Some directions of improvement of Chapter 22 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

Amendments and additions to Chapter 22 of the Criminal Code of the RussianFederation in 2010 appeared to be insufficient for its improvement. The decriminalisation of illegal enterprise is proposed as one ofthe ways for further improvement of Chapter (Article 171 of the Criminal Code of the RF). Simultaneously with this approach, the decriminalisationof illegal bank activity is also set forth (Article 172 of the Criminal Code of the RF). Instead, it is proposed to establishcriminal responsibility only for illegal income. Moreover, it is supposed to put forward the decriminalisation of "self-money laundering"(Article 174-1 of the Criminal Code of the RF), and malicious evasion from repayment of creditor debts (Article 177 of the CriminalCode of the RF). For the development of the Chapter it is important to make changes in the disposition of articles 178, 193,195-197 as inthe present edition, these norms are not practically applicable. Furthermore, the next step towards the improvement of Chapter 22, whichis necessary to consider, is bringing legal entities to criminal responsibility for the commission of crimes in the sphere of economic activity,and they should be criminally responsible in accordance with foreign criminal law rules. For legal and criminal measures to betaken towards legal entities, it is essential to view caution, fine, deprivation of license on work, deprivation of the right in specified activities,liquidation of a legal entity. The improvement of Chapter 22 is expected to have a revision of the system of sanctions applied toindividuals as well. At present, for economic crimes, individuals are often given custodial sentences, which is contradictory to the reformof the penal system in the Russian Federation targeted at reducing the number of offenders sentenced to imprisonment. A sanctionthat can be an alternative to custodial sentence, a fine, should be viewed. Although a fine is available in the sanctions of legal norms inChapter 22, the amount of a fine is insufficient. Thus, it is obvious to conduct revision of those amounts. The confiscation of propertycan also be viewed as an alternative to custodial sentence. Due to forfeiture, a convicted person completely loses income and propertyreceived from crime in the sphere of economic activity. In the present edition of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, propertyconfiscation is not a criminal penalty but it is another measure of criminal law, on the ground of that, the existing criminal law lacks themost effective kind of punishment. Therefore, forfeiture must be a criminal punishment. The process of developing Chapter 22 of theCriminal Code of the Russian Federation involves both the criminalization of new offences that are unknown to the domestic legislaturebut prohibited by foreign criminal law and the decriminalisation of acts that have lost their former social danger.

Keywords

Authors

References