The initiative should allow Russia to fulfill the recommendations of the group of States against corruption (GRECO)
The arbitrators prepare criminal liability for the use of authority “contrary to the objectives of its activity”. United Russia Anatoly Election to the state Duma suggested to Supplement the criminal code with new articles, according to which promises, offers or requests to take, to transmit the bribe or the commercial bribe item enough to be involved in the case.
United Russia Deputy Anatoly Vyborny submitted to the state Duma the bill developed in the framework of the implementation of Russia’s obligations to implement the provisions of the Convention of the Council of Europe on criminal liability for corruption. The document aims to implement the recommendations of GRECO (group of States against corruption), the data of the Russian Federation in the third round of assessment of national legislation and practices in the fight against corruption on the topic of “Criminalization of criminal acts,” says Vyborny. He recalls that next week Russia will report on the implementation of the recommendations. The document is also sent to the government of the Russian Federation and the Supreme court.
According to the document in the criminal code will be a new article providing punishment for the promise, offer or request to accept or give a bribe (article 291.3) or the commercial bribe item (clause 204.3). So, for example, to years of imprisonment with a fine of five times the amount of the bribe or bribes will face someone who will promise, will offer or ask to take them. For particularly large promises of commercial bribery will face imprisonment from three to seven years with a 30-fold penalty, with the promise of a similar bribes — for up to eight years in prison with similar material the recovery in favor of the Treasury.
In addition, the Election proposes to Supplement the criminal code article “Abuse of influence” (article 291.4). It will be punished illegal transfer, offer or promise (natural persons, personally or through an intermediary) of money, securities, other property, services of property or non-property nature “to use its influence on the decision by an official, foreign official or an official of a public international organization.” For it will face imprisonment of up to two years with a fine of up to tenfold sum of a bribe. The consent of individuals to use their influence would under the draft be punished with imprisonment up to three years with a fine up to 15-fold amount of the bribe.
Lawyer Bureau “Business fairway” Anton Senichev considers a positive idea to introduce penalties for the promise, offer or request participation in commercial bribery or bribery, and influence peddling.
According to experts, the corrupt officials will be easier to identify and they will have fewer loopholes to bypass the law. More participants in corrupt collusion will be punished, which should reduce willing to participate in it because of the increased risk.
— These articles eliminate the gaps in legislation that hinder the quality of the fight against corruption and punishment, explains Senichev.
Professor of the Financial University under the government of the Russian Federation Ivan Solovyov believes that the expansion of the list of corruption crimes predictable and can be encouraged, because the more detail in this area, the lower the risks of unwarranted criminal prosecution.
Only this time, the bill is aimed at a broader range of persons: not only officials, but by other persons who may be involved in the orbit of corruption risks and opportunities, he says. This, of course, subject to design standards officials to commercial structures are unlikely to be much enthusiasm from the offered prospects. It’s one thing to actively blame the officials and law enforcement authorities of corruption, and another thing to themselves to comply with international and national anti-corruption standards.
The penalty for non-material bribe
The draft toughens punishment for bribing an official, foreign official or official of a public international organization (paragraph 1 of article 291). For this the offender will face up to four years imprisonment and two years with a fine in the amount of fivefold to tenfold sum of a bribe. This change is the attribution of crimes to the category of medium gravity will allow to implement the recommendations of GRECO, stated in the explanatory note to the draft, in which it is necessary to increase the minimum two-year Statute of limitations for such crimes.
The document also introduces the concept of intangible, non-material bribes, which are incalculable, says Elected. For this purpose, in particular, to correct, item 290 (“bribe reception”) at which such crimes will be attributed not only to receive money, securities, other property or illegal rendering of services of property character, and a “moral nature,” receipt “of moral rights or other improper advantage”. The same clarification appears in the article on commercial bribery.
These innovations in the explanatory note to the project also are necessary to implement the recommendations of GRECO. According to him, Russia “it is necessary to expand the scope of the provisions on bribery of the criminal code, so they definitely cover any form of improper advantage, including any benefits of intangible nature, regardless of whether they have a measurable market value or not,” reads the accompanying materials to the project.
Criminal proceedings without the complaint of the victim
Also Anatoly Vyborny proposes to allow investigators and victims without complaint companies to initiate criminal proceedings under articles of Chapter 23 of the criminal code (“Crimes against interests of service in commercial and other organizations”), which are the articles of commercial bribery, abuse of authority and others. Now for the initiation of criminal cases will need the statement of the head of the organization.
Election also refers to the need for adjustments in connection with the GRECO recommendations. Now businessmen do not report such crimes, said the Deputy.
— It turns out that the person who committed the crime remains unpunished. No matter the public or private sector, if a crime is committed, then he should be held accountable. Impunity, as a rule, leads to other crimes, says United Russia.
Lawyer Senichev believes that this novel is able to “reduce the level of corruption, where perpetrators avoid responsibility, if you agree with the affected companies.”
Professor Solovyov believes that the proposal requires a thorough analysis.
— As recently as a year and a half ago just were in the middle of conversations that criminal cases in a number of formulations with the damage and harm (e.g., fraud) without the presence of the particular victim and his statements should not be excited, — it reminds.
Criminal penalties for arbitrators
In addition, the bill introduces criminal liability for arbitrators, including for foreign referees for the use of their authority contrary to the objectives of its activity and in order to extract benefits for themselves or others or harming other persons. Now the penalty for such violation provided by private notaries and auditors (article 202 of the criminal code — maximum penalty of five years imprisonment). Vyborny said that “the arbitrator fell out of the cage of legal regulation” in this matter, and because the bill corrects this defect.
Responsible administrator Arbitration center Andrey Gorlenko draws attention to the fact that the novels of the draft law raise a number of issues, despite, apparently, a good goal pursued by the authors. St. 202 of the criminal code now provides for liability for abuse of authority by private notaries and auditors, but the status of the arbitrator and notary public, auditor different. At last it is permanent, and the arbitrator only temporary, occurs in humans at the time of his appointment for consideration of the case and ceases after a decision is rendered.
— Not very clear who the “foreign arbitrator”. A foreign citizen, and why is it singled out? And where the place of arbitration should be to become the subject of crime in Russia or abroad too? The law on arbitration of such differentiation (Russian — foreign) does not contain, says Gorlenko.
— Also in arbitration there is always a winning side and the losing, as a rule, unhappy. This increases the risk of applications losing party and subsequent inspections, he said. In turn, this may discourage qualified arbitrators to participate in the arbitration, fearing such pressure. All this may significantly reduce the attractiveness of Russia as a place of arbitration, and disputes of the Russian business will again begin to “leak” abroad.