Analysis of the objective evidence of the receipt and bribery

Тип работы:
Юридические науки

Узнать стоимость новой

Детальная информация о работе

Выдержка из работы

In conclusion, the author notes that today the settlement of a conflict of interest from a practical point of view, unfortunately, quite problematic. Commission for the Settlement are ineffective due to unclear language norms, gaps and conflicts in the legislation. But despite this local governments, as well as municipal employees must search for specific ways and means of resolving conflicts of interest, guided by the norms that exist.
1. Ob obshhih principah organizacii mestnogo samoupravlenija v Rossijskoj Federacii: Federal'-nyj zakon ot 06 oktjabrja 2003 N 131-FZ (red. ot 25. 07. 2011) // Sobranie zakonodatel'-stva RF. 2003. № 40. St. 3822.
2. Ancupov A. Ja., Shipilov A.I. Problema konflikta. Analiticheskij obzor / Mezhdisciplinarnyj bibliotechnyj ukazatel'-. M., 2013. 549s.
3. Channov S.E., Konflikt interesov na municipal'-noj sluzhbe: problemnye aspekty realizacii novogo zakona // & quot-Rossijskaja justicija& quot-, 2013. № 11. S. 27−32.
4. Butova T.V., Anisimov A.A. Osobennosti sotrudnichestva vlasti i bankovskogo biznesa v gorode Moskve. Zhurnal «Municipal'-naja akademija», № 2, aprel'-, 2013.
© N O. Udachin, 2015
УДК 351. 25
N.O. Udachin
Student of the faculty of & quot-State and municipal management& quot- The Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow
Under the provisions of the Concept of administrative reform in the Russian Federation in the years 2006- 2010. a prerequisite for achieving the stated objectives in the administrative reform is to reduce the level of corruption in the executive branch, which significantly reduces the efficiency of public administration. The World Bank defines one every two years so-called index GRICS (Governance Research Indicator), by which evaluates the effectiveness of governance in 209 countries. Russia in terms of government efficiency, the quality of legislation, the rule of law and control of corruption is at the bottom of the rankings. The Criminal Code of criminal acts committed by officials assigned to Chapter 30 and called instead of & quot-malfeasance"- & quot-crimes against the state, the interests of public service and service in local government. "- This group of offenses can be defined as socially dangerous act (action or inaction), committed by the authorities and officials, thanks occupied their position and contrary to the interests of the service, and cause substantial harm to the normal functioning of public authorities, the interests of the public service or service in the local government or contain real threat of such harm.
the administrative reform, the quality of legislation, the public service.
The exact definition of the boundaries of the objective side of a certain type of crime (in other words — the scope of the objective side of the offense) is essential for proper criminal legal qualification acts. This primarily concerns the application of the provisions of criminal law institutions as the completed and uncompleted crime, complicity in a crime
Since the adoption of bribes as part of the will of the objective side of taking a bribe, is the will of (illegal remuneration requirement, the expression of consent to accept it) even in the absence of any action to transfer the subject of a bribe, it seems appropriate to qualify as actions aimed directly at accepting a bribe, ie as an attempt to
bribe (this is especially evident in the case where the bribe-taker expects that bribe is a bribe-giver had with them). In practice, such actions, however, qualify as a preparation for taking bribes.
It should be emphasized that the objective side of bribery does not include those actions for which fulfillment is given a bribe. To qualify as a completed deed receiving a bribe, it is enough to bribe was received for such actions. It does not matter whether or not the actually performed these actions.
Since, as stressed by the Plenum of the Supreme Court in its judgment of 10 February 2000 № 6 «On judicial practice in cases of bribery and commercial bribery,& quot- you want to install the specific facts of the particular case under consideration, the connivance and patronage should be determined not by the nature of the service relationship and the presence of specific forms of occurrence of which was only possible as a result of the (imperfect) head of operations for the benefit of the slave. As such, can be: extraordinary unwarranted movement in the service, extraordinary special rank assignment, appointment if there is more than worthy applicants, undeserved promotion, concealment committed by subordinates or submitted to the face of the wrongful conduct and committing similar acts are not caused by necessity. As part of the review of the provisions relating to the objective side of taking a bribe, to emphasize the following: in the case of official money, securities and other assets for alleged actions (or inaction) that it cannot be due to lack of official authority, or the inability to use their official position, the act should be qualified in the presence of intent for the acquisition of these values as fraud under Art. 159 of the Criminal Code. The owner of property in such cases shall be responsible for the attempted bribery, if the transmission of values was designed to perfectly willing for him to action (or inaction) by the said person.
It should again be recalled that the acceptance of a bribe — the formal structure of a crime. It is recognized consummated act since the adoption of an official at least part of the bribe. In cases where advance due to the bribe was not obtained due to circumstances beyond the control of the bribe-taker (e.g. due to suppression of the crime operational police officers at the time of transfer), his action should be qualified as an attempt to bribe on p. 3 art. 30 and Art. 290 of the Criminal Code.
The law says that the bribe receives official (in person or by proxy), but is silent about in whose favor granted pecuniary benefits. It is obvious that not only the provision of property in favor of the official himself, but also for the benefit of his relatives can be seen as a bribe. Bribe will provide property for the benefit of any other private person, if the official is interested in providing this. Thus, it is possible to obtain bribes in favor of third parties.
The adoption of an official & quot-bribes"- in the public or the public interest (for example, the head of the state institution receives from a commercial organization computer and office equipment necessary for the efficient operation of the institution, promising to provide the organization with certain benefits) is not considered as bribery, although it is definitely harmful and negative phenomenon.
In summary of the content of objective evidence of bribe-taking, should pay attention to the following provisions.
1. Kapinus O.S. Izmenenija v zakonodatel'-stve o dolzhnostnyh prestuplenijah: voprosy kvalifikacii i osvobozhdenija vzjatkodatelja ot otvetstvennosti // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2011. N 2. //www. elibrary. ru.
2. Galahova A.V. Dolzhnostnye prestuplenija/A.V. Galahova-. M. Jurist#, 2012- 230s.
3. Mamedov S.A. K voprosu o sootvetstvii antikorupcionnyh norm, predusmotrennyh UK RF, mezhdunarodnym jetalonam // Chelovek: prestuplenie i nakazanie, 2014, № 5 // www. elibrary. ru.
© N O. Udachin, 2015
УДК 351. 65
N.O. Udachin
Student of the faculty of & quot-State and municipal management& quot- The Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow
The current stage of development and change society is characterized by global economic, organizational and ideological, systemic reform of the state apparatus. In this regard, priority issues become law enforcement and the fight against crime. In his annual message of the President of the Russian Federation focus is on anti-corruption component. The most dangerous and widespread form of corruption acts of bribery. At the same time, this phenomenon is one of the absolute leaders in the degree of high latency and masking. Since 1997, the date of entry into force of the new Criminal Code of the Russian Federation the number of reported cases of bribery in Russia increased by 1.9 times.
development, anti-corruption component, economic.
The subjective aspect of bribe-taking, according to the overwhelming majority of scientists, is characterized by guilt as a direct intent and an ax to grind.
Taker aware that receives property benefits for illegal actions (inaction) committed by abuse of official position or for general patronage or connivance in the service, and wants it.
To qualify as an offense of bribery does not matter whether the person intends to taking a bribe to perform the action for which the bribe is given. The determining factor is the fact that wishes to obtain a bribe bribe and realizes that receives a bribe complexity of disclosure of intent with a bribe because the composition is designed as formal. The law also defines the intent with respect to the material composition.
The subjective side of crime is characterized by direct intention. Giving a bribe, the person is aware of the social danger of his actions, foresees that by doing so committed the bribery of public officials and wishes, hoping that the officer will make due bribe actions (inaction) of the service. Subject of crime — any person who has attained the age of sixteen. In order to facilitate the fight against bribery note to Art. 291 of the Criminal Code provides for exemption from criminal liability of the person who gave the bribe, if there has been a solicitation or if the person has voluntarily reported bribery bodies entitled to initiate criminal proceedings mandatory feature of any corpus delicti is a subjective side. This feature is for the majority of malfeasance is characterized as specified in the Criminal Code, only intentional fault.
The last mandatory feature of any corpus delicti — the subject. Subject malfeasance (except Art. 288 -misappropriation of official- and Art. 291- bribery) are persons endowed with the appropriate authority to the service. Employees of government, public service and service in local government. According to the note. 1 of Art. 285 of the Criminal Code, the subjects of malfeasance can be four categories of employees:
1) Officials — & quot-persons engaged in a permanent or temporary functions of representative government, as well as holding a permanent or temporary positions in organizations associated with the implementation of organizational — managerial or administrative — economic duties, or perform such duties in these organizations on special authority. Currently, the Russian legal doctrine has no common approach on the recognition of official persons performing the above functions in non-governmental organizations & quot-(see. Encyclopedic. Law Dictionary 1996). In this definition to these organizations include government agencies, local governments, state and municipal agencies, as well as the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops and military formations. For face recognition officers is essential content and nature of their functions. There are whole categories of persons who are in some situations must be carried out, and in the other — professional functions (health workers, teachers at all levels). In some cases, they perform purely professional duties (diagnosis, the operation of an illegal fee). In this situation, these and other workers performing only their professional or business functions, cannot be recognized by officials and responsible for the crimes covered by the Criminal Code gl. 30 (bribery, etc.).

Показать Свернуть
Заполнить форму текущей работой