Traditional medicine

Indicate the basic principles of state anti-corruption policy. Countering terrorism: basic principles, concept, definition, legal and organizational foundations, minimizing losses and methods of settlement

Submitting your good work to the knowledge base is easy. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Anti-corruption- activities of federal government bodies, government bodies of constituent entities Russian Federation, local government bodies, civil society institutions, organizations and individuals within the limits of their powers:

a) to prevent corruption, including identifying and subsequently eliminating the causes of corruption (prevention of corruption);

b) to identify, prevent, suppress, disclose and investigate corruption offenses (fight against corruption);

c) to minimize and (or) eliminate the consequences of corruption offenses.

Anti-corruption efforts in the Russian Federation are based on the following: basic principles:

1) recognition, provision and protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen;

2) legality;

3) publicity and openness of the activities of state bodies and local governments;

4) the inevitability of responsibility for committing corruption offenses;

5) complex use political, organizational, informational and propaganda, socio-economic, legal, special and other measures;

6) priority application of measures to prevent corruption;

7) cooperation between the state and civil society institutions, international organizations And individuals.

The principles have system-forming significance, forming norms and guiding law enforcement, ensuring its uniformity. It is the principles that should serve as a guide in resolving legal conflicts. Principle (from lat. principium- basis, beginning) - fundamental principle, initial, guiding idea, basic rule of behavior, activity.

The principle of recognition is ensuredand protection of fundamental rights and freedomsbaud of a person and a citizen is constitutional and, moreover, universal. In accordance with Art. 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, man, his rights and freedoms are the highest value. Recognition, observance and protection of human and civil rights and freedoms is the responsibility of the state. Article 18 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation states: “The rights and freedoms of man and citizen are directly applicable. They determine the meaning, content and application of laws, the activities of the legislative and executive powers, local self-government and are ensured by justice.”

In the commented Law this principle takes on a special meaning, since corruption as a negative social phenomenon leads to a violation of the rights of citizens, to non-compliance with the conditions of normal competition between subjects economic activity, to discredit the institution of public civil service in the state.

Principle of legality is also a constitutional and industry-wide principle Russian law. Legality is a state of constant and accurate implementation of high-quality and fair legislation, ensured by the inevitability of the use of state coercive measures in the event of violations. Regime of legality - a certain state of the real level of compliance of existing social relations with laws and other regulations. And yet, in each area, the principle of legality has its own nuances and content. The context of the commented Law allows us to highlight the following areas of its implementation:

1. accurate implementation of the law by state and municipal employees, excluding manifestations of corruption;

2. accurate implementation of the law by citizens and organizations that should not initiate corrupt relationships;

3. strict observance and execution of the law by law enforcement and other authorities in the process of combating corruption. As a result, anti-corruption activities aim to restore the state of legality.

The principle of publicity andthe secrecy of government activitiesmilitary bodies and local government bodies, Unfortunately, it has not yet taken its rightful place in our legislation. The reason for this is the lack of fundamental laws on government bodies and their activities. Most often, this principle is replaced by the principle of publicity, which is much narrower in its scope. For example, the Government of the Russian Federation is guided in its activities by the principle of openness. (Federal Constitutional Law of December 17, 1997 N 2-FKZ “On the Government of the Russian Federation”).

In the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the principle of openness is enshrined only in relation to judicial proceedings (Article 123). We can find this principle in some sectoral laws - openness of information about the activities of state bodies and local governments and free access to such information, except in cases established by federal laws (Federal Law of July 27, 2006 No. 149-FZ “On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection”), openness of the civil service and its accessibility to public control, objective informing of the public about activities civil servants (Federal Law “On the Civil Service System of the Russian Federation”). Privatization of state and municipal property is based on the recognition of the equality of buyers of state and municipal property and the openness of the activities of state authorities and local governments (Federal Law “On the Privatization of State and Municipal Property”).

In general, the Federal Laws “On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection”, “On Personal Data”, “On Ensuring Access to Information on the Activities of Courts in the Russian Federation”, “On Ensuring Access to Information on the Activities of State Bodies” are devoted to the issues of information openness of the authorities. and local governments”, “On the procedure for covering the activities of public authorities in public funds mass media", Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation "On ensuring access to information about the activities of the Government of the Russian Federation and federal executive bodies." However, despite the steps taken in this direction, it cannot be said that a genuine regime of information openness of the authorities has been created in the country. Meanwhile, it is publicity and openness of power that corresponds to the idea of a full-fledged public administration, which presupposes the control of power by society. States in which a mechanism for information openness of power has been created are less corrupt. In the commented context, the principle of publicity and openness (transparency) also carries a preventive anti-corruption load - firstly, the openness of government activities reduces corruption opportunities, secondly, it highlights any deviations and violations, helping the work of law enforcement agencies, thirdly, it allows citizens and organizations engage in the anti-corruption process.

The principle of inevitability of responsibility as such, it disappeared from Russian regulatory legal acts (remember that it was one of the basic principles of Soviet criminal legislation). Nevertheless, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation continues to operate with the concept of the inevitability of responsibility, and even called it as before the principle of the inevitability of legal responsibility, not only in the field of criminal law, but also in tax law. In modern Russia, this concept is also used in statements on the ratification of international conventions (“The Russian Federation proceeds from the understanding that the provisions ... of the Convention must be applied in such a way as to ensure the inevitability of responsibility for the commission of crimes falling within the scope of the Convention”). The fact that the commented Law names as one of the principles the inevitability of responsibility for corruption offenses is intended to emphasize the seriousness of the anti-corruption policy and the focus on specific results of anti-corruption activities. This principle means that for each fact of corruption violation (subject to proof of guilt, of course) an adequate punishment must be imposed. This principle is further elaborated in Art. 13 and 14 of the commented Law.

The principle of integrated usepolitical, organizationinformational, outreach, socio-economic, legal, special and other measures reflects the specifics of corruption as a phenomenon that requires an adequate and systemic response. The comprehensiveness of the use of anti-corruption measures is focused both on preventive work and on the direct fight against corruption and the elimination of their consequences. A thoughtful attitude to the implementation of this principle in practice will allow us to avoid excesses, campaignism, and show trials, turning the activity in question into one of the components of public administration.

The principle of prioritytaking measures to prevent corrosiverupees, if we consider it in a systematic connection with the principle of comprehensiveness of measures, it focuses on organizing daily work in a normal manner, instilling intolerance towards corruption in society, raising the prestige of the public civil service and ensuring its stability, and educating a new generation of state and municipal employees. This principle sets the tone for the implementation of the entire array of regulations on the public civil service, as well as those regulations that determine the procedure for exercising the rights of citizens and organizations in administrative relations. The regulatory framework for the activities of state and municipal employees should not be corruptive and “push” them to arbitrary law enforcement. Society itself must play an important role in the implementation of this principle.

The principle of cooperationstates with institutions of citizenssocial society, internationalorganizations and individualstsami emphasizes the general social nature of the problem of corruption.

State corruption is a problem not only for the state apparatus itself, it is also a question for society itself, consisting of citizens who consider this phenomenon, if not normal, then quite tolerable. Of course, for genuine cooperation between the state and society, many conditions are necessary, many of which have not fully developed in our country. These conditions include: high level development of democratic institutions, political and civic activity of the population, genuine pluralism of opinions, real freedom and independence of the press, real transparency of the actions of the authorities and its controllability by the institutions of civil society. Where we're talking about on cooperation, only one subject cannot dictate the terms. Unfortunately, this principle is most poorly implemented both in the text of the Law under comment and in the current Russian legislation. Community-oriented methods and mechanisms that can encourage the public and individual citizens in such cooperation, collect objective information about the scale and methods of corruption among officials. Relying on civil society to combat crime in general and corruption in particular is important direction activities of law enforcement agencies in democratic countries. In Art. Article 22 of the Council of Europe Criminal Law Convention on Corruption refers to the protection of collaborators and witnesses and proposes to provide effective and appropriate protection to those who report corruption offenses and cooperate with authorities carrying out investigations and proceedings.

3.2 Anti-corruption policy of the Russian Federation

Anti-corruption policy consists of developing and implementing comprehensive and consistent measures of the state and society to eliminate (minimize) the causes and conditions that give rise to and feed corruption in various spheres of life.

Measures to combat and combat corruption are a priority for Russia at the present stage. International ratings show that the level of corruption in Russia is unacceptably high. Corruption in government agencies hinders the development of public administration, entails huge additional costs on the part of business and the population, which generally slows down economic development countries.

By Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of November 24, 2003 No. 1384, the Anti-Corruption Council under the President of the Russian Federation was created, within which two commissions worked: the Anti-Corruption Commission and the Commission for Resolving Conflicts of Interest. Since 2008, the Anti-Corruption Council under the President of the Russian Federation has been operating.

IN recent years Russia is undertaking active actions to improve its legislative framework and bring it in line with international standards. Thus, Federal Law No. 40-FZ of March 8, 2006 ratified the United Nations Convention against Corruption. United Nations Convention against Corruption (adopted in New York on October 31, 2003 by Resolution 58/4 at the 51st plenary meeting of the 58th session of the UN General Assembly // Bulletin of International Treaties. 2006. No. 10. P. 7-54 In addition, Russia is an active member of the Anti-Corruption Network for Countries in Transition and annually submits a national self-analysis report on anti-corruption.

Increasing the transparency of public authorities is one of the most effective means overcoming corruption, since it makes it much more difficult to conceal corrupt practices.

Need to consider a short history anti-corruption legislation of the Russian Federation.

The Russian state apparatus in the first years of the post-Soviet period, as well as the country's economy, and the entire society as a whole, found itself in a state of deep crisis. Only from 1991 to 1994. executive authorities at the federal level were updated by 56%, and in the regions by about a third. Corruption, incompetence, basic illiteracy, and lack of management culture are widespread among civil servants. In response to this, the President of Russia adopted the Decree “On the fight against corruption in the public service system” dated April 4, 1992. The Decree provided for a number of serious anti-corruption measures. Thus, paragraph 2 of this decree stipulated that “state employees are prohibited from engaging in entrepreneurial activities, providing any assistance not provided for by law to individuals and legal entities using their official position in carrying out entrepreneurial activities and receiving remunerations, services and benefits for this; perform other paid work on a part-time basis (except for scientific, teaching and creative activity), as well as engage in entrepreneurial activities through intermediaries, as well as be an attorney for third parties in the affairs of the state body in which he serves, independently or through a representative, take part in management joint stock companies, limited liability partnerships or other business entities.” On the fight against corruption in the public service system: Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 361 of April 4, 1992 // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. - 1992. - April 9. - No. 557. - P. 5-6.

Violation of these requirements entails dismissal from the position held and other liability in accordance with current legislation. In addition, civil servants were required, when appointed to a leadership position, to submit a declaration of income, movable and immovable property, deposits in banks and securities, as well as financial obligations.

In 1993, the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation adopted the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Fight against Corruption,” but it was never signed by the president. In 1995 and 1997, the second and third projects were adopted by the State Duma and approved by the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, respectively Federal Law RF "On the fight against corruption" and also rejected by the President of the Russian Federation.

In 2001, at the parliamentary hearings “The current state and ways to improve the legislation of the Russian Federation in the field of combating corruption”, the bills “Fundamentals of Anti-Corruption Policy”, “On Combating Corruption”, “On Parliamentary Investigation” and “On the Code of Conduct for Civil Servants” were discussed.

IN State Duma of the third convocation, the anti-corruption bill “On Combating Corruption” only reached the first reading. According to lawyers, this document is intended not so much to guide the fight against corruption as to imitate it.

Some change in the situation in the field of anti-corruption was associated with the signing by Russia international documents. On May 9, 2006, the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, in New York officially submitted to the UN Secretariat the instrument of ratification by Russia of the UN Convention against Corruption of December 14, 2005. The Federal Law “On the ratification of the UN Convention against Corruption” was signed by the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin on March 8, 2006.

It should be emphasized that in Russia the problem of corruption is one of the most pressing. In addition to the fact that the national economy is weakening, officials are ineffective in exercising their powers. A state affected by corruption cannot successfully implement its policies.

The legislative framework aimed at combating corruption is constantly being modernized and optimized. New anti-corruption structures are being created. At the same time, the level of corruption in the Russian Federation remains high and the development and application of modern effective methods aimed at combating this dangerous social phenomenon is required.

3.3 Anti-corruption issues

Recognition of the problem of anti-corruption in international level obliges states to take adequate countermeasures and ensure their implementation by appropriate regulatory legislation. The main role in the fight against corruption is given to the authorities comprehensive solution domestic problems. International cooperation is only a link in the totality of activities carried out by the country. Along with political, economic, social and other factors, the Russian Federation also uses legal methods to destroy existing corruption ties and takes into account global and domestic experience.

In the field of regulatory regulation, the weakest link in combating corruption in the Russian Federation is:

1. imperfection of domestic criminal procedural legislation regulating the scope of evidence in criminal cases. The subject of proving corruption is the most complex; it contains specific factors unique to this crime, but they have not found legislative permission in the criminal process. The criminal activities of corrupt officials are strengthened by their official position, which creates real opportunities for neutralizing evidence. These circumstances require adequate legislative procedures aimed at eliminating such obstacles;

2. the complete absence of criminal procedural norms in the current Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation governing international cooperation in criminal cases;

3. The current international treaties of the Russian Federation do not fill these gaps, but are based on the mandatory key rule of interaction - the application of domestic criminal procedural norms in the execution of international orders from foreign states. This emphasizes the need to develop and improve national procedural legislation;

4. the imperfection of national criminal procedural legislation and existing international treaties of the Russian Federation on the provision of legal assistance in criminal cases, the lack of special regulation of international cooperation in the field of criminal justice excludes the country from positive interaction with other states and does not solve it internal problems, including in matters of corruption, creates conditions and prerequisites for filling the legal vacuum with foreign legal systems to the detriment of the interests of Russia Kalamkaryan R.A., Migachev Yu.I. International law: textbook. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Eksmo Publishing House, 2005.- P. 485-490.

International cooperation between Russia and other countries on corruption issues in this situation is not capable of counteracting the corruption of officials either within Russia or outside its borders. Taking into account the prevalence of corruption and the particular difficulty of proving this crime, one of the measures to improve the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation could be the abolition of the institution of witnesses.

In modern doctrines of the criminal process, there is a clear tilt of the institution of defense towards the accused and the absolute insecurity of the victim, the emasculation of the responsibility of establishing the truth in the case from the function of the court, and the evidence base is narrowing, including cases of corruption. Moreover, the evidence base is placed under the control of witnesses who do not have any knowledge of jurisprudence, which reduces the procedural independence of the investigator. The only requirement for any citizen to participate in investigative actions as a witness is his disinterest in the case (Part 1 of Article 60 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). It follows from this that the investigator, who sees the witness for the first time, is obliged to foresee his moral qualities, be confident in his decency, ability to evaluate, remember what is happening and accurately reproduce the past, which borders on unrealism. Inspection of the crime scene and search in modern conditions is often burdened by opposition from offenders and the use of firearms, which puts the life and health of witnesses involved in their production in real danger. However, Article 60 of the Code of Criminal Procedure presents them as witnesses, whose responsibilities include: certification of the facts, content and results of the investigative actions during which they were present (Part 3 of Article 60 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). There is a discrepancy in the powers of the witnesses. On the one hand, they are not required to be understood and participate in their capacity on a voluntary basis. But on the other hand, although they are not participants in the process and competent officials, they are entrusted with the responsibilities listed above, which are in the nature of control functions, which is not consistent with the principles of criminal proceedings. This position of witnesses in criminal proceedings elevates them above the bodies of inquiry and preliminary investigation and puts him on an equal footing with the court. At the same time, in relation to the investigative and inquiry bodies, the principle of presumption of guilt prevails, since the assessment of their procedural activities is given by the attesting witness, based on arbitrary subjective conclusions that are not formalized procedurally. This conclusion follows from the established practice of calling witnesses to court and questioning them as witnesses for the court to evaluate the evidence being examined and the legality of its receipt. It seems that the institution of witnesses should be revised and abolished as it has become obsolete in modern conditions.

Procedural legislation also does not take into account the huge imbalance in the ability to prove corruption by practically unequipped preliminary investigation bodies and corrupt officials who have enormous resources, the most advanced technology and communications, transport and financial capabilities to neutralize evidence. The criminal process needs rules that can forestall the criminal intentions of government officials. officials and eliminate the possibility of causing irreparable damage, infringement of the rights of citizens, legitimate interests of the state and society. The idea of developing national legislation “as possible more states” on issues of liability for corruption was reflected in the Convention on Civil Liability for Corruption adopted in Strasbourg on September 9, 1999, which was noted by E.V. Shvets Shvets E.V. Some aspects of international legal cooperation of member states of the Council of Europe in the field of combating corruption // Journal of Russian Law. - No. 7. - 2000. - P. 66.

Following this trend, the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption of November 4, 1998. (Strasbourg), signed by Russia on January 25, 1999, obliges its participants to adopt a set of anti-corruption measures in national legislation. Among them: witness protection, collection of evidence, the procedure for interaction and cooperation of national authorities, which contain procedures based on global experience of domestic criminal policy and its implementation in the process of investigating criminal cases of corruption. A special chapter of the Convention is devoted to procedural rules for cooperation between states on issues of mutual assistance, extradition, exchange of information and a number of other regulations.

One of the fundamental conditions for providing assistance in criminal cases is the judicial perspective of the case. Therefore, the procedural position of the person whose extradition may be requested is important. The established practice of providing assistance in criminal cases allows for the detention of a person falling under the jurisdiction of Russia in connection with the commission of a crime. But it does not meet the conceptual foundations of international cooperation.

No foreign state has the right to exercise criminal jurisdiction over persons subject to the criminal law of the Russian Federation. Due to these factors, those abroad can only carry out instructions from Russia to the extent determined by the Russian side, but not make procedural decisions in a criminal case instead.

The procedural position of the suspect differs significantly from the status of the accused, although there are similarities. The suspect does not always become the accused.

Detention under Russian law is only a coercive measure, limited to a period of 48 hours and not subject to extension. Execution of an extradition order is possible in the presence of a preventive measure in the form of detention chosen by the applicant party, and follows the filing of charges, but does not precede it. To implicate a person as an accused, a body of evidence is required, which forms the basis of a procedural decision on this (resolution). But the presence of sufficient evidence is not required to detain a person on suspicion of committing a crime, which is detained until charges are filed.

The current Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation should determine the procedural position of the extradited person. Such a person can only be an accused person against whom, in accordance with the provisions of the Russian Code of Criminal Procedure, a preventive measure has been chosen - detention. There is a need for a legislative ban on the detention of a person subject to extradition or wanted in connection with his placement on the international wanted list. In cases of corruption, provide in the Code of Criminal Procedure and international treaties of the Russian Federation as a mandatory coercive measure, the removal of the accused from office and the mechanism for its implementation.

Conclusion

Summing up the results of the final qualifying work, we can conclude that corruption is becoming the norm, not the exception, including among the political, ruling and economic elite. Law enforcement agencies, themselves partly affected by corruption, do not have sufficient capacity and the necessary real independence to combat institutional corruption.

Reflecting the results of the tasks set at the beginning of the work, several main critical issues are identified that require immediate solutions, and delay in resolving which will make the process of dealing with them almost impossible. These are questions such as:

a) it is necessary to improve the current legislation, develop a unified conceptual mechanism and adopt new legislative acts: the law “On the fight against organized crime”, the law “On lobbying”, “Fundamentals public policy in the fight against corruption."

b) one of the main principles of the fight against corruption and organized crime should be openness and transparency of the activities of judicial and executive authorities, the media, citizens and public formations;

c) exclusion from sanctions of articles on liability for official crimes of all main types of punishment, except imprisonment, for a period of at least two years, and for a crime under Art. 289 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Illegal participation in business activities) - not less than five years; establishment of absolutely certain sanctions for the commission of these crimes with a prohibition to apply Art. Art. 64 (Assignment of a more lenient punishment than provided for this crime) and 65 (Assignment of punishment upon a jury verdict of leniency) of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the inclusion in the sanctions of such additional punishments as deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities, deprivation of special, military or honorary title, class rank and state awards and confiscation of property;

d) the creation of a permanent federal specialized body for the prevention and fight against corruption in order to implement the permanent anti-corruption policy of the state, for the effectiveness and integrity of which only two conditions must be created: careful, scrupulous selection of personnel (availability higher education, clean reputation, respect of society.....) and highest salary workers of these services. The most important tasks of which would be to monitor the implementation of the law on corruption, checking the income statement, especially if the employee’s salary does not at all correspond to the attributes of a luxurious life. Financial control over the income and property of officials and their families exists in all civilized countries of the world, for example in the USA. This situation also exists in International Code conduct of public officials (Article 8).

e) increasing the level technical support law enforcement agencies, the introduction of modern information technologies into their work, guaranteeing their safety, significantly increasing wages government workers.

f) developing an anti-corruption worldview among Russian citizens, including through the use of media opportunities.

In conclusion, it remains to emphasize that with the clear and conscientious implementation of all the above tasks, the cohesion of society in the fight against any kind of manifestations of corruption, the personal interest of law enforcement agencies in ensuring law and order in the country, Russia has a chance to avoid the criminalization of all spheres of life through corruption, and this is also will serve as a major step forward towards building a civil society.

Regulatory acts and special literature

Regulatory acts

1. United Nations Convention against Corruption (adopted in New York on October 31, 2003 by Resolution 58/4 at the 51st plenary meeting of the 58th session of the UN General Assembly // Bulletin of International Treaties. 2006. No. 10. P. 7 -54.

2. “The Constitution of the Russian Federation” (adopted by popular vote on December 12, 1993) (taking into account the amendments introduced by the Laws of the Russian Federation on amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation dated December 30, 2008 N 6-FKZ, dated December 30, 2008 N 7-FKZ) // “Russian newspaper", N 7, 01/21/2009

3. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of 1996 (as amended on December 1, 2012) // SZ of the Russian Federation, June 17, 1996, No. 25, Art. 2954 (dated December 7, 2011 N 420-FZ)

4. Federal Law of the Russian Federation of November 21, 2011 N 329-FZ “On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation in connection with the improvement of public administration in the field of anti-corruption // Rossiyskaya Gazeta, November 26, 2011.

5. Federal Law of February 9, 2009 N 8-FZ “On ensuring access to information on the activities of state bodies and local governments” // Collection of legislation of the Russian Federation. 2009. N 7.

6. Federal Law of the Russian Federation of December 25, 2008 N 273-FZ “On Combating Corruption” (as amended on December 29, 2012) // SZ RF, December 25, 2008, No. 273

7. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated March 13, 2012 N 297 “On the National Anti-Corruption Plan for 2012 - 2013 and amendments to some acts of the President of the Russian Federation on anti-corruption issues // Electronic resource http://www.pravo.gov.ru

8. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated November 24, 2003 No. 1384 “On the Council under the President of the Russian Federation to combat corruption.” (as amended on February 3, 2007 No. 129) // SZ RF dated November 24, 2003 No. 1384

9. On the fight against corruption in the public service system: Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 361 of April 4, 1992 // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. - 1992. - April 9. - No. 557. - P. 5-6.

10. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated February 18, 1998 No. 216 (as amended on October 11, 2001) “On introducing amendments and additions to decisions of the Government of the Russian Federation in accordance with Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated April 8, 1997 No. 305 “On priority measures to prevent corruption and reducing budget expenses when organizing the purchase of products for state needs” // SZ RF dated 02/18/1998 No. 305

11. Resolution of the Head of the city of Ivanovo dated September 23, 1997 No. 606 “On the implementation of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated April 8, 1997 No. 305 “On priority measures to prevent corruption and reduce budget expenditures when organizing the purchase of products for state needs” in the city” / / SZ RF dated September 23, 1997 No. 606

Judicial practice

12. Review of legislation and judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the fourth quarter of 2007" (approved by the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated February 27, 2008) // "Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation", No. 5, May, 2008

13. Criminal case No. 1-129/2011. Archive of the Ivanovo District Court of Ivanovo, 2011.

Main and withspecial lliterature

14. Andrianov, V.D. Bureaucracy, corruption and the effectiveness of public administration: history and modernity [Text]: monograph / V.D. Andrianov. - M.: Wolters Kluwer, 2009. - 178 p.

15. Arinin A. Information is the enemy of corruption//United Russia.-2005.-No. 13.- P.9

16. Berman G.J. Western tradition of law: the era of formation. - M., 1994. - 123 p.

17. Bolotsky B.S., Volevodz A.G., Voronov E.V., Kalachev B.F. Combating money laundering from the drug industry in the countries of the Commonwealth. - M., 2001. - P. 37

18. Bransky V.P. Theoretical foundations social synergetics// Questions of philosophy.-2000.-№4.-267 p.

19. Burlakov V.N., Kropachev N.M. Criminology: textbook. - St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, 2002. - 432 p.

20. Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. - April, 2006. - No. 4.

21. Varchuk T.V. Criminology: textbook. - M.: INFRA-M, 2002. - 298 p.

22. Gershenkov G.N., Gershenkov A.G., Gershenkov G.G. Preventive strategy in the fight against crime: the problem of criminological justification // Russian criminological view. - 2005. - No. 1. - P. 40

23. Giske A.V. Theoretical and methodological aspects of ensuring public security in the Russian Federation. - M., 2000. - 365 p.

24. Degtyarev A., Malikov R. Institutional analysis of business corruption in Russia // Economic Issues. - 2005. - No. 10. - P. 108-111

25. Demidov A.I. On the methodological situation in jurisprudence // Jurisprudence.-2001.-No.4.- P. 17

26. Dernova V. Salvation from corruption // Russian news. - 2006.-№43.-S. 18

27. Zheludkov A. Criminology: lecture notes. - M.: PRIOR Publishing House, 2002. - 144 p.

28. Ivanov V.P. Criminal money - the financial roots of terrorism//Law and Law.- 2006.- No. 1.- P. 6-7

29. Inshakov S.M. Criminology: textbook. - M.: Jurisprudence, 2000. - 432 p.

30. Kalamkaryan R.A., Migachev Yu.I. International law: textbook. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Eksmo Publishing House, 2005. - 736 p.

31. Corruption networks. NovayaGazeta.Ru. http://novayagazeta.ru/rassled/400 mlrd/n 14n-s01.shtml

32. Kostikov V. And the level of the city is visible // Arguments and Facts. - 2006. - No. 25. - P. 8

33. Kudryavtsev V.N., Eminova V.E. Criminology: textbook. - 3rd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Yurist, 2005. - 734 p.

34. Kurakin A.V. Administrative and legal means of preventing and suppressing corruption in the public service system (history and modernity)// State and Law. - 2002. - September. - No. 9. - P. 35-48

35. Kurakin A.V., Arutyunov K.G., Berezhnoy V.V. Legal principles of the fight against corruption in internal affairs bodies. - Investigator. - No. 7 (75). - 2004. - P. 59

36. Kurganov, S.I. Sociology for lawyers: a textbook for universities. - M.: UNITY, 2007. - 116 p.

37. Lopashenko N.A. Modern varieties of Russian and world crime: state, trends, opportunities and prospects for countering: a collection of scientific works. - Saratov, Saratov Center for the Study of Problems of Organized Crime and Corruption: Satellite, 2005. - P. 367-368

38. Lukashuk, I.I. International legal forms of the fight against corruption [Text]/ - M.: Logos, 2001 - P.24

39. Malkov V.D. Criminology: textbook. - M.: JSC Justitsinform, 2005. - 231 p.

40. Malko A.V. Corruption as the main part of the shadow legal life of society: research methodology // http://sartraccc.sgap.ru/Pub/malko(22-12-04).htm

41. Panfilova E. Under corruption is a strong branch. Who will help the president cut him down? // Arguments and Facts. - 2006. - No. 24. - P. 4

42. Polyakov A.V. Communicative concept of law: theoretical issues. Discussion of the monograph. - St. Petersburg, 2003. - P. 39

43. Polyakov A.V. General theory of law: problems of interpretation in the context of the communicative approach. Course of lectures. - St. Petersburg, 2004. - P. 8

44. Popov N. Give and take: corruption in Russia is ineradicable // New Time. - 2005. - No. 33. - P. 16-18

45. Russian legal encyclopedia [Text]/ T.E. Abova, S.A. Avakyan, A.Ya. Sukharev. - M.: Infra, 2003. - 547 p.

46. Salnikov V.P. Criminology: dictionary. Series “Textbooks for universities, special literature.” - St. Petersburg: Publishing House “Lan”; Publishing house of St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 1999.- 256 p.

47. Sichinava I.M. Bribery: qualifications and the state of the fight against it // Law and Law. - 2006. - No. 8. - P. 10-11

48. Speransky A. Deadly number. Corruption sometimes means trading in human lives // Your right. - 2006. - February. - No. 4. - P. 1.5

49. Sungurov A.Yu. Civil initiatives and prevention of corruption. - St. Petersburg, 2000. - P. 72

50. Judicial practice in criminal cases / comp. G.A. Esakov. M., 2005, pp. 147-152.

52. Tolkachev V.V. Methodology for studying corruption relations in the context modern theory rights//State and law.- 2006.- No. 7.- P. 14-20

53. Furs V.N. The philosophy of unfinished modernity by Jurgen Habermas. - Minsk, 2000. - P. 66

54. The pure doctrine of law by Hans Kelsen. Sat. translations. Vol. 1.- M., 1987.- P. 47

55. Chichneva E.A. Philosophy of law in the postmodern era, or new right-wing thinking // Historical and philosophical yearbook "99. - M., 2001. - 412 p.

56. Shvets E.V. Some aspects of international legal cooperation of member states of the Council of Europe in the field of combating corruption // Journal of Russian Law. - No. 7. - 2000. - 164 p.

57. Shirokov V.A. Criminal legal problems of combating bribery//Law and Law.- 2006.- No. 9.- P. 16-19

58. Eriashvili N.D., Loginov E.L., Kaziakhmedov G.M. Economics and law. Shadow economy: textbook for universities. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: UNITY-DANA, 2005. - 256 p.

59. Yurgens I. Six salvoes on corruption. You can deprive officials of gifts, but it’s better - the opportunity to take bribes // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. - 2006. - September 28. - No. 216. - P. 5

Posted on Allbest.ru

Similar documents

Characteristics of anti-corruption legislation. The concept of corruption and its subjects. Statistics of corruption in the world and in Russia. Organizational foundations, principles and subjects of anti-corruption. Powers of anti-corruption entities.

thesis, added 01/14/2017

The concept of corruption and the historical stages of the formation of anti-corruption policy in Russia. The history of the formation of the concept of combating corruption, its doctrinal definition. Causes and conditions of corruption in Russia, legal measures to counter it.

thesis, added 10/21/2013

The concept and general signs of corruption, historical aspects of the development of anti-corruption activities, measures for its prevention. Prerequisites for the spread of corruption in modern Russia, stages of formation and prospects for the development of anti-corruption policy.

course work, added 01/10/2010

Legal basis for economic security of Russia. Anti-corruption measures. Review of the regulatory framework for combating corruption in the public procurement system in Russia. Recommendations international conference and anti-corruption expertise.

thesis, added 11/09/2011

Historical aspects, concept and types of corruption. The current situation in the Russian Federation regarding corruption at the levels of government authorities and services. Legislative framework and additional measures introduced by the state to combat corruption.

thesis, added 09/24/2012

Characteristics of the essence and main manifestations of corruption in Russian society. Features of legal policy in the field of anti-corruption in Russia. Studying proposals for developing measures to counter the spread of this criminal phenomenon.

abstract, added 12/07/2010

Peculiarities of qualification of corruption crimes. Social aspect of anti-corruption. The educational function of legal education in the context of anti-corruption policy. Basic models of interaction between legal and religious systems.

course work, added 05/20/2014

Factors that determine the “prosperity” of corruption and hinder the fight against corrupt officials in different echelons of power. Anti-corruption legislation of Russia. The main forms and methods of combating administration corruption in the Perm region.

course work, added 03/06/2015

Historical aspect of anti-corruption activities. The concept and forms of corruption, its results and consequences. Reasons for corruption of public servants. State-legal, special, organizational measures to combat corruption crime.

course work, added 04/18/2013

Regulatory and legal framework for combating corruption in Russia. Constitutional foundations for preventing threats to economic security and citizens’ trust in state institutions. Labor and civil legislation and prevention of corruption.

Principles (from Latin principium - basis, beginning) - the basic, initial provisions of any theory, the basic rules of activity; established, ingrained, generally accepted, widely accepted rules of action. There are no universal rules for combating corruption, but international practice has developed the basic principles of countering this negative phenomenon.

The principles of anti-corruption policy are:

1. partnership between subjects of the formation and implementation of anti-corruption policy measures;

2. priority of measures to prevent corruption and moral principles of the fight against corruption;

3. the inadmissibility of establishing anti-corruption standards below the level determined by federal laws;

4. the inadmissibility of combining the functions of development, implementation and control over the implementation of anti-corruption policy measures;

5. maintaining the optimal number of persons holding public positions and persons in state and municipal services;

6. targeted budget financing of anti-corruption policy measures;

7. recognition of the increased public danger of corruption offenses of persons holding positions provided for by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal constitutional laws, federal laws, laws of constituent entities of the Russian Federation;

8. the inadmissibility of establishing privileges and immunities that limit liability or complicate the procedure for bringing to justice persons holding public positions who have committed corruption offenses;

9. the inadmissibility of restricting access to information about facts of corruption, corruption-causing factors and anti-corruption policy measures.

The state is a certain way of organizing society. It does not exist in isolation from the social environment surrounding it. Therefore, it is precisely from the activity of free, responsible people, their vital energy, level of civil, legal, political culture and education depends on the construction of a legal, effective state in which corruption has been defeated.

Without a person defending his personal rights and freedoms, in particular, the right to decent life, the right to personal dignity, the right to freedom and personal integrity, the formation and development of a free, responsible and creative personality is impossible. Without a person defending his economic rights, such as the right to private property, the right to freedom of entrepreneurial activity, to equal rights of competition, the formation of small and medium-sized businesses, the formation of an effective economy, the middle class - the foundations of civil society - are impossible. Without a person defending his rights to participate in the management of state affairs, both directly and through his representatives, and the rights to receive information, it is impossible to establish public control over the activities of the government, which will force the state to implement laws and work effectively for the common good.

Essentially, the process of eradicating the causes of corruption begins today with each individual person, his legal and civil self-determination and self-expression. The fight against corruption is nothing more than the struggle of citizens for their rights, for responsible, honest and effective government, and ultimately, for a decent, safe, prosperous life.

To achieve these goals, civil society must establish public control over the activities of government authorities. Public control is the accountability of government bodies and officials to citizens. It is very important to develop democratic institutions that increase the accountability of government to society. This is, first of all, the free development of the media, free elections, democratic development of parliament, political parties, active development local government, etc. It is the aggregate pluralism of the media that ensures the implementation of the rights to freedom of speech, receipt, transmission, production and dissemination of information. Therefore, this civil society institution can and should conduct public anti-corruption discussions, highlight the anti-corruption actions of the state and society, conduct its own anti-corruption investigations, show and publish facts of corruption.

To fully combat corruption, the media must take a serious step towards further liberation from the tutelage of the state. Denationalization of the media should take place at the level of both the federal center and the regions. There is no need for any printed media, both federal, regional and local (except for purely official bulletins and the army press), to be owned by any government authorities.

The media must be subject to strict conditions of financial responsibility for violating the law. This will make it possible to create a system of civilian control in this area.

Important form public control over the activities of state power are parliamentary investigations. In this regard, the public organization “Public Anti-Corruption Committee” developed a bill “On Parliamentary Investigations”. Its goal, firstly, is to establish public control over the activities of executive authorities and their officials within the framework of current legislation. Secondly, to strengthen the democratic order of organization and functioning of state power. Thirdly, the purpose of the bill is to inform civil society about the circumstances and causes of negative events of public significance. Finally, the purpose of the bill is to develop recommendations for eliminating the consequences of such events and preventing them.

Parliamentary investigations are conducted in a transparent manner. All conclusions and decisions of parliamentary investigations are published in the media and posted on relevant websites on the Internet.

Political parties can play a serious role in public control over the activities of government authorities. In this regard, the fight against corruption, which today threatens Russia’s national interests, may become the cornerstone of the strategies and tactics of political parties. Parties can be the vanguard in anti-corruption activities. But in order to truly carry out this activity, we ourselves must become responsible and transparent. “It is unacceptable when civilized political competition is replaced by a selfish struggle for status rent. When the financial side of the activities of political parties is still hidden from the public, when the market for election technologies and lobbying services is focused primarily on the shadow sector,” the Message of the President of Russia emphasized Federal Assembly May 26, 2004.

Consequently, in order to criticize government authorities for corruption, parties themselves must open up their financial activities. Only in this case will political parties be able to truly participate in anti-corruption activities, such as: conducting parliamentary investigations that expose corruption; hold parliamentary hearings on anti-corruption programs, organize broad socio-political discussions on the fight against corruption; carry out anti-corruption examinations of bills and existing legal acts.

In order to take an active part in anti-corruption activities, business must become more responsible to society and the country as a whole. The social responsibility of business is specific: strict payment of taxes, investment in one’s own country, transparency of business. And this is often still not the case. Meanwhile, the country’s urgent problems require business to change the vector of development and move from the morality of “wild capitalism” to work within the framework of the law, transparency for the benefit of the country. The task of business today is to ensure increased competitiveness of the economy and increased prosperity Russian society. This is where new standards come from, which every entrepreneur must follow. Firstly, business must be efficient: move from redistributing resources to creating and developing production. Secondly, business must be innovative and transparent, that is, develop new technologies, pay all taxes, and be law-abiding. Thirdly, business must be civilized: value its reputation and strive for the best global corporate standards. Finally, business must be patriotic and socially responsible.

Civil society at the local government level has significant opportunities for anti-corruption activities. These include citizens’ meetings where anti-corruption decisions can be made. These include public anti-corruption hearings, which are initiated by citizens. These include meetings of citizens on issues of corruption in the local government system. These include citizens’ appeals to local governments to uncover facts of corruption.

In order to form and implement an effective anti-corruption policy, organize interaction and coordination between government bodies and society in the fight against corruption, it seems relevant to intensify and give a new quality to the work of the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for the fight against corruption.

For these purposes, Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of November 24, 2003 No. 1384
“On the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for the Fight against Corruption” established the need to form an Anti-Corruption Commission. The work of the Commission, according to the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation, should be focused on analyzing the activities of federal government bodies, government bodies of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments, in order to identify the causes and conditions that contribute to the emergence and spread of corruption, as well as anti-corruption expertise of legislation.

The next measure was the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of February 3, 2007.
No. 129 “On the formation of an interdepartmental working group to prepare proposals for the implementation in the legislation of the Russian Federation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention against Corruption of October 23, 2003 and the Council of Europe Convention on Criminal Liability for Corruption of January 27, 1999.”

The time has come when a social order to eradicate corruption as a system of social relations has been formed. On May 19, 2008, Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 815 “On measures to combat corruption” was issued.

To eradicate corruption means to create a strong legal and democratic state that effectively serves all of us, Russian citizens. Defeating corruption means creating a competitive economy, overcoming poverty, and increasing the well-being of Russians. Eliminating corruption means establishing a new quality of life, social stability, order and justice. Eliminating corruption means forming a mature civil society, a society of free, responsible and creative people. Eliminating corruption means stopping terrorism in our country, protecting the lives of citizens, preserving the integrity and unity of Russia, making it a strong and competitive country in the world community.

§4. Basic principles of anti-corruption

§5. Anti-corruption entities and their powers

Chapter 2. Measures to prevent corruption §1. Anti-corruption examination of regulatory legal acts and their projects

§2. Organizational and legal ways to exclude unjustified interference in the activities of civil servants in order to induce them to commit corruption offenses

§3. Anti-corruption restrictions imposed on a citizen who previously held a civil service position

§4. Public and parliamentary control in the field of anti-corruption

Chapter 3. Legal status of a civil servant in connection with ensuring the prevention of corruption

§1. Qualification requirements for citizens applying for civil service positions

§2. Basic rights of a civil servant related to the performance of professional duties

§3. Basic anti-corruption responsibilities of a civil servant and requirements for his official conduct

§4. Anti-corruption prohibitions in connection with public service

Chapter 4. Conflict of interest in the public service §1. The concept and content of conflict of interest in the public service

§2. Powers of the commission to comply with requirements for official conduct of civil servants and resolve conflicts of interest

§3. Responsibilities of a civil servant and a representative of his employer to prevent conflicts of interest

§2. Administrative procedures for the performance of public functions (provision of public services)

§3. Monitoring the implementation of administrative regulations and appealing against their violations

Chapter 6. Prevention of corruption risks when placing orders for government needs §1. Legal basis for preventing corruption when placing orders for government needs

§2. Anti-corruption support for order placement methods

§3. Anti-corruption requirements for procurement participants and specialized organizations

§4. Corruption risks when performing R&D and their prevention

§2. Powers and responsibilities of representatives of the state control (supervision) body when conducting an inspection

§3. Scheduled and unscheduled inspections. Anti-corruption requirements for their implementation

§4. Basic rights of legal entities and individual entrepreneurs in connection with the inspection

Chapter 8. Responsibility for corruption offenses §1. Responsibility of individuals and legal entities for committing corruption offenses

§2. Criminal, administrative, civil and disciplinary liability for corruption offenses

§2. Subjects carrying out inspections and their powers

§3. Subject of inspection and grounds for its implementation

§4. Administrative procedures for conducting an inspection

§5. Using scan results

Chapter 10. Anti-corruption monitoring §1. Subject, tasks and goals of anti-corruption monitoring

§2. Monitoring criminal and judicial law enforcement practices in the fight against corruption

Information on the application by courts of maximum criminal sanctions to those guilty of committing certain corruption crimes in 2007-2009. (V %)

Comparative information on rarely and often imposed types of criminal punishment for committing certain corruption crimes in Russia in 2007-2009.

§2. Promising directions of public-state anti-corruption interaction

Workshop on mastering educational material Glossary

Questions for self-test and exam preparation

§4. Basic principles of anti-corruption

The principles on which anti-corruption activities are based, based on those defined in art. 3 of the Federal Law of December 25, 2008 N 273-FZ “On Combating Corruption” can be divided into general legal and special.

The following principles have general legal significance: recognition, provision and protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen; legality; publicity and openness of the activities of state bodies and local governments; the inevitability of responsibility for committing corruption offenses.

Special legal significance for anti-corruption purposes can be assigned to the principles of: integrated use of political, organizational, information and propaganda, socio-economic, legal, special and other measures; priority application of measures to prevent corruption; cooperation between the state and civil society institutions, international organizations and individuals.

The combination of these anti-corruption principles makes sense when considering their functional purpose.

Firstly, anti-corruption activities are based on the use of various measures, both punitive and preventive. Secondly, these principles are multi-vector, because they are focused on different anti-corruption participants from a wide range of entities (state authorities, local governments, civil society institutions, international organizations, individuals). This situation creates high risks of going beyond the legality of those anti-corruption actors who have neither special nor professional training and skills in anti-corruption activities. Unfortunately, anti-corruption experience Russian history shows that the goals of combating corruption in practice often take on the properties of opportunistic considerations, and sometimes even illegal actions on the part of those who are called upon to carry out true counteraction. In this regard, the statement of the famous French thinker C. Helvetius that knowledge of certain principles easily replaces ignorance of certain facts becomes relevant.

Ultimately, through a combination of principles, it can be emphasized that combating corruption has common legal grounds for all entities involved in it without exception. In this regard, it makes practical sense to analyze the content of those principles, if observed, there is likely to be widespread interaction between different anti-corruption actors.

The principle of integrated use of political, organizational, information and propaganda, socio-economic, legal, special and other anti-corruption measures provides not only for the coordination of the actions of entities involved in the process of implementing these measures. The beginnings of this principle are laid in the activities of the Anti-Corruption Council under the President of the Russian Federation, within the framework of which responsible representation can be noted in each of the areas that comprehensively make up the principle under consideration. Along with this, the comprehensive nature of the application of the listed anti-corruption measures is reflected in the National Anti-Corruption Plans and the National Anti-Corruption Strategy.

In this regard, it should be noted that the risks associated with combating corruption “blindly” are completely excluded. Meanwhile, the implementation of the principle under consideration should have the property of such a combination in which the implementation of one of the areas, if possible, takes into account its consequences for another independent area of anti-corruption. It is important to emphasize that amateur implementation of directions (especially at the level of constituent entities of the Russian Federation) is unacceptable and is fraught with the formation of results contrary to those expected. For example, additional incentives for employees performing official duties in conditions of increased corruption risks with the so-called “compensation package”, without proper organization of work to comply with the requirements for official conduct, will, at a minimum, discredit the measures taken to prevent corruption.

The principle of priority application of measures to prevent corruption is expressed in the early adoption of preventive measures aimed, first of all, at eliminating the causes and conditions conducive to corruption. This principle requires comprehensive implementation. For example, based on the results of inspections carried out by the prosecutor's office, during which shortcomings in the legislation were identified that contributed to corruption, along with prosecutorial response measures, substantive law-making initiatives can be taken that exclude corruption determinants at the legislative level. In addition, this principle presupposes a balanced approach to the selection of measures not only within the framework of their degree (punitive and preventive, in favor of the latter). It is also important to have the right combination of general and special measures to prevent corruption.

In this regard, let us turn to the same example, but in its different content. Thus, the introduction of mechanisms for additional internal control over the activities of employees whose duties are exposed to the risk of corruption (through the use of technical means, such as the installation of web cameras in office premises) should be justified in use only when other measures, primarily general prevention ( for example, the same “compensation package”) are ineffective. In other words, special means of preventing corruption in the form of excessive “tightening the screws” (moreover, often feigned), when other measures work, can do more harm than good.

Along with this, for the correct implementation of the principle under consideration, it is certainly important to understand the limits of preventive activities outlined by the status and functions of various entities involved in combating corruption. An analysis of law enforcement practice shows that the insufficiency or lack of competence of organizers (performers) in activities to prevent corruption to a decisive extent predetermines miscalculations, errors and systemic failures for the general goals of combating corruption. So, for example, conducting an anti-corruption examination of legal acts by the developers of these acts may turn out to be not only biased, but also unauthorized for the purpose of eliminating “identified” corruption norms, and especially in cases where the examination was carried out by unauthorized entities.

The principle of cooperation between the state and civil society institutions, international organizations and individuals in combating corruption is given attention special attention in anti-corruption conventions. For example, Article 13 of the UN Convention against Corruption notes the need for public institutions to facilitate the active participation of “individuals and groups outside the public sector, such as civil society, non-governmental organizations and community-based organizations, in the prevention of corruption and the fight against it." Based on the recommended measures for the participation of civil society institutions in anti-corruption conventions, we can identify those whose implementation is relevant to the current Russian reality. In the conventional reading, these are measures related to:

1) with increased transparency and promotion of public involvement in decision-making processes;

2) ensuring efficient access to information for the population;

3) with the implementation of public awareness activities that contribute to the creation of an atmosphere of intolerance towards corruption, as well as the implementation of public education programs, including training programs in schools and universities.

In terms of implementation of these provisions into domestic practice, the following can be noted.

The implementation of the first measure can be used in a wide range. In particular, it can be seen in the conditions of reforming the models of socio-economic and administrative policy of the state, according to which the need for a new understanding of the place and role of non-profit organizations is dictated, including the denationalization of the market for the provision of a number of services that were previously the subject of a monopoly on the part of the state . Obvious legal grounds for the participation of the population in management decision-making can be considered in the context of the requirements of the Federal Law of October 6, 2003 N 131-FZ "On the General Principles of the Organization of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation", Federal Law of June 12, 2002 N 67-FZ “On the basic guarantees of electoral rights and the right to participate in a referendum of citizens of the Russian Federation” (in paragraph 53, page 2). The norms of natural resource legislation universally note the mandatory participation of citizens, public and religious organizations in resolving issues relating to their rights in the relevant area, as well as participation in the preparation of decisions, the implementation of which may lead to adverse consequences for them. In particular, such provisions are contained in art. 3 and 12 of the Federal Law of January 10, 2002 N 7-FZ “On Environmental Protection”, in ï. 4 pages 1 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation, in ï. 6 cm. 3 of the Water Code of the Russian Federation.

There are also sufficient normative legal grounds for the implementation of the second measure of citizen participation in activities to prevent corruption, namely, related to ensuring effective access to information for the population. In accordance with the article. 38 of the Law of the Russian Federation of December 27, 1991 N 2124-1 “On the Mass Media,” citizens have the right to promptly receive through the media reliable information about the activities of government bodies and organizations, public associations, and their officials. The intended purpose of anti-corruption property can be assessed by the norms of the Federal Law of May 2, 2006 N 59-FZ "On the procedure for considering appeals from citizens of the Russian Federation", which provides for a set of decisions on issues related to the procedure for ensuring citizens' access to information.

The implementation of the third measure, concerning the formation of an information field of intolerance towards corruption, including through the implementation of educational programs at various levels, must be associated not just with the active use of modern telecommunications and educational technologies. Information support is just a form that can have constant or variable properties. Much more important is the content and mechanisms for presenting anti-corruption material, which should not be faceless, but, on the contrary, be targeted and professionally competent.

For example, for the business community, those anti-corruption programs (educational, informational) will be constructive, the content of which is set not by experts who arbitrate corruption situations, but by responsible persons of public authorities who have the appropriate powers to prevent corruption and respond to its manifestations.

Counter terrorism- activities of state authorities and local governments in:

a) prevention of terrorism, including the identification and subsequent elimination of the causes and conditions conducive to the commission of terrorist acts (prevention of terrorism);

b) identification, prevention, suppression, disclosure and investigation of a terrorist act (fight against terrorism);

c) minimizing and (or) eliminating the consequences of terrorism.

Legal basis for countering terrorism

The legal basis for countering terrorism is the Constitution of the Russian Federation, generally recognized principles and norms of international law, international treaties of the Russian Federation, the Federal Law on Countering Terrorism, and regulatory legal acts of the President of the Russian Federation.

Basic principles of countering terrorism

Countering terrorism in the Russian Federation is based on the following main principles: principles:

Ensuring and protecting fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen;

Legality;

The inevitability of punishment for carrying out terrorist activities;

Systematic and comprehensive use of political, informational and propaganda, socio-economic, legal, special and other measures to counter terrorism;

Cooperation of the state with public and religious associations, international and other organizations, citizens in countering terrorism;

Confidentiality of information about special means, technical techniques, tactics for implementing measures to combat terrorism, as well as about the composition of their participants;

Inadmissibility of political concessions to terrorists;

Minimizing and (or) eliminating the consequences of terrorism;

TYPES OF TERRORIST ACTS AND WAYS OF THEIR IMPLEMENTATION.

Terrorist acts can be of the following types.

1. Sabotage(explosion, spraying of toxic substances, etc.). Explosions are carried out in vehicles or buildings with the intention of causing damage and causing casualties, as well as open space to destroy people. As a result of the explosions, a large number of people suffer random people, therefore it is precisely this tactic that leads to the most powerful psychological effect. Another type of explosive activity is the use of suicide bombers Islamic terrorists. Terrorists also mine various objects: residential buildings, shops, banks, hotels, airports, highways, and industrial facilities.

2. Kidnapping. Significant figures capable of attracting public attention are kidnapped: famous politicians, officials, journalists, diplomats. They are committed in order to achieve the fulfillment of political demands, to intimidate the ruling strata, and to obtain funds for the activities of the organization.

3. Attempt and murder. It is distinguished by demonstrative targeting, therefore it is effective for targeted psychological impact for a narrow audience

4. Robbery (expropriation). It is carried out both for the purpose of obtaining the funds necessary for the struggle, and for propaganda purposes.

5. Hijacking- seizure of a vehicle: airplane, railway train, car, ship.

Capturing buildings.

7. Armed attack without death and causing minor property damage. It is carried out by terrorist organizations in their infancy, when they have not yet accumulated experience in conducting large-scale operations, as well as by actively operating organizations that only need to demonstrate the ability to conduct armed operations.

8. Cyberterrorism (cyberwar)- attacks on computer networks. Political terrorism is not the only type of violent activity in the political sphere. Political assassinations and guerrilla warfare stand apart from terrorist activities: At the same time, especially dangerous forms of crime are not a monopoly of terrorists; ordinary bandits often resort to terrorist methods.