Art. 291 of the Criminal Code. Giving a bribe to an official

The most common form of corruption in the modern world is bribery. Penetrating into the activities of state institutions, it significantly undermines the authority of officials, discredits authorized bodies, and violates the principle of social justice. Practice under Art. 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation indicates that this illegal act is often accompanied by other crimes. They present a special danger when they are committed by conspiracy. Let us further consider what constitutes giving a bribe (Article 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

Punishment

The punishment for this crime is provided for by Article.291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In particular:

1. Giving a bribe to officials through an intermediary or personally punishable:

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

- correctional labor for 1-2 years;

- arrest for 3-6 months;

- imprisonment up to 3 years.

2. The transfer of a bribe to officials repeatedly or for committing knowingly unlawful acts / omissions shall be punished:

- a fine from 700 to 1000 minimum wages or the amount of salary / income for 7 months-1 year;

- imprisonment up to 8 years.

Note to Art. 291 of the Criminal Code

The 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. On the part of the official, the fact of extortion took place and proved.
2. The guilty person voluntarily informed the authorized bodies of the crime.

The law does not establish how much 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, indicates that to qualify a crime under Art. 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the cost characteristic of the transferred values ​​or benefits does not matter.

Content of an unlawful act

A commentary on the Criminal Code clarifies the essence of the crime in question. An unlawful act consists in the unlawful delivery of material assets or in the provision of property benefits to a person who is in the service of state bodies. The purpose of the crime is the action / inaction on the part of the official, which is part of his official powers, in favor of the bribe giver or the citizens he represents. An unlawful act is also committed for assisting employees by virtue of the position that he occupies, the execution of orders by another employee of state bodies. Punishment under Art. 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (as amended) also occurs if values ​​were presented or benefits were provided for general connivance or patronage of the service to the guilty person or those represented by him.

Completeness of crime

A commentary on the Criminal Code clarifies that the unlawful delivery of values ​​or the provision of any goods is inextricably linked to their receipt. Thus, the latter cannot take place if there was no first. Giving a bribe, as well as receiving it by an official performing managerial activities in a commercial or other organization, is considered completed from the moment of acceptance of the transferred values ​​at least partially. The finished crime cannot take place if the item has not been accepted. In this regard, the offer to the official of property gain or material value, leaving the latter in the clothes or on the employee’s desk, sending them in a letter or postal parcel, handing them over to relatives or the intermediary on the part of the recipient, if this is not followed by their acceptance, should not be qualified as completed wrongful act. It should be considered as an attempt to commit a crime under Art. 291 of the Criminal Code.

Important point

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

Complicity

Through the illegal provision of material goods or delivery of values, a citizen can persuade an employee to knowingly illegal behavior (inaction / action) within the framework of his official powers (part 2, article 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The latter is not in itself considered a crime. In such cases, the guilty person is held liable not only for giving a bribe, but also for inciting (complicity) in the unlawful actions of the employee.

Subjects

Responsibility for a crime under Art. 291 of the Criminal Code comes from 16 years old. The subjects may be citizens of Russia or another state, as well as persons without citizenship. The bribe giver may be:

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

The type of subject does not matter when qualifying a crime. An official or employee performing administrative functions who suggested that a subordinate employee achieve the desired inaction or action by delivering values ​​or providing benefits will be liable as a bribe giver. An employee who agrees to carry out the stipulated activities and hands over the agreed item will be involved as an accomplice.

Subjective side

Giving a bribe is accompanied by direct intent. Its content consists in the fact that the offender provides unlawful remuneration to an official for performing an act or abstaining from him using his official position (authority) or for facilitating the achievement of what is desired, general protection or connivance with respect to the guilty person. If the subject in good faith was mistaken about the basis of the transfer, did not realize its illegality, then the composition of the illegal act is absent.

Qualifying signs

In Art. 291, part 2, the type of crime is established - giving a bribe to an employee for performing a deliberately unlawful act / omission. To impute this, the guilty must prove intent. This means that it must be established that the bribe giver was aware that he was transferring values ​​or providing benefits directly for the official to commit inaction / action. The second qualifying sign is repeated. She assumes that the crime is committed:

1. Previously convicted person under the same article.
2. At least two times as a citizen who had not previously been prosecuted.

Under aggravating circumstances, giving a bribe is a serious crime. If they are absent, she qualifies as an unlawful act of moderate gravity.

Features of Repeatability

This attribute should be distinguished from giving one bribe in two or more receptions, as well as from the continued unlawful delivery of values ​​/ provision of benefits for connivance and general protection of the guilty person or the persons represented by him. Unlawful remuneration of a group of officials for committing a crime by prior conspiracy cannot qualify as a repeated act. In the systematic delivery of values, the provision of property benefits to an employee for general connivance or patronage, the court must verify whether these crimes are combined with the sole intention of the bribe giver. In the absence of a sign of repeated occurrence, this behavior must be considered as a continuing crime under part 1 of this article.

Mediator

The Plenum of the Supreme Court defined this subject as a person acting on behalf of the recipient or transferring a bribe, directly handing over the negotiated item. The intermediary does not act on his own behalf, representing the interests of third parties. Unlike the bribe giver, he does not achieve, through the transferred material reward, the fulfillment or abstinence from the official to perform certain actions for himself personally. The behavior of an intermediary is qualified as complicity in a crime if he was aware of the wrongfulness of the event. In the practice of the judicial and investigative bodies, there are cases of so-called alleged mediation.