Secret of correspondence: determination, violation, principles and requirements

Violation of the secrecy of correspondence in Russia is punishable by law. The regulatory acts establish liability for the manifestation of undue interest in the private life of citizens.

Relevance of the issue

With the development of technology and technology, various means of listening, audio, video recording and other surveillance tools are being improved. Currently, there is always a chance of hacking Internet pages containing confidential (personal) data, including correspondence with other persons. Unprotected are paper media. However, everyone has the right to privacy of correspondence. Non-compliance is fraught with criminal liability. In some cases, the law provides for the possibility of familiarization with the personal information of the subject. This is possible if there is reason to suspect a citizen of a crime, if this data can pose a security risk and in other similar situations. In all other cases, confidentiality must be maintained. The Constitution of the Russian Federation guarantees citizens the inviolability of their private life.

Criminal norms

The Criminal Code provides for Art. 137-139. They protect the inviolability of the home, the secrecy of correspondence / telephone conversations, the private lives of individuals. These standards have much in common. However, the legislator does not combine them into one article, but makes a division of acts. A common sign of crime is the fact of an encroachment on the freedoms established by the Constitution. The essence of differentiation is to single out the individual elements that make up the different structures of the attacks. For example, peeping into someone else's correspondence, eavesdropping on someone’s conversations does not always indicate a person’s desire to collect information about someone and use it for personal gain. Often people are driven by ordinary curiosity. In this regard, the legislation identifies a narrow norm relating to oral or written interaction between entities.

Secret of correspondence, telephone, other negotiations

Often the question arises: in what cases can we talk about an invasion of a person’s private life? Often, citizens in public transport or on the street talk quite loudly with someone on a variety of (including private) topics. Is it possible in such a situation to consider people passing by or nearby as criminals? In this case, the surrounding citizens are not violators. This is due to the fact that loudly speaking subjects do not take measures in order to maintain the confidentiality of information. But if, for example, a person standing nearby shows unhealthy interest and tries to look into the phone of another person, while he is chatting with someone, this behavior will be unlawful.

CC: Article 138

This norm provides for liability for violation of the secrecy of telegraph, mail and other messages, correspondence, negotiations. For this crime, the perpetrator may receive:

1. Fine up to 80 thousand rubles. or a penalty equal to half an income.
2. 360 hours obligatory or up to a year of corrective labor.

Aggravating circumstances

If the confidentiality of correspondence has not been respected by the subject who used his official position, he is threatened with:

1. Recovery in the amount of 100-300 thousand rubles. or component income for 1-2 g.
2. Mandatory work up to 480 hours.
3. Up to 4 years in prison.
4. Up to 4 months arrest.
5. Deprivation of the right to carry out professional activities of a certain type or to occupy relevant positions for 2-5 years.

Analysis of the act

The confidentiality of the correspondence will be considered non-observed at the moment when the perpetrator got acquainted with the contents of the message. The crime established by article 138 is considered formal. The object is the right of a person to keep secret the information present in messages received in a variety of ways (verbally, in writing on paper, using a telephone, computer, etc.).

Objective part

It consists of acquainting the perpetrator with the content of information that is passed on by one citizen to another. It should be noted that such a thing as “confidentiality of correspondence” does not exist for persons who are in places of serving a criminal sentence. The amount of information, the confidentiality of which has not been preserved, does not affect the qualification of the act.

Subjective side

It is characterized by the presence of intent. A person who has reached 16 years of age may be brought to justice as a guilty person. The criminal, getting acquainted with the content of other people's information, understands that his actions are illegal. However, he does nothing to keep the privacy of his correspondence. Part 2 of article 138 provides for a special entity. It is an official who used his official position to commit a crime.

Qualifying signs

Responsibility under article 138 is brought to those who deliberately familiarized themselves with the contents of telephone conversations, correspondence or messages of any type without receiving the court or one of the participants in the relevant relationship. As mentioned above, the subject of the crime in general cases is 16-year-old sane individuals. When an official commits an act, a more severe punishment is applied.

Case studies

Consider several cases of application of the 138th article of the Criminal Code.

• The company hired an employee to exercise control over any information received and forwarded. In the process of his work, an unincorporated electronic mail box of one of the company's employees was hacked, and according to the information there, it became clear that he had given out trade secrets to competitors. The company filed a lawsuit in court, but it was not satisfied because access to unincorporated mail was made without permission. In such a situation, the responsibility will most likely be borne by the person who carried out the hack.
• In another case, a citizen in a fit of jealousy was able to gain access to letters in an email belonging to her ex-husband's ex-wife, as well as to a page on one of the social networks. She repeatedly received information intended for the victim. As a result of the trial, the citizen was charged with a fine, as well as compensation for non-pecuniary damage.

Conclusion

It should be noted that even reading a message that is intended for another person is a crime, the punishment for which is established by Article 138 of the Criminal Code. Moreover, the degree of kinship with the victim does not matter. The subject, in turn, has every right to go to court and hold the offender accountable.