons who committed crimes - 24861. The number of crimes against the justice of special subjects for the same period was equal to 1875, and the number of identified special subjects was 951.

2. The study of the personality of a criminal committing a crime against state power showed that this crime in the overwhelming majority of cases make men, women. The educational level of persons who committed a crime against state power indicates an increase in the number of convicts with higher and secondary-seat education.

3. The reasons for the growth of the number of crimes against state power researchers see in economic, social and moral changes, permissiveness and uncontrolcility, in the oblivion of traditions and a false understanding of the democratic principles of the hostel. And also in the fact that the centralized system is opposed to a hidden, secret and experienced force, which gradually creates to official institutions and organizations, paralyzing their activities or subordinate to themselves.

So, the analysis of regulatory acts and published literature concerning the retrospective and criminological characteristics of crimes against state power allows us to formulate the following conclusions:

the first stage, enshrined in judicication 1497 and 1550,

the second stage was reflected in the legislation of the end of the XIX - early XX centuries,

the third stage is expressed by decrees and regulations of power,

the fourth stage is the consolidation of crimes against state power in the Criminal Code of the RSFSR,

the fifth stage is the reflection of the specified type of crime in the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Crimes of this kind are undergoing the basics of power and management, discredit and undermine their authority in the eyes of the population, infringe upon the constitutional rights and interests of citizens, destroy the democratic foundations and law and order, perversion of the principles of legality, impede the conduct of socio-economic reforms in society.

6. Most crimes against state power in the Russian Federation are committing men, women. The educational level of persons who committed a crime against state power demonstrates the increase in the number of convicts with higher and secondary special education. For most people who committed crimes in the sector under consideration, a predetermined intent is characteristic.

2. Modern legal regulation of criminal liability for crimes against state power

2.1 General characteristics of crimes against state power

Crimes against state power, public service and service in local governments are traditionally referred to as officials and are criminal proceedings of corruption. Being a multifaceted, socially complex and largely objectively determined phenomenon, corruption in terms of legal regulation requires an integrated approach, under which criminal law measures should occupy a leading, but not the only role. The danger of corruption manifestations of EMKO is described in the preamble of the European Convention, which it is noted that corruption threatens the rule of law, democracy and human rights, undermines the foundations of good public administration, violates the principles of equality and social justice, it makes it difficult for economic development and threatens the stability of democratic interests and the moral polls of society. It should be noted that our country in terms of corruption occupies one of the first places in the world: according to some estimates, in this respect, Russia stands in one row with such states as Colombia.

In this paragraph, we will consider some of the compositions of crimes related to encroachments on state power. Unfortunately, within the framework of this work, it is impossible to analyze all the compositions of crimes relating to the problem under study, so we will only dwell on some of them.

It should be noted that the norms of chapter 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are devoted to the establishment of crime and the punishability of acts, which are violations of the normal activities of public authorities and its bodies. These disorders are performed inside, i.e. The subjects of the authorities themselves, so they have increased danger.

Crimes against civil service and service in local governments are provided for by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, socially dangerous acts committed against the interests of the public service using the guilty official position or related to non-fulfillment of their official duties, which creates a direct threat to the rights and legitimate interests of citizens, organizations, societies and state.

The species object of these crimes is a combination of social relations that ensure the correct, i.e. The activities of the powerful public office, government bodies, local governments, state and municipal institutions, as well as government bodies in the Armed Forces, relevant law.

In the title of Chapter 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is mentioned about the direction of these crimes against state power, the interests of the civil service and services in local governments. It should be noted that in accordance with the Federal Law No. 58-FZ "On the System of the State Service of the Russian Federation", the public service is the professional official activity of citizens of the Russian Federation to ensure the fulfillment of the powers of the Russian Federation, the federal authorities of the Russian Federation, as well as persons who replace state positions of the Russian Federation.

The direct object of the crimes under consideration is the public relations, developing about ensuring individual components of the proper functioning of the powerful public apparatus.

Note that from the objective side, one of the crimes under consideration is characterized by actions, others as actions and inaction. So, only in the form of action may be committed such crimes, as a gift of bribes, exceeding official powers. Such crimes as a refusal to provide information to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation or the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation, negligence can be committed and inaction.

Describing the action or inaction as a sign of an objective side of an official crime, it should be noted that it is:

associated with a service or other publicity of the person's activities and in this sense alternatively is committed;

completed contrary to the interests of the service.

The essence of the first feature is that the possibility of committing the acts listed in the law is due to the competence of the perpetrator or significance and the authority of his position. In other words, committing a crime, guilty uses actually available from him due to the work of the opportunity. Thus, the action as a sign of an objective side can formally enter the competence of the perpetrator or flow from it, to be connected with it.

The second feature indicates that the guilty uses its official position not in the interests of the public service, but against them. In other words, the special features provided by the guilty to ensure public interest are used by them for purposes that these interests are contrary to them, as a result of which the real threat of harm is caused or created.

Depending on the specifics of the subject, all crimes against public authority can be divided into types:

crimes committed by any persons responsible for signs of a common subject;

crimes committed by civil servants or employees of local governments that are not officials;

crimes committed by officials;

crimes committed by both officials and public servants.

As a result of the issues considered in this paragraph, it is necessary to note the following:

- the norms of chapter 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are devoted to the establishment of crime and the punishability of acts, which are violations of the normal activities of public authorities and its bodies;

- In view of the limited volume of this paper, it is advisable to consider and analyze only some specific types of crimes against state power.

2.2 Types of crimes against government and problematic issues of their qualifications

Within the framework of this work, it is not possible to analyze all the compositions of crimes relating to the problem under study, so we will dwell only on some of them.

In the sense of the law, the state treason can be performed in three forms: a) espionage; b) issuing state secrets: c) other assistance to a foreign state, a foreign organization or their representatives in conducting hostile activities to the detriment of the external security of the Russian Federation.

The concept of espionage will be considered when analyzing the crime, the responsibility for which is provided by Art. 276 CC.

Under the issuance of state secret impacts oral or written, as well as the message made by other means and methods, a message to a foreign state, a foreign organization or their representatives of information constituting the state secrecy. In accordance with Art. 2 of the Law of the Russian Federation of 21.07.93 No. 5,485-1 "On State Secret" State secrecy is the state-protected information in the field of its military, foreign policy, economic, intelligence, counterintelligence and operational investigative activities, the dissemination of which may cause damage to the safety of the Russian Federation.

The information constituting the state secret is recorded on certain carriers, which include material objects, including physical fields. Fixation is carried out in the form of symbols, images, signals, technical solutions and processes. The media component of the state secret have details indicating the degree of secrecy of these information. The degree of secrecy should correspond to the severity of the damage, which can be inflicted by the Russian Federation due to the dissemination of these information. The Government of the Russian Federation approved the rules for the assignment of information constituting the state secret, to various degrees of secrecy of September 4, 1995 No. 870, in accordance with which the indicated information is divided into:

1) information of particular importance is information in the field of military, foreign policy, economic, scientific, technical, intelligence, counterintelligence and operational investigation activities, the dissemination of which can cause damage to the interests of the Russian Federation in one or several listed areas;

2) completely secret information is information in the areas listed, the distribution of which can cause damage to the interests of the Ministry or the sectors of the Russian economy;

3) Secret Information is information, the distribution of which can cause damage to the interests of enterprises, institutions or organizations in the same regions.

The crime concluded in the issuance of information constituting the state secret is considered the end of the actual report of the state secret to representatives of a foreign state, a foreign organization.

Other assistance assumes the commission of various actions that are not covered by previous form of state treason and are aimed at promoting a foreign state, a foreign organization or their representatives in conducting hostile activities to the detriment of foreign security of the Russian Federation. The crime that makes this form of state treason is considered to be the end of the moment of the commission of any action to assist in a foreign state, a foreign organization or their representatives in conducting the indicated activities.

It should be borne in mind that state treason is carried out in favor of a foreign state, a foreign organization or their representatives. A foreign organization can be both state and non-state. Representatives of a foreign state and foreign organization are their officials.

Subjective stern by direct intent. Mandatory feature is the goal – causing damage to the external security of the Russian Federation. The motives of state treason do not affect qualifications.

The subject of the crime, with the exception of such a form, as issuing, is common. Subject of extradition - special, this is a citizen of the Russian Federation, who has information that make up the state secret, due to his service activities or for work, as well as received this information under other circumstances.

In accordance with the note, the person who committed crimes is responsible for which is established in Art. 275, 276, 278 of the Criminal Code, is exempt from criminal liability if it is voluntary and timely communicating authorities or otherwise contributed to the prevention of further damage to the interests of the Russian Federation and if its actions do not contain a different crime.

The espionage is defined as a transfer, but equally collecting, abduction or storage for transfer to a foreign state, a foreign organization or their representatives of information constituting a state secret, as well as the transfer or collecting other information on the task of foreign intelligence for their use to the detriment of foreign security of the Russian Federation.

The main object of espionage is external safety as a state of protected sovereignty, territorial integrity and defense capability from external influence.

The subject of this crime is the information of two categories: firstly, these are the information constituting the state secret; Secondly, these are other information that are collected on the task of foreign intelligence and can be used to damage the external security of the Russian Federation.

Depending on the content of the subject of the crime, two types of espionage are distinguished: a) the subject of the first is the information constituting the state secret; b) the subject of the second - other information collected on the task of foreign intelligence and intended for use in the detriment of the external security of the Russian Federation.

The objective side of the first type espionage has been the commission of active actions in the form of transmission, collecting, abduction, the storage of components of the state secret. Collecting is to obtain information in any way, carried out without the withdrawal of objects or documents from the ownership of their owners or owners. All methods of collecting information can be divided into two groups: a) personal observation, i.e. obtaining information from the surrounding objects of reality; b) an agent method - obtaining information from people with such information. The abduction involves the illegal seizure of information from their owner. The withdrawal may be a secret or open, with the use of deception or violence, when documents and items are removed not at the time, and forever to transmit the addressees specified in the law.

Collected or abducted information is usually stored before the transfer of a foreign state, a foreign organization or their representatives. From the objective side, storage means, firstly, that the pre-assembled or abducted guilty information components of the state secret are stored in a certain place before they are transferred, secondly, that the guilty himself did not directly collected and the information was not kidnapped, but he was transmitted Other faces for subsequent transfer to certain subjects, and, thirdly, a situation is possible when the guilty stores information collected and kidnapped by another person with the subsequent return of the same person. Thus, the storage of information constituting the state secret, as a form of action during espionage, can have three types: a) the person keeps information collected or stolen themselves in order to transfer to a foreign state, a foreign organization, their representatives; b) the face itself did not collect and did not kidnapped information, but received them to transfer to the addressee; c) storing information collected by another person, followed by returning the same person. In this case, the guilty will be responsible for the presence in espionage, provided that he realized the nature of the stored information, the goal pursued by the column of their face, and in advance gave a promise to hide items mined by criminal paths containing this information.

The main goal, to which the guilty seek when collecting, abduction or storing the information constituting the state secret is to transfer them to specific addressees. The transmission should be understood the message of information constituting a state secret, a foreign state, a foreign organization or their representatives. In this case, the message can be carried out not only to orally, but also by, for example, displaying any documents or objects, as well as using the caches, postal correspondence, radio communications. Transmitted information can be collected or stolen by the guilty themselves, and can be obtained from other persons. Transmission can be performed in person or through intermediaries. At the same time, if the mediator realizes the nature of the transmitted information and the status of the addressee, then it is responsible for the complicity in espionage.

The objective side of the second type espionage has been implemented in the form of collecting and transferring other information. The legislator does not provide for such forms of action as abduction and storage, since this information is open and can be obtained from a variety of sources: official publications of scientific and technical literature, periodicals: at official symposia, conferences; By sending requests to various organizations, surveys, etc. Other information can be collected and by personal observation.

Transmission or collecting other information is punishable if these actions are carried out on the task of foreign intelligence in order to use them to the detriment of foreign security of the Russian Federation, i.e. In this case, the existence of two signs is assumed: the presence of the task of foreign intelligence and the purpose of damaging the external security of the Russian Federation.

Spying refers to crimes with formal composition. It is worth noting that such an action, as storage, is lasting, i.e. It is characterized by the continuous implementation of this Act.

The subjective side sappionage is characterized by wine in the form of direct intent. In addition, the second form of espionage is characterized by a special goal - to damage the external security of the Russian Federation, and the collateral itself, the abduction or storage of information constituting the state secret is carried out in order to transfer them.

Subject of espionage may be foreign citizens and stateless persons who have reached the age of 16.

Note that if a citizen of the Russian Federation acts as an organizer, an incitement or accomplice of espionage, responsibility for which is provided by Art. 276 of the Criminal Code, its actions qualify as state treason in the form of other assistance to a foreign state, a foreign organization or their representatives in conducting hostile activities to the detriment of foreign security of the Russian Federation.

In relation to the group of crimes, encroaching on the basis of the political system, the legitimacy of state power is understood, i.e. The constitutional basis for its functioning, as well as the unimpeded implementation of its political functions by state and public figures. This group of crimes includes the acts provided for by Art. 277-279 of the Criminal Code.

Encouring on the life of a state or public figure. The immediate object of this crime is not only the foundations of the political system of the Russian Federation, but also the life of a state or public figure.

The victims of the crime under consideration can only be a state or public figure. Heads and other officials of the highest bodies of legislative, executive, judiciary and the prosecutor's office both at the federal level and the level of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation are observed. Under public figures are the leaders and active functionaries of political parties, public movements, funds, professional and other unions at the federal or regional levels.

The objective side is a prosecution to the life of a state or public figure. This concept as applied to the encroachment to life was clarified by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the USSR in the decision of 09.22.89: "Under the encroachment to life it is necessary to consider the murder or an attempt to murder .... The same interpretation of the concept of encroachment on life was given and the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the RSFSR in the decision of 24.09.91.

The composition of the terrorist act is a formal, ended. He is recognized since the commission of socially dangerous actions aimed at depriving the victim of life, but the actual causation of death is covered by the composition of the crime under consideration and does not change the legal entity of the act.

The subjective sideprightement is characterized by direct intentity by a special purpose of a special motive. If the murder of a state or public figure is committed with a different goal or other reached, rather than those indicated in the disposition of Art. 277 of the Criminal Code, the act qualifies under Art. 105 Criminal

Subjectterrorist act - a person who has reached the age of 16. If this act is committed by face aged 14 to 16 years, then responsibility comes under paragraph "B" part 2 of Art. 105 Criminal

The violent seizure of the authorities or the violent retention of power. The general crime object is the foundations of the political system of the Russian Federation in terms of legitimacy of state power, the constitutional procedure for the establishment and functioning of state power and its bodies. Additional objects are the following health, bodily immunity, honor and dignity of persons affected by violent action.

The objective side of the crime may be expressed in actions aimed at the violent seizure of power, or for the violent retention of power in violation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, or for a violent change in the constitutional system of the Russian Federation.

Actions aimed at the violent seizure of power mean an attempt to an unconstitutional way of coming specific persons, political parties, movements and other political forces to power in the Russian Federation or its subjects without changing the constitutional arrangement in the country. Violence as an unconstitutional way of seizing power or its deduction may consist of, for example, in custody of custody, intercourse, violent physical isolation, physical humiliation, beatings, causing harm to the health of persons representing the authorities formed in accordance with the Constitution and the laws of Russia.

Actions aimed at violent retention of power are a refusal to give up power. Contrary to the results of the elections, a referendum or other lawful, based on the Constitution of the Russian Federation, a shaft, connected to the application of violence to representatives of the political forces, to which state power should go through the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Violence with an unconstitutional attempt to keep power in content is no different from violence with an unconstitutional attempt to seize power.

The most dangerous species of the analyzed crime are actions aimed at the violent change in the establishment of the Russian Federation. They are violent actions that pursue the goal to change public system, a political system, a state structure or the main political institutions of the Russian Federation and form a new system of authorities.

The extreme form of violence is the use of weapons. But if it acquires the form of armed rebellion in order to overthrow or violent change in the constitutional system of the Russian Federation, the act is fully covered by the composition of armed rebellion and does not require additional qualifications under Art. 278 of the Criminal Code, since the targets mentioned in Art. 27.8, and in Art. 279 CC. If the rebellion pursues the purpose of the capture of power, which goes beyond the framework of Art. 279 of the Criminal Code, and at the same time the goal of the violation of the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation, which is not covered by the composition of the crime described in Art. 278 of the Criminal Code, it should be qualified for the aggregate of Art. 278 and 279 of the Criminal Code.

The composition of the crime is formal. Such a crime is recognized as endaged from the moment of the action aimed at the violent seizure of power, or for the violent retention of power, or for a violent change in the constitutional system of the Russian Federation, regardless of whether the guilty managed to implement criminal plans.

If the death of violence is caused in the process of violence, it is not covered by the composition of this crime and requires additional qualifications under Art. 277, 317 or 105 of the Criminal Code.

The subjective side of the crime is characterized by direct intent and a special purpose - the unconstitutional seizure of the authorities, the unconstitutional retention of the authorities or the change in the constitutional system of the Russian Federation for a violent way.

The subject of the crime is a person who has reached the age of 16. In case of a violent retention of power, the subject is special: a representative of the authorities formed in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, but obliged to convey the state power to the political forces that came to power constitutional.

Associated rebellion. The end-certified object of the crime is the foundations of the political system of the Russian Federation in terms of the inviolability of the foundations of the constitutional system and the territorial integrity of Russia.

The objective side of the crime is characterized as an armed rebellion organization or an active part in it.

The rebellion is defined as "a spontaneous uprising, armed performance against power," as "perturbation, confusion, rebar, folk excitement, Kramol, Riot, conspiracy in fact, a common disobedient." But in the sense of Art. 279 of the Criminal Code is understood not as a spontaneous uprising, but as a provoked, organized armed performance against the legitimate authorities, the constitutional system and the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation.

The organization of armed rebellion is various actions aimed at provoking armed performances against legitimate authorities in the Russian Federation. They can consist in particular, in the propaganda of armed rebellion, in the recruitment of its participants, in the supply of rebels with weapons, military equipment, in planning armed operations and other actions on ideological, material or organizational support of the insurgency.

Active participation of armed rebellion means a joint action with other participants in the reaction of violent actions using or an attempt to apply weapons aimed at achieving reaction objectives. However, the intentional causing death in the process of application of violence is not covered by the composition of this crime and is subject to additional qualifications under Art. 105 of the Criminal Code, and if the victims are state or public figures or law enforcement officers, then under Art. 277, 295 Go Art. 317 CC.

The legislator, describing the two forms of this crime, is the organization of the rebellion and active participation in it, - in both cases implies the real performance of the rebels. Therefore, an armed rebellion in the form of his organization should be recognized by completed from the moment of the first armed speech of the rebels. If the actions of the Organizer did not actually led to armed speeches against legal authorities, they should be qualified as preparations for armed rebellion.

An active part in the armed rebellion can be considered the ended of the moment the participant in the rebellion of specific violent action using or an attempt to apply weapons aimed at achieving the objectives of the rebellion, regardless of the actual implementation of these goals or other consequences.

The subjective side of the crime is characterized by direct intent and special chain:

1) the overthrow of the constitutional system;

2) a violent change of constitutional system;

3) violations of the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation.

The purpose of the overthrow of the institutional system of the Russian Federation involves the desire to abolish the foundations of the constitutional system, enshrined in ch. 1 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, eliminate rights and freedoms enshrined in ch. 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and establish a public and state system, not the corresponding Constitution of the Russian Federation.

The goal of a violent change in the constitutional system of the Russian Federation has the same content as in Art. 278 CC.

The purpose of the violation of the territorial integrity is the intention to destroy the principles of the federal device, enshrined in ch. 3 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and forcibly refund part of its territory with the proclamation of its independence from Russia or accession to the foreign state.

The subject of the crime is a person who has reached the age of 16. When committing a crime in the form of an armed rebellion organization, it may be its organizers and managers. Active participating insurgent - these are persons directly committing violent actions with the use of weapons for the achievement of reaction objectives.

Next, we analyze from a criminal law point of view of encroachment on the economic security and defense capability of the Russian Federation. Thus, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation attributed to one of the crimes of this group of the Group. It is a subsequent sabotage facility are the economic security and defense capability of the Russian Federation.

Safety is defined in Art. 1 of the Law of the Russian Federation of 05.03.92 No. 2446-1 "On Security" as a state of the protection of the vital interests of the person, society and the state from internal and external threats. It follows from this that under economic security it is understood as the state of the protection of the most important economic interests of the Russian Federation.

The defensiveness of the Russian Federation means the state of its protection against the possible attack of the external aggressor and includes elements such as the economic and military potential of Russia, the combat training and professionalism of the personnel of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, the mobilization readiness of the civilian population, etc.

The objective side of the sabotage is characterized by the commitment of the explosion, arson or other actions aimed at destruction or damage to enterprises, structures, ways and means of communication, means of communication, liability objects of the population.

This crime is usually committed with respect to economically important and vulnerable energy units, defense industry enterprises and military facilities, enterprises and means of railway, water, air and pipeline transport, communications and alarm systems, and objects to ensure the life of the population.

Diverse methods are not only explosions and arsions , Directly allocated by the legislator, but also other actions that, like explosions and arson, are also combined and are also aimed at destruction or damage to the objects listed in the disposition of Art. 281 CC. Actions include, for example, a device of accidents and disasters, collaps, floodings, radioactive and other similar infesses or pollution, etc.

Destructed in the disposition of objects means their physical destruction, the loss of national economic significance, the inability or economic inexpediency of recovery. Under the damage to the causation of such harms of sabotage actions, which significantly reduces their national economic significance and economic value, but can be eliminated by repair or recovery.

Compiler - formal, it is an overview of the execution of socially dangerous actions aimed at destruction or damage to those named in the law of objects, even if they were actually not destroyed or damaged.

The death of people as a result of a sabotage act is not covered by the composition of the sabotage and forms a set of this crime with murder in aggravating circumstances.

The subjective side of the sabotage is characterized by direct intent in a focusing goal - undermine the economic security and defense capability of the Russian Federation.

Subject Diversions - a person who has reached the age of 16. If a sabotage act is committed by a citizen of the Russian Federation on the task of foreign special services, the act should be additionally qualified as state treason in the form of assistance to a foreign state in conducting hostile activities to the detriment of foreign security of the Russian Federation.

In the Criminal Code is provided not only by the main, but also qualified as station: its committing an organized group.

Of course, the Criminal Code provides other types of crimes against state power, however, considering the framework of our work, we cannot stop at all.

Thus, the general sign of all-point against the foundations of the constitutional system and security of the state provided for by section X of the Criminal Procedure should be considered: a set of social relations that ensure the inviolability of the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state, the normal functioning of state bodies belonging to various branches of state power, as well as interests civil service and services in local governments.

We emphasize that a significant role in addressing the tasks of personality protection, society, the system plays the system of the special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. As indicated by N.F. Kuznetsova, the structuring of the system of a special part has not only applied, but legal and technical search meaning, similar to the alphanage and subject indicator of the articles of the Criminal Code, and shows the hierarchy of social values \u200b\u200bprotected by them, performs the interrelation of sections, chapters, articles inside the system and outside of it with other systems legislation. Accounting for a place of one or another article, a group of norms in the structure of a special part makes our idea of \u200b\u200bthe relevant criminal laws, and sometimes indicates some contradictions in legislative structures, for errors in the chosen tactics of public relations.

So, in the underlying aspect, the chapter 33 "Crime against Military Service" is attracted. The legislator placed it into the sections of the XI section, which in the structure of the special part of the Criminal Code is the penultimate and is located between the section x "Crime against state power" and section of the XII "crime against peace and security of mankind". But noticeably not a neighborhood, and the actual separation of military service from state power, obviously, the legislator considered that social relations developing in these areas are heterogeneous.

Note, in the Criminal Codes of the RSFSR 1922, 1926 and 1960. Military crimes were always united into individual chapters that closed the special part. But in the framework of the three-dead division of criminal law protection, such an approach was acceptable and explained. For example, the Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR 1960, along with Chapter 12, "Military crimes" contained such chapters as "official crimes", "crimes against justice" and "crimes against the management order". Analogs of the Three World Heads in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of 1996 are reasonably united in one section of the "crime against state power". As a generic facility here is the state power. We share the opinion of N.F. Kuznetsova, which believes that the generic object performs the function of the base of the unit of the general object to objects of large subsystems - blocks, the generic objects of which act as criteria for structuring a special part to the sections. Traditionally, in textbooks on the theory of the state and the right as one of the signs that the state distinguish between the Best and non-governmental organizations is called public power. The army can only exist to the extent that the state legal consciousness animates.

In art. 2 of the Federal Law of March 28, 1998 No. 53-FZ "On Military Duty and Military Service" notes that military service is a special type of federal civil service and lists the types of military formations in which it is executed.

We will pay attention to the fact that the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the Definition of December 27, 2005 explained the provision that military service is a special type of civil service directly related to the provision of defense of the country's and security of the state, the rights and freedoms of citizens and, Consequently, carried out in public interests.

Thus, the recognition of the public character of military service makes it possible to attach encroachment on its interests to encroachments on state power, therefore, chapter 33 "Crimes against military service" should enter the section x "Crime against state power".

Opponents may argue: for example, the normal development of relations in the field of economic activity or about public security is also of great importance for the whole society. In general, any crime is a blow, ultimately, and according to the state. But the criminal law enforcement of encroachments on state power is that the public relations are acting here as an object, which the state does not simply control and protects, but is their main subject or expressing the shared - "main player".

In addition to the official division of crimes against state power under the species object, the following groups can be noted in the general form. First, it is encroachments on state authorities and those who carry out, secondly, encroachment on the attributes and symbols of the state and third, these are crimes committed by the authorities, as well as those who directly ensure their activities.

These general groups of encroachment are present in the chapter on crimes against military service. The standards involving the responsibility for physical or psychological violence, as well as the humiliation of military personnel in connection with the performance of their official or official duties belong: Art. 333 of the Criminal Code "Resistance to the Chief or forcing him to violate the responsibilities of military service", Art. 334 of the Criminal Code "Enforced actions against the Chief", Art. 336 CK "Insult a serviceman."

It should be noted that the features of crimes against military service are determined by its specificity. There is in Chapter 33 of the Criminal Code described in which crimes can be fully attributed to official. The implementation of public interest is associated with the implementation of certain functions, the implementation of authority. In the same way, as a judge, the prosecutor, the investigator and the investigator in connection with the implementation of its procedural powers enter into relations with the participants of criminal proceedings, military personnel by virtue of the specifics of their official duties interact with each other and other persons.

As shown above, the fact that the military is civil servants is not doubtful. In part 1 tbsp. 2 of the Federal Law of May 27, 2003 "On System of Public Service in the Russian Federation" Military service is called as one of the types in the system of public service. Paragraph 1 Notes to Art. 285 of the Criminal Code provides for the possibility of committing crimes against state power, public service officials who carry out the functions of the representative of the authorities, organizational and administrative or administrative and economic in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops and military formations of the Russian Federation. " A number of authors quite rightly pay attention to the mistake of the legislator, which has spread the criminal law definition of an official only on Articles of Chapter 30 of the Criminal Code.

Officials of the Armed Forces are more inherent in organizational and administrative powers to manage military teams, or administrative and economic functions on order of military property or budget funds entering the counties of districts and parts. The encroachments committed in connection with their implementation are most often subject to the norms provided for in chapter 30 of the Criminal Code. Thus, the head of the garrison hospital C. The defendant agreed to receive money for a positive decision on the direction of subordinates on a business trip to Bosnia. For h. 1 Art. 286 of the Criminal Code was qualified actions of the Military Commissioner of the Perm Region D., who demanded from the subordinates of the military commissarians of the regions to make its material contributions to the creation of a "gift room". The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation recognized the reasonable qualification of the actions of the doctor of the military unit, which for bribes provided the military personnel of the urgent service, obviously fictitious certificates of illness with the conclusion of a military medical commission on their limited fitness to the military service under Art. 290 of the Criminal Code and Art. 286 CC.

A number of military official crimes provided for in chapter 33 of the Criminal Code can be attributed to alternative-official. For example, the failure to fulfill the order may not be expressed simply in the dying service, but in the non-recovery of organizational and administrative or administrative and economic powers. Such unattended may consist of avoiding the appointment of servicemen for serving service, in not accrualing premiums, combat payments. In addition, the senior chief may be prohibited by the commander of the unit in ordinary form. For example, send military servicemen to the construction of facilities and the production of work not related to combat training. Ignoring such an order should be considered as a special type of abuse of official powers.

As a special norm in relation to exceeding official powers, Part 2 of Art. 336 of the Criminal Code in terms of insult "... the head of the subordinate during execution or in connection with the fulfillment of the responsibilities of military service ...".

The noteworthy compositions of official military crimes are the fact that they provide for responsibility at the same time as a special type of abuse and exceeding official powers. Thus, the violation of the statutory rules of the guard can also be expressed and accepting the head of the Karaul who contradict the interests of the management decision service, and in the commissioning of the guard of the guarantee of clearly overlooking its powers. "As an derivative, as part of the guard, appointed for the protection and defense of Gaupvakta, ordinary Kmitts for the refusal to fulfill their claim beat the ordinary Zyryanov and Vasilyeva, which caused the first of the victims of the health of the middle severity, and the second to be bombed.

The actions of Kmitov "... Along with Part 2 of Art. 335 of the Criminal Code, were qualified by the Military Court of the Borzin Garrison and under Part 1 of Art. 342 of the same code. " Analysis of Art. 201 Charter of the Garrison and Kasual Services of the Russian Federation, approved by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of December 14, 1993 No. 2104, establishing the duties of the output gives all the grounds to believe that it is endowed with administrative authority in relation to the arrested.

According to the explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of February 10, 2000 No. 6 "On judicial practice on bribery and commercial bribery" servicemen when performing responsibilities assigned to them on the protection of public order, ensuring security and other functions, in the execution of which military personnel are executed administrative powers "are government representatives. Here will be appropriate to bring two norms that protect the normal development of social relations arising in the process of exercising external regulation armed for the armed forces. This is Art. 341 of the Criminal Code "Violation of the Rights of the Border Service" and Art. 343 of the Criminal Code "Violation of the Rules for the Protection of Public Orders and Public Security. Violation may be expressed in the failure of duties, non-compliance with prohibitions and restrictions. We also believe that the guilty representing power in the protection of the state border and providing public security may abuse this authority or exceed their powers.

The formal material structure of Part 1 of Art is drawn to. 341 Criminal Responsibility for violating the rules of the border service will be emphasized if this act led it or could entail harm the security of the state. Thus, the Military Court of the Tbilisi garrison Efreitor Abgaryan, ordinary Uvarov and Alekseev were convicted of violating the statutory rules of the border service and convicted on the basis of part 1 of Art. 341 Criminal

As indicated in the sentence, Abgaryan, Uvarov and Alekseev, being in the border outfit at the observation of the border area, in violation of the requirements of Art. The 15 temporary charter of the border troops of the Russian Federation was distracted from carrying service, weakened vigilance and fell asleep, leaving weapons entrusted to them and without protecting the state border over 20 minutes. During the inspection, they were discovered by sleeping. For a similar violation - a dream for 20 minutes in the border dressing on the site of the border - is condemned by the same court for h. 1 tbsp. 341 Criminal Code and Private Baidin, Rozhkov and Oganesyan.

The violation of the rules of the border service, called the rules of the border service, as the first and in the second case, is obvious. Moreover, the violation committed by the guilty objectively determined the possibility of illegal intersection of the protected area of \u200b\u200bthe border and thus created a real threat to harm the interests of the state.

Such an approach of the legislator, as well as its materialization in judicial practice, emphasize the value of the border as one of the most important elements of state power and occupy its essential place in the argument series in favor of the inclusion of chapter 33 of the Criminal Code in the section x "Crime against state power".

On the other hand, they cause a perplexity of the sanction of the studied compositions, they are significantly softer the possible punishments provided for in common types of crimes. For violation of the Rules of Border Service, the upper limit of the sanction committed without aggravating circumstances is three years of imprisonment, for violation of the rules for the protection of public relations, we note, provided that this violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens is harmful. So, Major Usov and Michman Strekolovsky are found guilty that in violation of the rules of the border service, the illegal crossing of the fishing vessels of the maritime border of the Russian Federation, maintaining the staciner's crab fishery, disembarking and unloading outside the checkpoints across the border of people and cargo, warned captains These ships on the exit of border ships to the service. Since the listed consequences actually caused the interests of the economic security of the state, the court reasonably qualified the permanent guilty under Part 1 of Art. 341 Criminal

Without challenging the qualifications, we note that the perpetrators were abused by officials in the form of inaction and exceeded them, betraying the interests of the service. We believe that the maximum possible punishment in the form of three years of imprisonment does not adequately reflect the public danger of crimes committed by border guards. The reasons for such inconsistencies lie in the insufficient integration of the compositions of military encroachments to the system of official crimes in the current Criminal Code.

As a special type of job crimes, there is a violation of the rules for the protection of public relations and public safety. The composition of this crime is material. The review of judicial practice on crimes against military service is noted that one of the mandatory grounds for bringing to responsibility under Part 1 of Art. 343 of the Criminal Code is the fact of causing due to a violation of the rules of service of the service as a person who is part of the military outfit on the protection of public order and ensuring public security, harming the rights and legitimate interests of citizens. This harm can be expressed in causing property damage to a citizen, physical or moral suffering. In the latter case, based on the nature and degree of public danger, reflected in the sign of punishability, the volume of such harm is limited to the causation of the average severity of harm to the health of the victim. But we will remind, the sanction in part 1 of Art. 343 of the Criminal Code - up to two years of imprisonment, and for the causation of the middle severity, the health has been punished for up to three years.

On inconsistency of the responsibility of the responsibility of chapter 30 of the Criminal Code and articles intended for military personnel also testifies to the sentence of the Military Court of the Odintsovsky Garrison. The defendant was found guilty of violating the rules of serving of the service in the composition of the military outfit on the protection of public order and providing public security, which resulted in grave consequences. His actions were qualified by the court under Part 2 of Art. 343 CC. According to the sentence of Larionov, applying the fault techniques, Skvorttsov and Zhelekina on Earth had several times, causing them in the very physical pain. In addition, he broke up with his blow to the lower jaw Grinevich, that is, caused the last harm to the health of the middle severity. When considering this case, the military board indicated that the military collegium indicated that the grave consequences in terms of the meaning of Part 2 of Art. 343 of the Criminal Code should recognize the causing harm to health as a result of the illegal use of physical strength, special means and tablet weapons, or deposit of various harm to the health of several citizens. Since the actions of Larionov, the victim of Grnenevich was harm to the health of medium severity, and the Skvortsov and Zhelekin were defeated, the court had enough grounds for the conclusion about the occurrence of the serious consequences from the convict actions. Taking into account the foregoing, the military collegium has retrained the Military College with part 2 by Part 1 of Art. 343 CC.

Note that for violation of the rules for the protection of a public order protection, the resulting serious consequences are punished under five years of imprisonment, and for causing grievous harm without aggravating circumstances - up to eight. In addition, the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation acknowledged that when committing a crime under Part 2 of Art. 343 of the Criminal Code, to victims of citizens may be illegally applied: physical strength, special means, tabletime, i.e. In fact, the signs of exceeding official powers committed in particularly aggravating circumstances. In turn, the upper limit of the sanction for the general type of exceedment is exactly twice the maximum possible punishment for a similar crime committed by the military personnel. With such differentiation of responsibility for general officials and encroachment of the officials of the Armed Forces agree difficult.

A.V. Kudashkin is argued underlines the special character of military service and notes that it provides independence, state sovereignty and the integrity of the state with specific military methods. Indeed, it is difficult to overestimate the importance of the army for the state and do not understand the need to use exclusive tools and methods for solving, again the exceptional, sometimes of the fateful, both for the state as a whole and for each individual citizen of tasks. But it is because of these features, the activities of military institutions should be strictly subband, which, by the way, is one of the main traditions of the army.

In conclusion, it should be noted the following. Features of crimes against military service are due to its specifics. There is in Chapter 33 of the Criminal Code described in which crimes can be fully attributed to official. Considering the above, we consider it expedient to place chapter 33 "Crimes against military service" in the section x "Crime against state power". Such a step will eliminate the systemic inaccuracy of the special part of the Criminal Procedure and will allow to combine the chapters in the same section that have public relations as a species object in the field of public interest, the main subject of which is the state. We believe, it will emphasize the close relationship and mutual responsibility of the army and the state.

In conclusion of this chapter, we do the following conclusions:

1. A common feature of all closures against the foundations of the constitutional system and security of the state provided for by section X of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be considered:

2. The most dangerous of the crimes that form this section are encroachments on the basis of the constitutional system and the security of the state, since they affect the foundation of the public, political and state system of the Russian Federation, its sovereignty, external and internal security.

3. In the section X of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, state power acts as a generic facility.

The generic object unites the subsystem of homogeneous similar interests, which cause damages related to the nature of the public danger of the crime. At the same time, the degree of public danger of acts may be different.

4. The objective side of all crimes against the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state is characterized by actions. And only the disclosure of state secrets and loss of documents containing state secrets can be performed both actions and inaction. The compositions of these two crimes are constructed as material, and the rest of the compositions are formal, and crimes are over due to the implementation of the actions described in the law, regardless of the onset of some harmful consequences.

5. In addition to the official division of crimes against state power in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the species object, the following groups can be noted in the most general form:

6. A number of military official crimes envisaged in chapter 33 of the Criminal Code can be attributed to alternative-official. For example, the failure to fulfill the order may not be expressed simply in the dying service, but in the non-recovery of organizational and administrative or administrative and economic powers.

7. Noteworthy for some formulations of military crimes is the fact that they provide for responsibility at the same time as a special type of abuse and exceeding official powers.

8. Servicemen when performing responsibilities assigned to them for the protection of public order, ensuring security and other functions, in the fulfillment of which military personnel are executed by administrative powers, "are government representatives.

9. Features of crimes against military service are determined by its specificity. At the same time, the recognition of the public character of military service makes it possible to attach encroachment on its interests to encroachments on state power, therefore, chapter 33 "Crimes against Military Service" should be included in the section x "Crime against state power".

Such a step will eliminate the systemic inaccuracy of the special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and will allow to unite in the same section of the chapters that have public relations as a species object in the field of public interest, the main subject of which is the state. It seems that this will emphasize the close relationship and mutual responsibility of the army and the state.

3. Methodical recommendations of teaching rights in general education institutions

3.1 Methodology of Teaching Law: General Questions

In the conversion of all parties to the life of our society, the social role of the teacher is becoming complicated and the social role of the teacher is increasingly increasing with which there is a difficult restructuring of the operation of the Mid-Educational School.

It should be noted that the Education Act allows the existence of different types of schools, which gives the right to the family in which the child is brought up for an independent choice of any general educational institution. This law provides in turn to school independently determine the content and ways of teaching. The educational process introduces new disciplines, new areas of knowledge. Changes in school programs go two basic ways: extensive and intense. In the first case, the training time is extended, the volume of educational material increases, in the second the fundamentally new programs are created. Integrated courses are introduced into the practice of training, the teacher got the opportunity not to follow strict methodological regulations, but to almost completely focus on the creative approach to the organization of the learning process: choose the problem and textbook from several options, evaluate them, and in some cases - to draw up a program and training materials To her. Under these conditions, the social and professional functions of the teacher are complicated, the question of its methodological skills is sharply about the ability to approach the organization of the educational process from creative positions, carry out the transition from the school of memory to the school of thinking and action. The ability to show creativity in work requires a teacher of deep and durable knowledge of the methodology of its subject. We emphasize that the technique, like pedagogy, is characterized by the unity of two began - science and art, science and creativity are closely intertwined in it.

However, in the current situation in the work of the school, methodological nihilism is very dangerous, methodological work, which are ready to deny the norms established in the methodology of training and the proven practice of school work. The most important quality of the teacher is an initiative and methodological creativity based on the knowledge of the subject.

The formation of legal culture students as an integral part of the general culture of a person applies to the number of the most important tasks of teaching law in secondary school. In this issue, we propose to take a division of general knowledge into two groups:

Consider first the first group of knowledge into which we include the following main parts.

First, these are legal knowledge involved in the formation of the scientific worldview of schoolchildren. The right has always been and remains an important discipline. The leading ideas of the school courage on the right should, in our opinion, attribute:

1) ideas reflecting the manifestation of the main features and laws in dialectics in the legal shell and its parts:

a) legal shell as a qualitatively peculiar material system of interpenetrating and interacting all its industries;

b) the legal shell is inhomogeneous in its structure: each part of it has its own individual characteristics and, at the same time, it is characterized by general laws of development;

2) ideas reflecting the manifestation of laws of dialectics:

a) All elements constituting the processes proceeding both in the right in general and in its separate industries.

It should be noted that the effectiveness of the formation of a legal card is determined by the volume of knowledge gained and increases if the learning process is based on the age and individual opportunities of schoolchildren, therefore, the search for effective ways to transmit the system of legal knowledge involves the identification of personal precepts of the teacher.

The second option is associated with the implementation in the practice of learning the right of ideas of pedagogy development. Comparing this option to organize the interaction of the individual picture of the world with a scientific legal, it should be noted that the conceptual core of the educational process should include concepts from the field of theoretical thinking. However, their selection is predetermined not by the logic and structure of legal science, and the significance of the transformation of the individual legal picture of the world, the basis of which also makes up concepts. Based on this, in educational discipline should be focused on those concepts that reflect the specifics of the legal method of expressing reality, and not the entire content of legal knowledge. The means of the implementation of such a transformation of an individual legal picture of the world is the independent educational activity of schoolchildren.

The main result of the formation of the legal picture of the world according to the second option is the developing ability to create their personal world population. This achievement becomes a personal acquisition of a student and turns it from a carrier of culture into its source.

Thus, under the legal picture of the world, it should be understood in this case the result of the interaction in the process of learning a scientific and legal picture of the world and the individual, created by each schoolboy. In our opinion, this approach to the interpretation of the specified concept is most fully consistent with the tasks of personal-oriented learning.

It should also be borne in mind that every science and each school subject have their own language. And the right in this sense is no exception, because there is every reason to talk about the existence of a "legal language", which has a certain set of terms, which gives it individuality and color.

3.2 Methods of teaching law in the field of study of crimes committed against state power

As a science, the learning technique right has two aspects - theoretical and applied. The main methodological and theoretical problems that it considers can be attributed: the subject and methods, the objective objectives of the subject, the principles of the selection of the content and determination of the structure of the school subject, the psychological and pedagogical basis of teaching law.

At the present stage of the development of secondary education, the tasks of the teaching methodology, which focuses on the adjustment of the learning goals to the law, which should be directed to the education of the student of the student of the student of the schoolchildren, are changed and complicated. Methods of learning is right to decide how to make learning right personally oriented.

Currently, the development of the selection criteria, the principles of building the subject of the subject in general and in its individual courses, the definition of the system of values, which should be formalized by legal science, is particularly relevant. Therefore, the methodological science should relate the content of the subject and activities with the functions that the generation studying at school will be carried out in the near future in society.

Success in the work of the teacher is largely determined by interest in pedagogical activities, creativity that is impossible without the development of methodological thinking, the abilities rationally organize pedagogical labor and conduct research on the method of learning law.

Note that in the teaching methodology, several methods are used, which are grouped into the methods of experimentally empirical and theoretical level.

Thus, empirical methods should be used at the stage when the facts accumulation under the problem under study are underway, in this case, examples of crimes committed against state power.

The methods of the theoretical level should be applied at the stage of comprehension of facts.

Note that the methodology is increasingly used by a system-structural approach, in which the analysis is subject to communication between the content and methods of learning.

Mathematical and statistical methods are used in the processing of results and testing the quality of learning.

Methodological work develops from several stages. So, in relation to the study of crime and crimes against state power, the following stages can be distinguished.

So, at the first stage, it is important to substantiate the relevance of studying the issue of crimes against state power.

At this stage, it is necessary not only to study the history of the issue, but also note that these crimes are dangerous acts committed against the interests of the public service using the guilty official position and causing a direct threat to the impact of significant damage to the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations, Societies and states.

It is especially important at this stage to emphasize that corruption has spread in all branches of government, it is amazed by all spheres of society. The crimes of public servants committed by them using their official position threaten the rule of law, human rights, undermine the moral authorities of society, confidence in power, the principles of government, equality and social justice. The special danger of such crimes is due to the fact that they are committed by persons who, by the nature of their activities, are obliged themselves to fight various offenses and ensure the rule of law in a particular sphere.

At the second stage, the main problem should be established, indicating that the Constitution of the Russian Federation establishes and enshrines the functioning of legislative, executive and judicial authorities, as well as local governments; It is these bodies that implement public power, i.e. endowed with the right to accept volitional solutions dictated by public needs. Since public authorities operate for public purposes, and its decisions are generally obligatory, the postolon of the Constitution and the legislation of each state establish certain frameworks, the rules for its implementation. In general, it can be said that the main requirement for public authorities, its authorities is the requirement of legality. Violation of the principle of legality in any form not only makes it difficult to implement the tasks of public authorities, but also calls for its right to make mandatory requirements for citizens and monitor their correct implementation, undermining its authority. Separate violations of the normal functioning of public authorities have such a high degree of public danger that the fight against them is impossible without the use of criminal repression.

At the next stage, the goals and objectives should be formed, which are in preventing such crimes.

At the last stage, conclusions for studied issues are formed.

Note that the purpose of teaching schoolchildren to section the right to crimes against state power is the knowledge of the surrounding world, which exists in objective laws, assigning students of historical experience in combating this type of crime, an increase in legal culture. At the same time, training in this industry should be understood not just as the transfer of knowledge to memorize, but as the formation of personal qualities of the student.

The main ideas in the studied area we consider the following:

1) to reveal a legal picture of the world as part of criminal law in the field of crimes against state power, for what follows:

a) develop scientific views from students to the specified issues, on the relationship of sociology, economy, politicians with criminal law as a whole and with crimes committed against state power;

b) promote the formation of a legal consciousness in a student in order to rethink the place and role of civil servants in society and their norms of behavior;

d) prepare students for self-education in the field of law as a whole and in the field of crimes committed against state power;

e) develop legal thinking among students, teach them to think comprehensively;

2) orient schoolchildren to study the experience of foreign countries on the problem under study;

3) contribute to the formation of the consciousness of the need to assimage moral values, norms and rules of civilized communication in order to prevent and prevent crimes against state power.

We particularly want to emphasize that the study of crimes against state power may be preceded by the course "Laws". In this case, the section concerning crimes against public authority will be a logical continuation of training in a general legal system and structure. Studying the general course of law, the schoolboy receives a holistic picture, where all objects and items are interrelated. As part of this course, students should learn the concept and signs of a crime, punishment, responsibility as a whole. The main goal here is to know the general issues and problems of legal entity in order to comprehend the dependence of common problems with crimes against state power.

When developing guidelines for schoolchildren training, we consider it expedient to turn to foreign experience. Thus, among the most important aspects in this regard, in the American education system, you can allocate an acquaintance with the methodology for learning students, the construction of research work. Even distracted by the specifics of philosophical, legal or other education, we can talk about the principles and methods of training in Russian and American schools.

Each country has their own traditions of teaching in school. Russian teaching is characterized by the presence of independent work, the transfer of knowledge by the teacher in the form of lectures, in some cases a seminar classes are allowed in combination with business games, etc. It has long been recognized that if European teaching models have significant similarities, then American law teaching is fundamentally perfect. It was in the United States, back in 1871 a Socratic method of teaching law was introduced. The named method corresponds to how Socrates built his classes: he asked questions that have forced students to take their own decisions. We believe that this is an effective way of learning and it is advisable to use it in Russian schools.

It should be noted that the purpose of learning determine and the difference in the methodology - American education seeks not only to teach, but also to instill professional skills. It is this aspect of learning that is often overlooked in the Russian teaching system. However, the introduction of new learning techniques is often facing conservatism of teachers.

Conclusion

In accordance with Art. 3 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation by the sovereignty carrier and the only source of government in the Russian Federation is the people who exercise it directly either through state authorities and local governments. In art. 11 The Constitution is indicated by an exhaustive list of government bodies that have the right to take state-power decisions at the federal level and at the level of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Public-legal nature also has the authorities carried out by local governments, but they do not bear the state, since in accordance with Art. 12 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation local governments are not included in the system of government bodies. The possibility of carrying out powerful powers of a public-legal nature by other subjects of the right to the Constitution of the Russian Federation does not provide.

Summing up the work, it is necessary to formulate the following conclusions:

1. In the history of Russian legislation, one of the first references to criminal liability for official crimes in Pskov diploma and judicens 1497 and 1550.

2. In the development of legislation on state crimes, the following steps can be distinguished:

the first stage, enshrined in judicication 1497 and 1550,

the second stage was reflected in the legislation of the end of the XIX - early XX centuries,

the third stage is expressed by decrees and regulations of power,

the fourth stage is the consolidation of crimes against state power in the Criminal Code of the RSFSR,

the fifth stage is the reflection of the specified type of crime in the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

3. The study showed that the most severe punishment was prescribed for crimes against state power in various historical periods, often the death penalty.

4. According to legal statistics over the past ten years, the number of crimes percentaged in Russia against state power has stabilized at a fairly high level and occupies a fourth part in the overall structure of crime.

5. The public danger of crimes against state authority is that as a result of their commission, the regulatory, regulated by the law, the activities of the apparatus of legislative, executive and judiciary, as well as local governments are violated.

Crimes of this kind are undergoing the basics of power and management, discredit and undermine their authority in the eyes of the population, infringe upon the constitutional rights and interests of citizens, destroy the democratic foundations and law and order, perversion of the principles of legality, impede the conduct of socio-economic reforms in society.

6. Most crimes against state power in the Russian Federation are committing men, women. The educational level of persons who committed a crime against state power indicates an increase in the number of convicts with higher and secondary-seat education. For most people who committed crimes in the sector under consideration, a predetermined intent is characteristic.

7. The reasons for the growth of the number of crimes against state power are: economic, social and moral changes, permissiveness and uncontrolcity, oblivion of traditions and a false understanding of the democratic principles of a hostel; Corruption of representatives of state bodies, splicing them with organized criminal formations.

8. A common sign of all impregnations against the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state provided for by section X of the Criminal Code should be:

- a set of social relations that ensure the inviolability of the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state;

- the normal functioning of state bodies belonging to various branches of state power;

- Interests of civil service and services in local governments.

9. The most dangerous of the crimes that form this section are encroachments on the basis of the constitutional system and the security of the state, since they affect the foundation of the public, political and state system of the Russian Federation, its sovereignty, external and internal security.

The species object of the crime group are public relations, providing the inviolability of the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state.

10. In the section X of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, state power acts as a generic facility.

The generic object unites the subsystem of homogeneous similar interests, which cause damages related to the nature of the public danger of the crime. At the same time, the degree of public danger of acts may be different.

11. The objective side of all crimes against the foundations of the constitutional system and state security is characterized by actions. And only the disclosure of state secrets and loss of documents containing state secrets can be performed both actions and inaction. The compositions of these two crimes are constructed as material, and the rest of the compositions are formal, and crimes are over due to the implementation of the actions described in the law, regardless of the onset of some harmful consequences.

The subjective side of almost all the crimes of the group under consideration is characterized only by direct intent: the guilty is aware of the socially dangerous nature of the actions of the actions and wishes them.

12. In addition to the official division of crimes against state power in the Criminal Code in the species object, the following groups can be noted in the general form:

- encroachment on state authorities and those implementing it;

- encroachment on attributes and symbols of the state;

- Crimes committed by government officials, as well as those who directly ensure their activities.

13. A number of military official crimes provided for in chapter 33 of the Criminal Code can be attributed to alternative-official. For example, the failure to fulfill the order may not be expressed simply in the dying service, but in the non-recovery of organizational and administrative or administrative and economic powers.

14. Notable for some formulations of military crimes is the fact that they provide for responsibility at the same time as a special type of abuse and exceeding official powers.

15. Servicemen when performing responsibilities assigned to them for the protection of public order, ensuring security and other functions, in the fulfillment of which soldiers are endowed with administrative powers, "are government representatives.

Protection issues:

1. It is proposed to move chapter 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Crime against Military Service" in the section X of the Criminal Code "Crime against State Power".

Features of crimes against military service are due to its specifics. There is in Chapter 33 of the Criminal Code described in which crimes can be fully attributed to official. The implementation of public interest is associated with the implementation of certain functions, the implementation of authority. In the same way, as a judge, the prosecutor, the investigator and the investigator in connection with the implementation of its procedural powers enter into relations with the participants of criminal proceedings, military personnel by virtue of the specifics of their official duties interact with each other and other persons. Such a step will eliminate the systemic inaccuracy of the special part of the Criminal Procedure and will allow to combine the chapters in the same section that have public relations as a species object in the field of public interest, the main subject of which is the state. We believe, it will emphasize the close relationship and mutual responsibility of the army and the state.

2. The norms of chapter 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are devoted to the establishment of crime and the punishability of acts, which are violations of the normal activities of public authorities and its bodies. These disorders are performed inside, i.e. The subjects of the authorities themselves, so they have increased danger.

3. The main criterion of criminal law protection and the framework of classification is public relations, which ensure the stability of the state, the normal, legislatively regulated functioning of state power and its individual components: institutions and bodies.

4. It seems that based on the direct facility, crime against the management order can be classified into the following three groups of crimes:

encroaching on normal management activities;

encroaching on the established regime and inviolability of the state border;

encroaching on the established procedure for circulation of official documentation.

5. The formation of legal culture students as an integral part of the overall culture of a person is among the most important tasks of teaching law in secondary school. In this issue, we propose to take a division of general knowledge into two groups:

knowledge, in the formation of which the right is studied along with other school subjects;

knowledge that make up the specifics of the science itself and defining his personal contribution to the legal culture of the student.

6. The study of crimes against state power in the school curriculum should be preceded by the course "Laws". In this case, the section concerning crimes against state power will be a logical continuation of learning in a general legal system and structure. Studying the general course of law, the schoolboy receives a holistic picture, where all objects and items are interrelated. As part of this course, students should learn the concept and signs of a crime, punishment, responsibility as a whole. The main goal here is to know the general issues and problems of legal entity in order to comprehend the dependence of common problems with crimes against state power.

Bibliography

1. Constitution of the Russian Federation // ATP "ConsultantPlus"

2. Federal law "On the basics of the State Service of the Russian Federation" // ATP "ConsultantPlus"

3. Federal Law "On the General Principles of Local Self-Government Organization in the Russian Federation" // ATP "ConsultantPlus"

4. Federal Law "On the Fundamentals of Municipal Service in the Russian Federation"

5. Federal Law of 27.05.2003 No. 58-FZ "On the System of the State Service of the Russian Federation"

6. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of 13.06.1996 No. 63-ФЗ // ATP "ConsultantPlus"

7. Bazhenov A.V. Investigation of the crimes of the anti-state government, the interests of civil service and service in local governments: analysis of the problems of theory and practice // Russian investigator. M., 2008. - №8. P. 2-4.

8. Borkov V.N. Crimes against military service in the system of encroachment for state power // Military legal journal. №11. M., 2006.

9. Borkov V.N., Ventenko S.V. Criminal and legal characteristics of the crimes of the anti-state authorities, the interests of civil service and service in local government bodies. Omsk, 2007.

10. Borodin S.V. Qualifications of crimes against life. M., 1977.

11. Budatar S.M. Assignment of bribes: Crime against property or a crime against the interests of state power? // Ords of judicial reform: right, economy, management. №2. Rostov-on-Don, 2009. - 115 c.

12. Galakhova A.V. Official crimes. Crimes of the Anthepseed Authority, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments. M., 2006.

13. Gorelik A.S. Criminal law. M., 2000.

14. Gorokhovskaya A.A. Problems of the classification of crimes in Russian law. St. Petersburg, 2007. - 74 p.

15. Gupinov K.E. Criminal law. M., 2009.

16. Dyakov S.V. State crimes against the foundations of the constitutional system and security of the state and state crime. M., 1998.

17. Yezhov A.N., Samoilov A.S. Crimes against the basic establishment and security of the state. Arkhangelsk, 2004.

18. Yezhov A.N., Mirzoev GB, Samoilov A.S. Criminal liability for crimes against the foundation establishment and security of the state. M., 2004.

19. Kasho V.S. The role of municipal legal acts in the prevention of crimes against service in local governments // Actual problems of combating crime in the Siberian region. Collection of materials of the International Scientific Conference: in 2 parts. Part 2. Krasnoyarsk, 2006.

20. Klimchak A.G. The concept and signs of crimes against the basic establishment and security of the state in Russia. M., 2008. - 154 p.

21. Kokorin D.L. The subject of crimes of the anthepsession of the criminological and criminal law issues of the fight against crime. Collection of scientific articles / d. Red.: Smirnov G.G. Ekaterinburg, 2004.

22. Kolpakov I.A. The concept and types of crimes against the foundation establishment and security of the state // Actual problems of criminal law and process. Digest of articles. Vol. 1. M., 2006. - P. 32-48.

23. Korev A.I. Full course of criminal law: the crime of the anti-state government. Crimes against military service. Crimes against peace and security of humanity. International criminal law. In 5 volumes. St. Petersburg, 2008.

24. Krasikov A.Yu. Classification of crimes. M., 1992.

25. Kuznetsov E.V., Stoytsky A.E. Problems of legal regulation of criminal liability of subjects of crime against state power, public service interests, services in local governments, in commercial and other organizations // The activities of law enforcement agencies and the State Fire Service in modern conditions: problems and development prospects. The materials of the All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference dedicated to the 60th anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War on April 21-22, 2005 Irkutsk, 2005.

26. Kuznetsova N.F. Problems of qualifications of crimes. M., 1999.

27. Lunev M.M. Criminal law. M., 1990.

28. Lyanayev EK Commentary on the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. M., 2007. - 1323 p.

30. Minakova I.G. About the object of crimes of the antgotelery, interests of civil service and service in local governments // North Caucasian legal commanders. №1 - Rostov-on-Don, 2008.

31. Murykin A.R. Commentary on the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. M., 2-1. - 1003 s.

32. Naumov A.V. Russian criminal law. M., 2006. - 572 p.

33. Poznyyshev S.V. Elementary textbook of the Russian criminal process. Moscow, 1913.

34. Prudnikov V.V. Crimes of the Anthepseed Authority, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments. Krasnodar, 2003.

35. Gingerbread A.A. Legal reform in Russia. M., 2001. - 94 p.

36. Pyatkov E.G. Investigation of crimes against state power // Actual problems of modern law. Number 3. M., 2001. P. 43-54.

37. Rarog A.I. Criminal law of Russia. M., 2007.

38. Rashkovskaya S. Qualification of crimes. M., 1991.

General provisions of chapter 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

Definition 1.

The crimes against state power are socially dangerous acts that can be committed by such subjects as representatives of power, officials, and non-state employees who are not officials, due to their official position, contrary to the interests of the service cause significant harm to major objects or Threatens with causing such harm.

As objects of the impact of this crime, the normal activities of state authorities, the interests of the service at the regional or local level are understood here.

These crimes differ from other signs:

• committing special subjects, except Article 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation;
• the commission of act is possible only due to the service position occupied or when using their official authority;
• an encroachment on the normal activity of the authorities and management is carried out or there is a real threat to performing this violation.

A detailed list of these crimes is contained in chapter 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Note 1.

The subject of these crimes there can be only an official, with the exception of the cottage of the bribe. This person must fulfill the functions of the representative of the authorities or organizational and administrative, administrative and economic functions, as well as other in accordance with applicable law.

General characteristics of crimes against state power

In addition to the names of the main objects of these crimes, additional objects can be applied, for example, human rights and freedoms and citizen, human health, honor, freedom, and so on.

Some objects of criminal encroachment have the subject of encroachment, these are, for example, documents containing important information, targeted budget funds and so on.

The objective side of crimes can be expressed in the form of action or inaction. Basically, the objective side of this crime is expressed in the form of active actions committed by the subject of the crime. The compositions of this category of crimes are very diverse - in the design of the objective side, some of them are material, for example, Article 287, Article 289 of the Criminal Code, part is formal, for example, part 1, 2 of Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In some compositions, formally material signs may be present.

To commit some crimes, the method and method of their committing, applied tools and instruments of crimes may be important.

The subjective side is determined by the fault, mainly in the form of intent. In some of the crimes there are negligence. A certain role can play the qualifications of acts of motifs and goals.

The subject, as we already indicated, is a special (employee). The general entity that is present in some compositions is characterized by the following signs - a physical impaired person who has reached the age of attracting criminal liability.

Note 2.

These crimes are reasonably allocated to a separate chapter, as it is a special danger.

The commissioning of unlawful actions to a certain sphere may entail the infliction of significant damage to various protected laws of public interest. The designs of some formulations provide as qualifying signs the use of violence or threats, the use of weapons or special means, the onset of grave consequences, such as, for example, in Art. 286 of the Criminal Code. Such consequences talk about the big danger of crimes committed, that they can strongly affect public relations in a certain sphere, and therefore their committing is strictly punished by the legislator.

In the history of criminal law, regulating responsibility for service (official) crimes passed several stages. Initially, these crimes were not allocated in legislation in the form of a special group, but were considered as individual cases of common crimes committed using official authority. Then the legislation of different countries began to allocate officials in a separate group, and as a trait that separates them from other crimes was considered a special position of the guilty person who abused him provided by the public authority. As the famous Russian criminalist V. N. Shiryaev wrote, "Official crimes are the abuse of official authority, which consists in encroachment by them on legal benefits available for exposure only from officials, or to other legal benefits, but those who were implemented with this method which is in the hands of only an official. "

In the pre-revolutionary Russian criminal law, official (service) crimes began to be considered as a special type of crime, starting with the deposits of punishments of criminal and correctional 1845, where they were allocated in the section "On Crimes and Criminals in State and Public Service". The criminal Code of 1903 also contained the chapter "On criminal acts in the State and Public Service". The subject of these acts was recognized as an employee, i.e., "The person who is responsible or an interim order for the service of state or public, as an official, or a police officer or other guard or minister, or the face of the rural or social management" (Part 4 . 636).

In the Soviet criminal codes (1922, 1926 and 1960) there was an independent chapter on official (official) crimes, however, they changed them. In the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, 1960 were: abuse of power or official position, excess of power or official powers, negligence, receipt of bribes, giving bribes, mediation in bribery (1962), a bodie, violation of antimonopoly legislation (1992 G.).

The 1996 Criminal Code of the Russian Federation has fundamentally changed the regulation of responsibility for official crimes in the Soviet criminal law. In fact, the complete population of all parties to the economic and public life, which established in the conditions of totalitarianism and the command-administrative management system, determined the understanding of official crimes as acts that violate the normal activities of the state and public office, which could be the directors of the management workers from almost all the structures in society, With the exception of religious organizations and associations. Therefore, subjects of official crimes, in addition to government representatives, were recognized by persons holding positions related to the implementation of organizational and administrative and economic responsibilities in state and public organizations, institutions and enterprises (Note to Art. 170 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR 1960). The root restructuring of the economic and political systems of society in the Russian Federation in the 90s, the emergence of a multi-way economy, the emergence of numerous commercial organizations based on various forms of ownership, the process of democratization related, in particular, with the emergence of political parties and public associations of various orientation, Faculty of statehood with trade unions and other public organizations has determined the need to revise the concepts of official (official) crime and officials that have developed in the Soviet criminal law and reflected in the existing legislation. The consequence of this was the emergence of two independent chapters in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: "crimes against the interests of the service in commercial and other organizations" (ch. 23) and "crimes against state power, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments" (ch. thirty). The crimes against public authorities, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments include: abuse of authority (Art. 285), exemption of officials (Art. 286), refusal to provide information to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation or the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation ( Art. 287), assigning authority of an official (Art. 288), illegal participation in business activities (Art. 289), receiving a bribe (Art. 290), a gift of a bribe (Article 291), a service face (art. 292), negligence (Art. 293).

Unlike the previously active Code in the title of ch. 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 1996 is more definitely reflected generic objectcrimes, responsibility for which the commitment is regulated in this chapter: state power, interests of civil service and service in local governments.

Governmentin the Russian Federation (legislative, executive, judicial) is carried out by the President, the Federal Assembly (Federation Council and the State Duma), the Government, the courts of the Russian Federation. State power in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (republics, edges, regions, cities of the federal importance, the autonomous region, autonomous districts) is carrying out the bodies of representative, executive and judicial (constitutional (statutory) court, the magistrates) of the authorities. The public service means professional activities to ensure the execution of powers of state bodies (Art. 2 of the Federal Law "On the Fundamentals of the State Service of the Russian Federation" dated July 5, 1995). Service in local governments (in cities, areas, villages, etc.) is professional activities on an ongoing basis in local governments to fulfill the powers of these bodies on solving local issues (Article 1 of the Federal Law "on the general principles of the organization local governments in the Russian Federation "of August 22, 1995). Local governments independently manage municipal property, form, approve and execute the local budget, establish local taxes and fees, carry out the protection of public order, solve other issues of local importance.

The interests of the state and municipal service

The interests of the state and municipal servicecompared primarily in a clear, full and timely implementation of the tasks of public administration, respectively, before each state body and body of local self-government. At the same time, employees of these bodies should strictly be guided by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal laws, other regulatory acts and job descriptions. They are obliged to recognize, abide by and protect the rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen. However, as noted in the decree of the President of the Russian Federation of June 6, 1996 No. 810 "On measures to strengthen discipline in the public service system", the formation of Russian statehood is often hampered as a result of a weak executive discipline and irresponsibility of officials and employees of federal executive bodies, organs State power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments leading to violation or non-fulfillment of federal laws, decrees of the President of the Russian Federation and decisions of the courts.

In this way, generic objectcrimes included in ch. 30 of the Criminal Code is the normal activity of the public office in the person of state bodies of legislative, executive and judiciary, local governments, state and municipal institutions, as well as management apparatus in the Armed Forces, other troops (internal, border, railway, etc. ) and military formations of the Russian Federation to fulfill the tasks facing them. In addition to this basic object, these crimes, depending on the specific circumstances of the commission, are able to cause physical harm to citizens, property damage to citizens, commercial and other organizations, seriously violate the constitutional and other rights of citizens, to cause other harm to the interests of society and the state.

The second distinguishing feature of crimes against state power, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments is that they are committed special subjects,i.e., persons characterized by certain features compared with the general subject. These crimes are committed as if from the inside, i.e., employees of state or municipal bodies, state or municipal institutions, military personnel entrusted to the public authority with certain powers and using these powers in criminal activity. In most of the compositions of crimes included in ch. 30 of the Criminal Code, such a subject is executive.At the same time, in a note 4 to Art. 285 of the Criminal Code states that in cases specifically provided for by the relevant articles, the responsibility for crimes against public authorities, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments are carried civil servants and employees of local governmentsnon-number of officials. There are two such cases: assigning authority of an official (Art. 288) and a service claim (Art. 292).

According to Note 1 to Art. 285, officersas subjects of crimes against state power, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments, persons constantly recognize persons constantly, temporarily or on the special authority of the representatives of the authorities or performing organizational and administrative, administrative and economic functions in state bodies, local governments, state and municipal institutions, as well as in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops and military structures of the Russian Federation. Thus, the law very clearly allocates two groups of citizens falling under the notion of an official. The first of them make up the faces, constantly, temporarily or by the special authority of the functions of the representative of the authorities.

Content concept "Representative of power" in relation to all cases of its use in Articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation disclosed in the note to Art. 318 UK: A representative of the authorities recognizes the official of a law enforcement or regulatory body, as well as a different officer, endowed with the manner prescribed managing authority in relation to persons who are not from him in official addiction. When comparing this definition with the definition of an official, its tautology is found: the official is an official, and an official is a person who performs the functions of the representative of the authorities, that is, the officials of the official.

In this regard, it retains its significance to clarify the concept of a representative of the authorities, contained in the decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the USSR of March 30, 1990 No. 4 "On judicial practice in cases of abuse of power or official position, exceeding power or official authority, negligence and official ", where the representative of the government is characterized by the fact that it is endowed with the right within its competence to make requirements, and also make decisions that are mandatory for execution by citizens or enterprises, institutions, organizations regardless of their departmental affiliation and subordination. The activities of the representative of the authorities are based on relationships with persons who are not in his official submission, depending on it. Many representatives of the authorities generally do not have subordinate to them in the service of individuals, but have powerful powers towards a wide, indefinite circle of citizens (for example, an investigator, tax inspector, police officers, etc.).

Representatives of the authorities carry out the functions of federal state power (legislative, executive, judicial), state power of the subjects of the Federation, as well as the powerful powers of local self-government.

Legislature

Persons engaged in state positions of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation,persons who occupy posts established by the constitutions or the charters of the Federation's constituents for the direct execution of government authorities (presidents of the republics, governors or other heads of subjects of the Federation, heads of legislative and executive authorities of the subjects of the Federation, deputies of representative bodies of the subjects of the Federation, members of the government, etc.) .

Local Government

Head of Local Self-Government -a job officer leading to local governments in the territory of the municipality. In accordance with Art. 16 of the Federal Law "On General Principles of Local Self-Government Organization in the Russian Federation", the heads of the municipality should be elected by the population, although now many of them continue to work as intended. The name of the head of the local government (the head of the administration, the mayor, chairman, the headman, etc.) and the terms of its powers are determined by the charter of the municipality.

Crimes against state power, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments need distinguish(misconduct), entailing only disciplinary, administrative or material responsibility. Regulatory acts regulating the disciplinary responsibility of employees are: Federal Law "On Fundamentals of the State Service of the Russian Federation", Disciplinary Charter of the Armed Forces, the Regulation on the passage of the service in the internal affairs bodies, the Regulation on the passage of the service in the tax police bodies and others. The difference between crimes and The service of the service is carried out according to the degree of public danger, the criterion of which is primarily the severity of the consequences of the official offense, as well as some other circumstances specified in the articles of the Criminal Code.

In conclusion of the general characterization of crimes against state authorities, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments, it should be said that the problems of criminal liability for official crimes are thoroughly investigated in the works of A. A. Zhizhinko, B. V. Srednyov, V. F. Kirichenko, N. S. Leukina, M. D. Lysova, A. B. Sakharov, A. Ya. Svellova, A. N. Trainina, B. S. Trevsky, V. N. Shiryaeva, A. Ya. Estrin and other criminologists .

Section X of a special part of the Criminal Code includes 4 chapters:

Chapter 29 "Crimes against the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state" (Art. Art. 275 - 284 of the Criminal Code);

Chapter 30 "Crimes against state power, public service and service in local self-government bodies" (Art. Art. 285 - 293 of the Criminal Code);

Chapter 31 "Crimes against Justice" (Art. Art. 294 - 316 of the Criminal Code);

Chapter 32 "Crimes against the Control Procedure" (Art. Art. 317 - 330 of the Criminal Code).

The main focus of all these crimes is against state power, the functioning of which they cause significant harm or threaten its causation. At the same time, each of these crimes groups encroaches the functioning of various branches of government - legislative, executive, judicial.

Acts, responsibility for which is provided for in chapter 30 of the Criminal Code, are of particular danger. These crimes are committed by persons holding positions in the state office or local governments, and therefore criminal activities not only cause harm to citizens, society or state, but also discredits power, undermines its authority, gives rise to distrust of the authorities in the eyes of the population.

Chapter 30 of the Criminal Code includes the compositions of crimes encroaching on a single generic object - normal activities of state authorities, local governments, state and municipal institutions, as well as the normal activities of the relevant bodies in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops and the formations of the Russian Federation.

The activities of economic partnerships, production and consumer cooperatives, public organizations, as well as foreign firms are not subject to the crime under consideration. Crimes aimed against the interests of this kind of organizations that are not state or municipal, encroach on the normal functioning of the economy and are subject to qualifications under Art. 201-204 of the Criminal Code.

Under civil service It is understood by professional activities to ensure the execution of powers of state bodies.

Service in local governments - This is the professional activities carried out on an ongoing basis in these bodies on the execution of the powers of these bodies in solving local issues.

Communication against civil service - These are provided for by the Criminal Code of socially dangerous acts committed mainly by officials who use their official position contrary to the interests of the service, which cause (may cause) a significant harm to the normal activities of state bodies and local governments.

Institution A non-profit organization created by the owner for the implementation of management, socio-cultural or other functions of a non-commercial nature (Article 120 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) is recognized. In this case, we are talking about budget and autonomous institutions created by the state or body of local self-government. They are state and municipal institutions, decisive management tasks, educational institutions, institutions of culture, science, health, physical culture and sports, social protection systems and social services.

State Corporation The non-profit organization established by the Russian Federation on the basis of a property contribution and established on the basis of a federal law for the implementation of social, managerial or other socially useful functions (Article 7.1 of the Federal Law No. 7-FZ "On Non-Profit Organizations") is recognized .

Other troops - These are the internal troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia and civil defense troops. To military formations according to Part 6 of Art. 1 of the Federal Law "On Defense" includes engineering and road-building formations with federal executive bodies. In addition, the military service is executed in the bodies of the Federal Security Service, the Foreign Intelligence Service, federal state protection bodies, the federal body of ensuring the mobilization training bodies of the Russian Federation, the Federal Body of Special Communications and Information, Military Units of the State Fire Service of the Russian Emergencies Ministry and the Military Systems Special formations.

FROM objective side The crimes under consideration are characterized by two signs. First, crimes are committed through the use of their official positions by the relevant persons, secondly, these crimes are committed against the interests of the service. To establish signs of a crime, it is necessary to find out the powers of this person defined by the relevant provision, charter, instructions or other regulatory act, which provides for the rights and obligations of this person. Under using your official authority It is understood by the actions of the person arising from his official authority and related to the exercise of the rights and obligations that this person is endowed by the position occupied by him.

Sign of use of your authority contrary to the interests of the service This means that the actions of the person in their content contradict the tasks and goals for which the corresponding authority functions.

Acts provided for by Art. 285, 286, 286 1, 288, Part 2 of Article 292, 292 1, and 293 of the Criminal Code, entail criminal liability only when the consequences specified in these articles, i.e. These compositions are described in law as material. In the articles of the Criminal Code, no criteria are not proposed to determine a significant violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens, organizations, societies or states, as well as criteria for the separation of a significant violation of serious consequences.

Under significant violation of the rights of citizens or organizations You should understand violation of the rights and freedoms of individuals and legal entities guaranteed by the generally accepted principles and norms of international law, the Constitution of the Russian Federation (for example, the rights to respect for the honor and dignity of the personality, personal and family life of citizens, the right to the integrity of the dwelling and the secret of correspondence, telephone conversations, Postal, telegraph and other messages, as well as legal protection rights and access to justice, including the right to an effective remedy in the state body and compensation for damage caused by the crime, etc.). When evaluating the materiality of harm, it is necessary to take into account the degree of negative impact of an unlawful act on the normal work of the organization, the nature and size of material damage incurred by it, the number of victims of citizens, the severity of physical, moral or property harm caused to them, etc. Under a violation of the legitimate interests of citizens or organizations, it should be understood, in particular, the creation of obstacles in satisfaction with citizens or organizations of their needs that do not contradict the norms of law and public morality (for example, the creation of an obstacle officer, limiting the opportunity to choose the organization for law in their discretion cooperation).

Under heavy The consequences of the qualifying sign of the crime, as provided for by part 3 of Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and paragraph "in" part 3 of Article 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, should be understood as the consequences of committing a crime in the form of major accidents and a long-lasting stop of transport or production process, other violation of the organization's activities, causing significant material Damage, causing death by negligence, suicide or attempted suicide of the victim, etc.

In order to investigate the above crimes with the material compositions, it is necessary to find out whether damaged to the rights and interests of harm to the causal connection with the violation of their official authority admitted to the official person.

Other formulations of this head of the Criminal Code. 285 1, 285 2, 285 3, 287, 289, 290, 291 and Part 1 of Article 262 of the Criminal Code are formulated in law as formal, these crimes are completed from the moment of the action described in these articles.

FROM subjective side All crimes envisaged by the head of 30 of the Criminal Code are deliberate, with the exception of negligence. A number of compositions In addition to intents include as compulsory signs, the presence of a certain motive - mercenary or other personal interest (Art. 285, 292 of the Criminal Code).

Traveling interest - the desire of an official by committing unlawful actions to get for themselves or other persons benefit of a property that is not related to illegal gratuitous appeal in its favor or the benefits of other persons (for example, illegal benefits, loan, exemption from any property costs, return Property, debt repayment, payment services, tax payments, etc.).

Other personal interest - The desire of an official to benefit the non-property, due to such motives as careerism, family, desire to embellish the actual position, get a mutual service, enlist the support in solving any question, hide their incompetence, etc.

Subject The crimes under consideration can be three categories of persons:

Any persons who have reached the age of 16 may be responsible only for granting a bribe from a job person (Art. 291, 291.1 of the Criminal Code);

Any government officials and employees of local governments are responsible for the assignment of the authority of the official and the service claim (Art. 288, 292 of the Criminal Code);

Officials are involved in all other crimes.

According to Note 1 to Art. 285 of the Criminal Code "officials in the articles of this chapter are recognized by persons constantly, temporarily or on the special authority of the representatives of the authorities or carrying out organizational and administrative, administrative and economic functions in state bodies, local governments, state and municipal institutions, state corporations, and Also in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops and military formations of the Russian Federation. "

In this way, the concept of an official is based on two criteria: functional responsibilities and the form of the body in which these duties are executed .

Based on the first criterion, officials are recognized by persons:

1) performing the functions of the representative of the authorities

According to the note to Art. 318 of the Criminal Code "A representative of the authorities in this article and other articles of this Code is recognized as an official of a law enforcement or regulatory body, as well as a different officary entrusted with the manner prescribed managing authority in relation to persons who are not from him in official addiction."

Representatives of power are characterized by the fact that:

They are endowed with authority;

These powers are distributed not only to those subordinate to them (many do not have them at all), but also on a wide, indefinite circle of persons.

Representatives of the authorities include representatives of all three branches of power:

a) legislative (deputies of all levels);

b) executive (employees of structures supporting the public order, leading the fight against crime providing state, fire, sanitary and epidemiological and other security - the Ministry of Internal Affairs, FSB, the Prosecutor's Office, the Ministry of Taxes and Claims, GTC, the Federal Sanitary and Epidemiological Supervision, State Forestry protection, etc.);

c) judicial (judge of the courts of all levels).

Technical workers and the inertate composition of legislative and executive bodies, prosecutorial-investigative, judicial, control and overall bodies (heads of the office, economic and legal departments, secretaries, referents, consultants) are not representatives of the authorities, but may be officials for other grounds.

2) performing functions :

- organizational and administratives under which the powers should be understood by the authority of the officials who are associated with the management of the labor team of the state body, the state or municipal institution (its structural unit), the state corporation, or in their official subordination to individual employees, with the formation of personnel composition and the definition of employee labor functions, with the organization of the procedure for passing the service, applying measures of encouragement or awarding, imposing disciplinary penalties, etc. Organizational and administrative functions include the authority of decision-making persons with legal importance and entailing certain legal consequences (for example, on issuing a medical personnel of temporary disability, establishing an employee of the institution of medical and social examination of the fact that a citizen of disability, receiving examinations and assessments of the member State examination (attestation) commission).

- administrative and economic . functions for the implementation of the authority of an official in the management and disposal of property and (or) with funds on balance and (or) bank accounts of organizations, institutions, military units and divisions, as well as for the commission of other actions (for example, to make decisions about accrual wages, premiums, monitoring the movement of material values, determining the order of their storage, accounting and controlling their spending).

The conclusion of a treaty between employees and the administration of full material responsibility for the safety of entrusted values \u200b\u200bin itself cannot serve as a basis for the recognition of an employee by an official. For this it is necessary that along with duties on direct storage of property, the financially responsible person also performed the functions for ordering and management.

The functions discussed above can be carried out or implemented constantly, temporarily or by special authority. As a general rule, the majority of officials perform such functions due to the constant position permanently. The execution of the officials of the official for a special authority means that the person performs the functions of the representative of the authorities, performs organizational and administrative or administrative and economic functions entrusted to him by law, other regulatory legal act, order or order of a higher officary person or eligible to the authority or official (for example, the functions of the jury). The officials of an official for a special authority can be carried out within a certain time or once, as a rule, carry short-term or one-time character, and can also be combined with the main work. With the temporary execution of the officials of the official or when they are fulfilled, the person can be recognized only during the execution of functions assigned to it. Persons temporarily or by the special authority of the authorities of the authorities include: jaages in courts; traffic police and prosecutor's office; Representatives of the public officially involved in the implementation of powerful powers to combat crime, the implementation of supervisory and control functions.

If the person appointed to the position with a violation of the requirements or restrictions established by law or other regulatory legal acts to a candidate for this position (for example, in the absence of a diploma on the highest professional education, the necessary experience of the work, if there is a criminal record, etc.), From mercenary or other personal interest used official authority, contrary to the interests of the service, either accomplished actions that clearly overlooking its powers, entailed a significant violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens or organizations or protected by the law of the interests of society or the state, then such actions should be qualified according to abuse officials authority or as an excess of official powers.

Separate employees of state-owned enterprises, institutions, organizations (teachers, doctors, employees of public utilities, catering, service sector) can be carried out either professional production or official functions. Thus, the teacher may be a member of the examination, qualifying or graduation commission, from the decision of which depends on the educational institution, the qualifications assignment, the issuance of a diploma; The doctor can define the patient's disability, to be a member of the Commission, which determines the disability determining the professional suitability exempt from service in the armed forces. On the other hand, the teacher can carry out the educational process; The doctor is to diagnose, appoint and conduct a course of treatment, carry out operations. In the first case, the names are officials, and in the second - they do not belong to those.

In the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops, military (special) formations and bodies carrying out functions to ensure the defense and security of the state, officials, constantly, temporarily or by special authority performing organizational and administrative and (or) administrative and economic functions may Represents supervisors on official position and (or) military rank. Heads on the official position are the persons who are subordinate to the service. These should be attributed to:

Persons engaged in the relevant military posts according to the staff (for example, the commander of the department, company, head of the shelf service regiment);

Persons temporarily acting on the relevant military office, as well as temporarily executing officials on a special authority.

Persons of civilian personnel are chiefs for subordinate servicemen in accordance with the staffable position. The heads of military rank are defined in Article 36 of the Charter of the Internal Service of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation (in particular, sergeants and the elders are heads of military rank for soldiers and sailors only one with them of the military unit).

In accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3, notes to Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - under persons engaged in state positions of the Russian Federation, persons who occupy government positions established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal constitutional laws and federal laws to directly execute the powers of federal state bodies (item 2 notes), and under persons engaged in state positions of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, persons holding positions established by the constitutions or the charters of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation to directly execute the powers of the state bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (paragraph 3 of the Notes).

The consolidated list of state positions of the Russian Federation was approved by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of January 11, 1995 No. 32 (as amended from 01.12.2008).

Also, the subject of increased responsibility is the head of the local government, under which only the head of the municipality should be understood - the highest official of the municipality, endowed with the charter of the municipal education with its own authority to address local issues (Article 36 of the Federal Law of October 6, 2003 No. 131- FZ "On the general principles of organizing local governments in the Russian Federation").

Second criteriondefining an official is the place of its activities. According to a note on Article 285 of the Criminal Code, only a person who performs the above-mentioned functions "in state bodies, local governments, state and municipal institutions, state corporations, as well as in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops and military structures of the Russian Federation may be recognized as an official "

In cases where the act containing signs of abuse of official powers (Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) or exceeding official powers (Article 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), was committed by an official to eliminate the danger directly to the threatening person, protected by law in the interests of society or the state, and this danger is not Could have been eliminated with other means, such an act cannot be recognized as criminal provided that no exceeding the limits of extreme necessity (Article 39 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) was not allowed. It cannot be recognized as criminal acts of an official associated with the use of official powers who caused damage to the interests of the criminal law, if they were committed in fulfillment of an obligatory order for him or order (article 42 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

Foreign officials and officials of a public international organization who committed a crime provided for in articles in ch. 30 of the Criminal Code are responsible for the specified articles in cases provided for by international treaties of the Russian Federation.

A private person can not be the performer (as well as the aircraft) of crimes against state power, the interests of the civil service and service in local governments, but it is quite legal to bring them to responsibility for complicity in these crimes as an organizer, instigator or accomplicice, as well as Participation in the commission of some of these crimes in the composition of the organized group (paragraph "b" part 3 of Art. 287, paragraph "A" Part 4 of Art. 290 of the Criminal Code).