Art. 291 of the Criminal Code. Bribing an official

Bribery is considered the most widespread form of corruption in the modern world. Penetrating the activities of state institutions, it significantly undermines the authority of officials, discredits authorized bodies, violates the principle of social justice. Practice under Art. 291 of the Criminal Code shows that this illegal act is often accompanied by other crimes. They pose a particular danger when committed on a preliminary conspiracy. Let us further consider what a bribe is (Article 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

Punishment

The punishment for this crime is stipulated in art.291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In particular:

1. Bribery of officials through an intermediary or personally punished:

- a fine from 200 to 500 minimum monthly wages or in the amount of income / wages of the perpetrator for 2-5 months;

- Corrective labor for 1-2 years;

- arrest for 3-6 months;

- imprisonment up to 3 years.

2. The transfer of bribes to officials repeatedly or for the commission of deliberately unlawful acts / omissions shall be punished:

- a fine from 700 to 1000 minimum monthly wages or a wage / income amount for 7 months-1 year;

- imprisonment up to 8 years.

Note to Art. 291 of the Criminal Code

Legislation provides for the release of the guilty person from liability in a number of cases. In particular, a citizen will not be punished if:

1. From the side of the official, the extortion was confirmed and proved.
2. The perpetrator voluntarily informed the authorized bodies about the crime.

Legislation does not establish what amount is considered a bribe. An explanation of this issue is contained in one of the decisions of the Plenum of the Armed Forces. The document, in particular, points out that for the qualification of the crime under art. 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the value characteristic of the transferred values or benefits does not matter.

Content of the wrongful act

The commentary to the Criminal Code clarifies the essence of the crime in question. An illegal act consists in the illegal delivery of material values or the provision of benefits of a property nature to a person who is on duty in state bodies. The crime's purpose is action / inaction on the part of an official who is part of his official powers, in favor of the bribe-taker or the citizens he represents. An illegal act is also committed for the promotion of employees by virtue of the position that it occupies, the fulfillment of instructions by another employee of state bodies. Punishment under Art. 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (in a new wording) also comes in the event that valuables were awarded or benefits were granted for general connivance or protection in the service of the guilty person or the person represented to them.

Completeness of crime

The commentary to the Criminal Code explains that the illegal delivery of valuables or the provision of any benefits are inextricably linked to their receipt. Thus, the latter can not take place if there was no first. Bribery, as well as obtaining it by an official who performs management activities in a commercial or other organization, is considered complete from the moment of acceptance of the transferred values, at least in part. A completed crime can not take place if the object has not been accepted. In this connection, the offer to the official of property benefit or material value, leaving the latter in clothes or on the employee's desk, sending them in a letter or postal parcel, handing them over to their relatives or an intermediary on the part of the recipient, if their acceptance does not follow, should not be qualified as The completed wrongful act. It should be regarded as an attempt to commit a crime under art. 291 of the Criminal Code.

An Important Moment

If the acceptance of values has not taken place due to circumstances beyond the control of the person who attempted to hand in or receive the item or bribe, this fact also provides for liability. In this case, the deed is seen as an attempt to give / accept bribes or unlawful remuneration against a background of commercial bribery. This definition can not characterize the expressed intention of a citizen to give / receive securities, money, other property or to provide the opportunity to use illegally material services, if the person has not taken any concrete action to implement the said.

Complicity

Through the unlawful provision of material goods or the delivery of valuables, a citizen may incline an employee to knowingly unlawful behavior (inaction / action) within the framework of his official authority (Part 2, Article 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The latter in itself is not considered a crime. In such cases, the guilty person is brought to justice not only for giving a bribe, but also for inciting (complicity) in the unlawful actions of an employee.

Subjects

Responsibility for a crime under art. 291 of the Criminal Code comes from 16 years. As subjects, citizens of Russia or of another state may act, as well as persons who do not have citizenship. The bribe taker may be:

1. Private person.
2. Employees of the state institution (authority).
3. An official who performs administrative functions in a commercial or other structure.

The type of the subject does not matter in the qualification of the crime. An official or an employee performing administrative functions who has offered a subordinate employee to achieve the desired inaction or action by the delivery of valuables or the provision of benefits will be held liable as a bribe-taker. The employee, who will agree on the fulfillment of the conditioned events and who delivered the agreed subject, will be involved as an accomplice.

The subjective side

The giving of a bribe is accompanied by a direct intent. Its content is that the offender grants an illegal compensation to an official for committing an act or abstaining from him with the use of his official position (authority) or for facilitating the achievement of the desired, general patronage or connivance with the perpetrator. In the event that the subject has faithfully misjudged the reason for the transfer, did not realize its illegitimacy, then the composition of the unlawful act is absent.

Qualifying signs

In Art. 291, part 2 establishes the type of crime - giving a bribe to an employee for the performance of a knowingly unlawful action / inaction. To impeach this guilty, it is necessary to prove the existence of intent. This means that it must be established that the bribe-taker realized that he is passing on values or providing benefits directly for an inaction / action by an official. The second qualifying sign is the repetition. She assumes that the crime is committed:

1. Previously tried by the same person.
2. At least two times a citizen who was not previously brought to criminal liability.

Under aggravating circumstances, giving a bribe is a serious crime. In the case of their absence, it qualifies as an unlawful act of medium gravity.

Features of recurrence

It is necessary to distinguish this feature from giving one bribe in two or more admission, as well as from continuing illegal delivery of values / granting of benefits for connivance and common patronage to the guilty or represented by them entities. The illegal remuneration of a group of officials for committing a crime by prior conspiracy can not be qualified as a repeated act. In the systematic delivery of valuables, the provision of property benefits to the employee for general connivance or patronage, the court must check whether these crimes are united by the bribe-maker's intent. In the absence of a sign of recurrence, this behavior must be considered as an ongoing crime in part 1 of this article.

Intermediary

The Plenum of the Supreme Council defined this entity as a person acting on behalf of the recipient or giving a bribe, directly effecting the delivery of the agreed subject. The mediator does not act on his own behalf, representing the interests of third parties. Unlike the bribe-taker, he does not seek at the expense of the transferred material remuneration to perform or abstain from carrying out certain actions for himself personally by the official. The conduct of the mediator is qualified as complicity in the crime, if he was aware of the wrongfulness of the event. In the practice of judicial and investigative bodies there are cases of so-called imaginary mediation.