ON THE ISSUE OF DETERMINING THE SELF MOTIVE IN CORRUPTION CRIMES COMPLETED BY EMPLOYEES OF THE FSIN OF RUSSIA

What is self-interest?

Depending on which science interprets the concept, it acquires new facets. If we abstract from the initially negative connotation, self-interest is not only a negative phenomenon. It can be revealed in one of the following aspects:

1. The desire for profit and personal benefit. Sociology, as a field of knowledge about processes in society, does not approve of such a passionate desire placed above moral values.
2. Inability or unwillingness to do good just like that, without material reward. Self-interest is closely related to a decrease in the need for moral satisfaction from approval and verbal gratitude.
3. The motive for committing a crime is theft, murder, fraud.

Self-interest - psychology

Science, which reveals the mechanisms of the work of human consciousness, calls self-interest the highest form of egoism, because at least once in a lifetime every person experiences such impulses. A selfish person is a person who regularly becomes a victim of his base desires to earn more and quickly. Psychology cannot fight prudence, but this science can give a person the motivation to suppress it in his character.

Based on the legislative definition enshrined in Note 1 to Art. 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, theft pursues a selfish goal. Based on the literal interpretation, selfish as a purpose of seizure, as an obligatory sign of the subjective side, assumes that the subject has the goal of obtaining material benefits from theft, enrichment at the expense of the victim, and has the goal of profit [1]. Studying this sign of theft, some scientists came to the conclusion that in the absence of a selfish motive as the main one that determines the volitional act and direction of the subject’s intent, the nature of the act changes and, accordingly, it is impossible to qualify the act as theft. If the culprit commits theft without the purpose of profit or enrichment, such an act does not have the signs of this crime [2].

Modern forensic investigative practice indicates that thefts can be committed without the goal of material enrichment. For example, experiencing a lack of economic resources, a person steals an expensive medicine; a person who has no means of subsistence steals food to feed his family; a homeless person purposefully commits theft in order to end up in a warm pre-trial detention center in winter, etc. In these examples, the perpetrator does not seek to enrich himself financially or to enrich other persons. In this regard, selfish purpose in its ordinary understanding is excluded in such crimes against property [3]. There is also no goal of getting rich financially in the case when someone else’s property is stolen for its further destruction[4]. In science, there is a position according to which, if theft with subsequent destruction is not mercenary, then such a crime should be qualified under Art. 169 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation – intentional destruction or damage to someone else’s property [5].

We believe that this position is incorrect, since in this case the fact of gratuitous, unlawful seizure of someone else's property is not taken into account. Such a crime must be classified as a single crime (entire act). And in this case, the destruction of someone else’s property must be approached as a way of disposing of already stolen property. So, if the theft of someone else’s property is associated with its subsequent destruction, there is no totality of crimes, since theft can cover various acts that are associated with the subsequent disposal of the stolen property by the perpetrator after the seizure [6]. Continuing to consider cases of theft without mercenary goals, we cannot fail to mention the so-called “Robinhood”, when the subject confiscates property from the victim without compensation, for reasons of jealousy, mischief, revenge, compassion, etc. gives it away to random people. Judicial practice also qualifies such cases as theft.

But in such examples there is no material enrichment of the perpetrator, which traditionally occurs when crimes against property are committed. So, if in judicial investigative practice such acts are qualified as crimes against property - theft, then the concept of self-interest should be interpreted broadly. Giving such a broad meaning to the purpose of theft - self-interest, will necessarily entail a broad interpretation of the entire rule of criminal law, provided for in Note 1 to Art. 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. But such an approach is hardly applicable in criminal law, since a broad interpretation of criminal legal norms will inevitably lead to such a phenomenon as the application of criminal law by analogy. In criminal law science it is correctly noted that personal material interest may be absent (and, accordingly, there may be no selfish goal) in case of complicity in theft. The actions of such an accomplice will not cease to be theft, since the motives and goals of the activities of accomplices in the same crime may not coincide (and this does not require proof) [7]. Criminologists have proven that crimes against property are often committed by criminals without the goal of making money (for example, in order to increase their authority in a criminal environment).

This behavior is very typical of youth and adolescence, who are classified as not “self-serving” but “self-affirming” criminals [8]. Also, theft without the purpose of enrichment is characteristic of the theft of property of legal entities (with the purpose of transferring it to other institutions, enterprises or organizations. All the examples we have named, which indicate a broad interpretation of a selfish goal, are qualified in practice as theft. Therefore, such practice requires recognizing that the need to describe in Note 1 to Article 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the mercenary purpose of theft is very flawed. Such a practice will not meet all cases of encroachment on property. Likewise, S.M. Kochoi correctly points out that in cases of theft of radioactive objects, there is also no obligatory mercenary purpose. He writes that at the present time there are many issues that are related to the qualification of crimes against property. Thus, in the case of theft in order to restore justice, help those in need, in order to repay a debt, due to delays in wages, etc., it is enough to prove a selfish purpose difficult, and sometimes even impossible [9].We also fully agree with experts who argue that not all crimes against property have a selfish goal [10].

For example, as Sklyarov S.V. points out, “when bringing a subject to criminal liability for theft, it is only necessary to determine that he unlawfully took possession of property in order to dispose of it at his own will. In this case, it does not matter whether he illegally owns this property personally, or transferred it into the possession of other persons, or disposed of this property differently” [11]. According to paragraph 28 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 27, 2007. No. 51 “On judicial practice in cases of fraud, embezzlement and embezzlement”, selfish purpose should be understood as the desire to convert and (or) confiscate stolen property in favor of the perpetrator or to dispose of this property as one’s own, as well as the method of transferring it into the possession of other persons . If this explanation is interpreted literally, then in such a situation self-interest as the desire of the perpetrator, indicated in Note 1 to Art. 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is disclosed through another sign indicated in the same note: “... confiscation ... in favor of the perpetrator or other persons...”. Thus, in this rule of law, two concepts with the same content are used, which is a tautology: “... for selfish purposes...” and “... seizure... in favor of the offender or other persons...”. This legislative technique is unacceptable when the characteristics of a specific composition are described.

Based on the above, it is not emphasized when in an action it is necessary to see self-interest as the purpose of theft. In this regard, the indication in the law of the purpose of theft as mercenary is quite controversial, it refers to evaluative criteria and is established by the judicial investigative authorities in each specific case, which undoubtedly complicates the qualification process. Based on this, the conclusion that selfish purpose is a necessary (obligatory) sign of the subjective side of theft is questioned.

Illegal seizure of someone else's property can be carried out without the purpose of enrichment. In this regard, if there is an unlawful taking of someone else’s property (regardless of the purpose) and the taking of it by the perpetrator, the act must still be qualified as theft. To solve this problem, in order to avoid errors in the classification of crimes, we propose from Note 1 to Art. 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, remove the indication of self-interest as a mandatory purpose of theft [12].

List of used literature: 1. Ozhegov S.I. Dictionary of the Russian language. M., 1988. P. 242; Volkov B.S. Motives of crimes (criminal-legal and social-psychological research). Kazan, 1982. P. 45.. 2. Krieger G.A. Qualification of theft of socialist property // Socialist legality. 1982. No. 7. P.35. 3. Encyclopedia of criminal law. T. 18. Crimes against property. Chapter IV. Author of the chapter Shulga A.V. – Published by Professor Malinin – St. Petersburg – GKA, St. Petersburg, 2011. P. 504. 4. Brainin Y.M. Soviet criminal law. Part special, vol. 2. Kyiv, 1952. P.48. 5. Vladimirov V.A. Qualification of crimes against personal property. Published by the Higher School of the Ministry of Education and Science of the USSR. 1968. P.41. 6. Sobolev V.V., Shulga A.V. Qualification of unlawful seizure of someone else's property with subsequent destruction // Russian justice. 2007. No. 5. 7. Yunusov A.Kh. Qualification of robbery under current criminal law. dis. ...cand. legal Sci. L., 1991. P. 88. 8. Criminology: Textbook / Ed. V.N. Kudryavtseva, V.E. Eminova. M.: Lawyer, 1995. P.89. 9. Kochoi S. Qualification of thefts through the eyes of practitioners // Russian justice. 1999. No. 4. P.26. 10. Commentary on the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. M.: INFRA. M – NORMAL. 1996. P. 528. 11. Sklyarov S.V. The concept of theft in the criminal legislation of Russia: Theoretical analysis // State. and right. 1997. No. 9. P.67. 12. Shulga A.V. Theft in the context of the development of modern information technologies and the market for innovative goods. M., 2021. pp. 167 – 176.

© Lazareva D.L., Shulga A.V., 2021.

Tags: self-interest, theft

• 44-FZ VAT NDFL advance car alimony business marriage money children housing contract will housing plot property claim apartment benefit medicine management motivation tax taxes inheritance education clothing pensions pension payments purchase allowance bonus crime trial psychology work advertising deal family court tender labor accounting school

We greatly appreciate your comments. Thank you!

Comments for the site
Cackl e

How to understand selfish goals?

Criminal law and psychology are two branches of science that know the answer to the question of how to recognize selfish goals. For specialists, the reasons to distinguish them help them carry out their work. Relationships between people are not always honest, just as a selfish motive can become a reason for a conversation with a psychologist or a prison sentence. Three factors will help you understand whether a person was selfish during a particular act:

• his personal attitude to the event;
• the motives that pushed him to act;
• relationship with the object.

Characteristics of a selfish personality

In any situation when control weakens, the self-interested personality type is triggered to commit illegal actions. Such people develop a non-normative pattern of behavior earlier than others.

In psychology, there are a number of qualities that are inherent in the selfish type. Crimes against private property are in most cases committed by males. This statement is especially true in relation to selfish-violent offenses.

Among the participants in property atrocities, people in the age category from 20 to 35 years predominate, and by social class - the working class.

The criminal is distinguished by the following psychological and moral qualities:

1. Incorrect (atrophied) understanding of the role of money in human life.
2. Orientation in life at the lowest level is primitive consumer.
3. Negative attitude towards successful people and the interests of society.

Thieves are more socialized, their anxiety level is much lower. Therefore, they are less impulsive in their actions and are satisfied with their position in society. Such criminals are well versed in social requirements and legal norms and strive to form new contacts. They are more sociable and do not feel an overwhelming sense of guilt.

Fraudsters have a special characteristic: they are intellectually developed and play well on their opponent’s shortcomings and weaknesses. Know and practice psychological techniques and NLP techniques.

Resourcefulness, sociability, energy, cunning and determination allow them to establish close contacts and close business relationships with people previously unfamiliar to them. Fraudsters are calculating and cold-blooded; they tend to think through strategies and be one step ahead of the rest.

Self-interest in marriage

The more difficult a life situation is, the more actively a person strives to correct it as soon as possible. Marriage to a rich or influential partner is one of the easy tools for gaining financial freedom, albeit at the expense of your own feelings. A selfish person can be either a man or a woman, but the fair sex is more often accused of being prudent when starting a family. It is expected that in such a marriage the two main problems will be:

1. Joint leisure
   . When spouses are connected only by money, they will not be able to come to terms with each other’s musical preferences, hobbies and views on life.
2. Sexual relationships
   . Selfish intentions will not make partners experience passion and satisfaction in bed.

Self-interest in Orthodoxy

The Christian religion calls the sin of love of money one of the most common and dangerous sins. The priests believe that society is poisoned by the culture of consumerism, so the people who enter it do not see that they are driven by the cult of money and self-importance. Selfishness hinders the salvation of the soul, so Orthodoxy advises fighting it in the following ways:

1. Ascetic lifestyle
   . Modesty in clothing, food and entertainment will help not only save money, but also pacify the passions caused by its excess.
2. Formation of correct value guidelines in children
   . So that children are not as unhappy as their parents, who instilled in them a love of success and wealth, they need to be reoriented towards respect and mercy.
3. Conversations with ministers of religion
   . Communication with a priest and like-minded people in the faith will give a feeling of unity and support.