Tendencies in Development of Russian Criminal Law, Protecting Public Relations in the Field of Economic Activity, in Historical Perspective

The article considers the sources of criminal legislation of both the Russian Empire and the RSFSR Criminal Code of 1960 as amended in 1996, which contain standards similar to those that make up Chapter 22 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It has been found out that criminal liability for committing acts similar to those prohibited by the norms that make up the specified Chapter was first provided for by the Council Code of 1649, according to which only the counterfeiting and corrupted rule were referred to the designated acts. The same concerns the Military Article 1714. The Code of Laws of the Russian Empire of 1832 as well as the Criminal and Correctional Penal Code of 1845 expanded the scope of these acts, with violations of the Customs Regulations and regulations on drinking taxes and excise taxes added to counterfeiting and corruption. The same could be found in the Criminal Code of 1903, which included liability for the disclosure of secrets and unscrupulous bankruptcy. The Soviet criminal law with its Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1922, 1926, and 1960 also had an expanded scope of acts, which were defined as the norms of the Chapters on economic crimes. Liability for acts similar to those prohibited by the norms of Chapter 22 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation can be found only in the last edition of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1960, which was in force until 1997. Thus, the previous criminal legislation, especially the pre-Soviet criminal legislation, envisaged the liability for certain crimes similar to those prohibited by the norms of Chapter 22 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Having analyzed the range of crimes in the designated legislation with the use the comparison method, the author has concluded that the range of crimes had constantly been expanded. The same “expansion” was observed in the 1996 Criminal Code. The author concludes that the separate norms of Chapter 22 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation also provide for liability for acts that, by their legal nature, do not belong to the group in question. Thus, as historical experience shows, the “expansion” of criminal law interference in the sphere of economic activity is erroneous. Currently, the liberalization of Russian criminal legislation should bring about the tendency to decriminalize acts under Chapter 22 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Keywords

Authors

References