Problems of the effectiveness of international cooperation of the Customs authorities of the Russian Federation in the law enforcement sphere

Ovchinnikov Sergei Nikolaevich ORCID: 0000-0002-5253-4587 PhD in Law Associate Professor, Department of Theory and History of State and Law, Far Eastern Federal University, Vladivostok 690922, Russia, Primorskii krai, g. Vladivostok, ul. Ostrov Russkii, Pos., 10 sovchinn@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

Atamanchuk Vadim Valentinovich Student, Law School, Far Eastern Federal University 690922, Russia, Primorskii krai, g. G. Vladivostok,, ul. O. Russkii, P., 10 atamanchuk.vv@students.dvfu.ru Other publications by this author

Within the framework of law enforcement activities, the Federal Customs Service of the Russian Federation cooperates with the customs services of foreign states – in 2020, the share of cases initiated by the Federal Customs Service of the Russian Federation according to information received from foreign colleagues in the framework of legal assistance amounted to 1.9% of the total number of criminal cases initiated (40 out of 2,067) and 0.05% of the total number of initiated cases of administrative offenses (58 out of 114,547), and the share of cases initiated as a result of 13 customs special operations involving foreign customs services amounted to 10.1% of the total number of criminal cases initiated (209 out of 2,067) and 0.05% of cases of administrative offenses (55 out of 114,547) ^[1]. In total, the Federal Customs Service of the Russian Federation cooperates with the customs services of 102 countries of the world.

Table 1 presents information based on official statistics of customs authorities in the field of law enforcement (combating drug smuggling) in the period from 2013 to 2021 ^[2].

Table 1. Statistics on the fight of the customs authorities of the Russian Federation against drug smuggling for 2013-2021.

As we can see from the official statistics of the customs authorities of the Russian Federation, the share of indicators achieved using various forms of legal assistance is extremely small against the background of general indicators. At the same time, the quantitative effectiveness of the use of these methods remains, and even a slight increase is observed, however, against the background of an even greater increase in overall indicators, the share of results achieved with the use of forms of legal assistance has fallen significantly. Such a situation testifies to the insufficiently effective development of international customs cooperation in the law enforcement sphere and indicates the presence of significant unresolved problems in this area.

Issues of the effectiveness of law enforcement in general and customs authorities in particular are actively investigated ^[3,4]. In the literature, it was noted that there were no indicators of the effectiveness of customs authorities in the field of international customs cooperation. I. A. Gokinaeva and A.V. Agapova proposed to assess the effectiveness of activities in terms of sending requests to foreign states such an indicator of the effectiveness of activities as "The proportion of requests to foreign states, the response to which confirms the stated information in the total number of requests sent". Moreover, the information stated by the declarant must be confirmed ^[5].  If we are talking about law enforcement activities, on the contrary, non-confirmation of the stated information may indicate a customs offense and the effectiveness of the request. Simple arithmetic of this kind is unlikely to work on the effectiveness of activities.

From the point of view of international legal regulation, the following factors can be identified that hinder the growth of the effectiveness of international customs cooperation:

1. Full-scale and operational international cooperation of customs authorities in the law enforcement sphere is possible only within the framework of specialized agreements on mutual assistance in customs matters. General agreements on legal assistance contain insufficient legal tools for cooperation, complicated by the need for interdepartmental interaction within the state. At the same time, specialized agreements have been concluded with only 61 out of 102 States with which such cooperation is possible in principle ^[6].

2. The predominant form of legal assistance in customs cooperation in the law enforcement sphere is the use of the controlled delivery method ^[7]. The key reasons for the insufficient effectiveness of the application of this form are: a limited list of countries with which such a form of legal assistance is provided, casual legal regulation of this form, the almost complete absence of a legal framework for controlled deliveries at the EAEU level.

It is important to note that according to the Customs Service Development Strategy for the period up to 2030, cooperation with the EAEU member states is a priority area of international cooperation. At the same time, the source base for interaction between the customs authorities of the Russian Federation and the EAEU countries in law enforcement is currently confusing and ambiguous. The following chain of reference norms takes place:

1. The Customs Code of the EAEU provides that legal assistance and interaction of customs authorities in criminal cases and cases of administrative offenses are carried out in accordance with international treaties within the Union.

2. The Agreement on Legal Assistance and Interaction of the Customs Authorities of the Customs Union member States in Criminal Cases and Cases of Administrative Offenses directly describes in sufficient detail the procedure for legal assistance and interaction in cases of administrative offenses. Regarding the provision of legal assistance in criminal cases, the agreement refers to the international treaties applicable to the parties.

3. At the level of these international treaties, the chain gets lost. Due to the existence of an extensive framework for regulating customs issues by the legislation of the EAEU, bilateral agreements on mutual assistance in customs matters have not been concluded between the participating countries. At the same time, cooperation in this area is still possible with the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Republic of Kyrgyzstan, but already within the framework of the activities of another international organization - the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Of the 4 EAEU member states, only one - the Republic of Kyrgyzstan – has signed an Agreement on legal assistance and legal relations in civil, family and criminal cases, in which interaction of customs authorities in criminal proceedings is possible. This situation explains the extremely low proportion of controlled delivery in the total volume of the results of the fight against drug smuggling, and also explains why "for the first time a unique interdepartmental operation of law enforcement agencies of the EAEU member states" in 2021 occurred with the Republic of Kyrgyzstan ^[8].

On the basis of strategic documents, action plans are adopted to achieve the stated goals and eliminate the identified problems. If the problem has not been identified directly in the Strategy, it will not find further resolution in practice. In this regard, it is considered expedient to formulate the following tasks in the field of international cooperation in addition to the formation of strategic documents:

1. Filling and updating of the international legal framework within the framework of the Union regulating cooperation with the customs authorities of the EAEU countries in the field of law enforcement, including the use of the controlled delivery method.

2. Filling and updating of the international legal framework with the States with which agreements on legal assistance regulating mutual cooperation in customs affairs have been concluded.

The consolidation of such tasks at the strategy level will allow implementing an effective legal policy, will direct the attention of the legislator to existing problems and will contribute to improving the effectiveness of international cooperation of customs authorities in the law enforcement sphere.

Another significant drawback of the Customs Service Development Strategy until 2030 is a serious restriction of priority interaction subjects – the EAEU member states and the People's Republic of China are included in their list. At the same time, the National Security Strategy (part of the implementation of which is the implementation of the law enforcement function by customs authorities) assumes a much broader interaction – the priority areas also include the BRICS group countries (with special attention to cooperation within the framework of the RIC – Russia, India, China), the SCO countries (in addition to those already mentioned in other organizations of the states The SCO includes Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, India). Due to the fact that the Development Strategy of the customs service has not been worked out in the field of international cooperation in the field of law enforcement, cooperation with the listed countries also falls out of the priorities of international cooperation of customs authorities. At the same time, both the BRICS and the SCO are organizations whose activities are largely related to the customs sphere.

Taking into account the expansion of the tasks of international cooperation in the customs sphere, it seems advisable to expand the geography of this cooperation by prioritizing interaction with the customs services of the EAEU, BRICS, SCO member states - in this case, the geography of international customs cooperation will coincide with the priority areas of international cooperation of the Russian Federation as a whole, which, with the help of the existing legal and technical base of these organizations that will quickly create suitable conditions for international cooperation of customs authorities, including in the field of law enforcement.

The Action Plan currently being implemented for the implementation of the Customs Service Development Strategy for the period 2021-2024 practically does not contain measures aimed at improving the contractual and legal framework of international customs cooperation at the EAEU level - the only event affecting the EAEU in any way is formulated at length and does not concern the contractual framework in principle – "assistance to the development of integration processes at the EAEU level". the EAEU space" ^[9]. Out of the field of execution is the resolution of the issue of insufficient contractual and legal regulation of the interaction of customs authorities in the law enforcement sphere (especially in the fight against smuggling) with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus, Armenia. A similar problem is relevant in relation to one of the countries that joined the SCO, but did not join the Tashkent Treaty and do not have bilateral agreements on mutual assistance in customs matters with the Russian Federation – Tajikistan.

It is important to note that the current Action Plan already provides for a trend to resolve one of the identified problems – a course has been taken to ensure cooperation and mutual assistance in customs matters with Afghanistan, Namibia, Nigeria, Nicaragua, the UAE, Pakistan, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Switzerland, Sri Lanka, South Africa. This trend needs to be continued in the future with the expansion of the list of countries. It seems appropriate to establish priority in relation to countries with which agreements on legal assistance in criminal and administrative matters have already been concluded – cooperation is already possible in relation to these countries, but it is fraught with difficulties in implementing intra-state interdepartmental interaction, which significantly reduces the effectiveness of cooperation between customs authorities in the law enforcement sphere.

In connection with the above, it seems appropriate to identify and implement the following measures in order to achieve the objectives of the Customs Service Development Strategy when forming an Action Plan for the period 2025-2030.:

1. Ensuring cooperation and mutual assistance with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus, Armenia, Tajikistan in the implementation of law enforcement functions by the customs authorities of the Russian Federation. The form of implementation is international legal acts, the expected result is the creation of a contractual and legal basis for interaction with the customs authorities of the EAEU countries, the SCO in the implementation of the law enforcement function by the customs authorities of the Russian Federation. When replenishing and developing the contractual legal framework, special attention should be paid to the regulation of specific forms of legal assistance, including, but not limited to, such forms as surveillance, controlled delivery.

2. Ensuring cooperation and mutual assistance in customs matters with Abkhazia, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Vietnam, Greece, Indonesia, Iraq, Yemen, Cambodia, Canada, Mali, Moldova, Mongolia, Panama, Tunisia. The form of implementation is international legal acts, the expected result is the creation of a contractual and legal basis for interaction with the customs authorities of foreign states on all aspects of customs administration.

The proposed methods, if properly implemented, can eliminate the identified problems in the field of international legal regulation of law enforcement activities of customs authorities, increase the effectiveness of international cooperation and increase the effectiveness of law enforcement activities of customs authorities both in general and in terms of international cooperation.

It is important to note that in addition to international legal methods of solving the identified problems, achieving the goal requires significant logistical and organizational resources. Only with an integrated approach is it possible to solve the tasks outlined in the strategic documents. In this regard, the problems raised require detailed study by specialists in the field of customs, economics, and international cooperation for the full development of tools for their resolution.