Criminological portrait of the identity of the bribe-taker serving in the internal affairs bodies

Shirshanova Ekaterina Alekseevna Postgraduate student, Department of Criminology, St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia 198206, Russia, Saint Petersburg, Pilyutov Pilot str., 1 Katushka915@yandex.ru

One of the central problems of criminology is the study of the identity of the criminal. It is criminology that studies the nature of the criminal's personality, its formation, psychological and sociological features, and also identifies a certain typology.

In the context of this study, it is necessary to determine the etymology of the concept of "personality". In a broad, traditional sense, a personality is "an individual as a subject of social relations and conscious activity" ^{[1, pp. 40-44]}. If we turn to the works of Russian psychologists, we can find the following definitions of personality: B.G. Ananyev wrote that personality is: "a social individual, an object and a subject of the historical process" ^{[2, p. 294]}.

A.N. Leontiev considers personality in the following context: "personality is a kind of unique unity, a kind of integrity" ^{[3, p. 78]}. According to A.G. Kovalev: "personality acts as an integral formation of mental processes, mental states and psychological properties. The personality itself is a synthesis" ^{[4, p. 63]}.

Thus, we can propose the following definition of personality – it is a bio-psycho-social being endowed with rights and responsibilities, having its own needs. This definition indicates that a person is formed in the process of social life, but at the same time does not discard the biological inclinations inherent in her from birth. The existence of rights, duties and needs emphasizes that a person participates in the social life of society and has certain social statuses.

Returning to the identity of the criminal, it should be noted that a person cannot be born a criminal, just as he cannot be born a person. In the course of personality formation, taking into account the impact of negative social processes, the personality of the criminal is formed.

In criminology, many scientists have been engaged in the study of the criminal's identity. For example, Y.M. Antonyan and V.E. Eminov wrote the following: "The criminal's personality appears in the totality of socially significant negative properties formed in it in the process of diverse and systematic interactions with other people. These properties, which are also amenable to correction, the personality, of course, is not exhausted"^{[5, pp. 107-112]}.

The concept of "criminal personality" is not limited to one person, it includes the whole set of persons who have committed a crime. There is also a point of view in science that it would be correct to say not the identity of the criminal, but "the identity of the person (individual) who commits (committed) a crime" ^{[6, p. 274]}. A more precise definition of the criminal's personality is revealed in the following definition: "In general, it is possible to define the criminal's personality as the personality of a person who committed a crime due to his inherent psychological characteristics, antisocial views, negative attitude to moral values and choosing a socially dangerous path to meet his needs or failure to show the necessary activity in preventing a negative result"^{[7, p. 32]}.

It should be noted that persons who have committed careless crimes may lack some of the features inherent in persons who commit intentional crimes, but this fact does not mean that it is not necessary to study the criminal behavior of "careless criminals". This feature allows us to argue that the criminal's personality is an independent, psycho-social type.

The study of the criminal's personality is based on the identification of those features and properties that gave rise to criminal behavior. Criminologists distinguish various properties to be studied. For example, N.F. Kuznetsova considers it necessary to investigate socio-demographic, socio-role and other characteristics of the personality of criminals ^{[8, pp. 124-132]}. A.I. Alekseev identifies the following criteria when characterizing the personality of a criminal: socio-demographic (gender, age, marital status, education, official position); criminal- legal (the presence or absence of a criminal record at the time of the commission of the crime, the individual or group nature of criminal activity); moral and psychological (needs, motives for committing a crime, value orientations)^{[9, pp. 84-91]}.

To date, A.V. Kokurin and V.E. Petrov have studied the personality of a criminal of an employee of the internal affairs bodies convicted of corruption-related crimes, who note that in order to compile psychological and criminological characteristics of such criminals, two groups of factors must be taken into account: "1) the main status socio-demographic parameters (gender, age, service experience in the internal affairs bodies, education, marital status, etc.); 2) psychological characteristics of the personality of corrupt officials." ^{[10, p. 112]}. T.A. Malykhina in her research notes that the selfish motivation of the criminal personality of an employee of the internal affairs bodies is one of the determinants of corruption in the internal affairs bodies: "Manifestations of various types of self-interest (such as greed-need, greed-parasitism, official greed, greed-greed) act as the main causes of corruption as a deformation of consciousness at the economic level" ^{[11, p. 43]}.

In our opinion, the consideration of the criminal's personality as an object of criminological science should not consist only in listing certain personality traits. It seems that the criminal's personality should be studied as a whole, as a subject of social relations, as a carrier of biological, psychological and social characteristics. But with such a full-fledged study, some problems may arise. For example, when studying the identity of a bribe-taker, when familiarizing with a criminal case, it is difficult to determine the motivation for committing this crime, since it can be formed even before a decision is made to commit a crime.

Investigating the problem of bribery in the internal affairs bodies, in order to study the identity of the bribe-taker, as well as the mechanism of criminal behavior, we studied 107 sentences of district courts of various subjects of the Russian Federation of general jurisdiction using the electronic system of judicial and regulatory acts "Sudakt", as well as those in the archives of the courts of St. Petersburg. In accordance with the materials studied, 122 employees of the internal affairs bodies of the Russian Federation were brought to responsibility for committing a crime under Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Taking a bribe", among them 4 federal state civil servants. Of these, 117 men and 5 women are demographically identified.

Speaking about age, it should be noted that most often this crime is committed at the age of 36-40 years, at the second stage the age of 31-35 years, in the third place persons aged 25-30 years.  This trend is explained by the fact that at the age of 36-40, an employee of the internal affairs bodies has been serving for a long time and has some authority among colleagues and managers, and also has special knowledge about how crimes are committed, as well as what ways can be mitigated if he is brought to justice. An example here is the Criminal Case No. 11902400022000121 (Verdict of the Petrodvorets District Court of St. Petersburg dated 12/14/2020 in case No. 1902400022000121) on the charge of K. in the commission of a crime under paragraph "b, c" of Part 5 of Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Held the post of investigator of the Department for investigation of crimes against persons and property FROM OMVD Russia in the Petrodvorets district of St. Petersburg with the special rank of major of justice staff of the Executive authority responsible for drafting and implementing state policy and normative-legal regulation in the sphere of internal Affairs, designed to protect the lives, health, rights and freedoms of citizens of the Russian Federation, foreign citizens, persons without citizenship, to counter crime, protect public order and property, to ensure public safety, having organizational and administrative powers in relation to an indefinite number of persons, i.e. as an official by virtue of his official position and responsibilities related to the implementation procedure for the investigation of criminal cases in the course of investigation of criminal case no. XXX excited 27.06.2019 G. entrusted to it by the leadership of the MIA of Russia in the Petrodvorets district of St. Petersburg, in the period from 17.09.2019 on 21.10.2019 at numerous meetings with relevant procedural status of the suspect in the case, in various places in the territory of the Petrodvorets district of St. Petersburg, said the latter requirement on transfer of a bribe in the form of money in the amount of 500 000 rubles, i.e. in a large size for the Commission of acts within its authority, namely for early completion of the investigation in the criminal case, as well as for unlawful actions, namely a reduction in the amount of the damage caused by H, and not the selection of the criminal case materials, evidence of the Commission of H crimes under Article 199 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

K. received a required bribe in the form of money in the amount of 15,000 rubles, as well as a dummy of money in the amount of 485,000 rubles, and in total in the amount of 500,000 rubles, from a company operating under the OPM "Operational Experiment", after which he was detained by employees of the USB GU of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in St. Petersburg and Leningrad areas.

1.                 During the court session, the accused K. claimed that in accordance with the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of 09.07.2013 No. 24 "On judicial practice in cases of bribery and other corruption crimes", his actions should be qualified under Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Fraud", referring to paragraph 24 of the said Resolution, which states that: "If an official has obtained valuables by deception or abuse of trust for committing actions (inaction) in the interests of the giver or other persons or for facilitating such actions that he cannot carry out due to the lack of appropriate official powers or official position, the deed should be qualified as fraud committed by a person using his official position. The owner of the transferred valuables in these cases is responsible for attempted bribery or commercial bribery. At the same time, such a person cannot be recognized as a victim and has no right to claim the return of these valuables, as well as compensation for damage in case of their loss." (Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 24 of 09.07.2013 "On judicial practice in cases of bribery and other corruption crimes" [Electronic resource]. – Access mode: https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_149092 /. – (accessed: 02.09.2023).

However , the perfect K. the actions completely contradict this provision due to the fact that he had the appropriate official powers in the criminal case he was investigating.

The next criterion characterizing the identity of the criminal-bribe–taker is the length of service in the internal affairs bodies. The most common crime under Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Receiving a bribe" was committed by employees whose service experience ranged from 11 years to 15 years inclusive. This fact can be explained by the same as the age of the commission of the crime: authority among colleagues, the trust of managers, the availability of the necessary knowledge and the mechanism of committing a crime, as well as how to mitigate your punishment in case of criminal prosecution. Persons with long seniority usually act in a group with the person(s) with the least seniority.

In support of this statement, an example can be given of criminal case No. 12102400015000033 (Verdict of the Petrodvorets District Court of St. Petersburg dated 05/16/2022 in case No. 12102400015000033) on charges of A. and V. of committing a crime under paragraph "a" of Part 5 of Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Taking a bribe", from the materials of which it follows that the captain police A., holding the position of senior inspector of the search group of the traffic police Department of the OMVD of Russia for the Petrodvorets district of St. Petersburg, that is, being an official of the internal affairs bodies, and police Lieutenant V., holding the position of inspector of the search group of the traffic police Department of the OMVD of Russia for the Petrodvorets district of St. Petersburg, that is, being an official, acting intentionally, out of selfish motives, realizing the criminal nature of their actions, reliably knowing that they have the material of an administrative investigation – determination, upon the commission of an administrative offense under Part 2 of Article 12.27, establishing N. as the guilty person, acting as a group of persons by prior agreement, during the period from 08.06.2021 to 28.06.2021 A. and V. Being on the territory of the Petrodvorets district of St. Petersburg, they repeatedly demanded from N. a bribe in the form of money in a significant amount for committing illegal actions, namely not bringing N. to administrative responsibility.

As a result, on 06/29/2021, acting intentionally, by a group of persons by prior agreement, out of selfish motives, in order to implement the joint above-mentioned intent, while in the premises of the Traffic Police Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Petrodvorets district of St. Petersburg, illegally, personally received from N. a bribe in the form of money in the amount of 60,000 rubles, that is, in a significant amount.

It can be seen from the case materials that V., having a special rank of "police lieutenant", graduated from the St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in 2020 and was appointed to this position, where, under the influence of senior colleagues, he was involved in committing a crime under paragraph "a" of Part 5 of Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Taking a bribe".

The next criterion that we have identified to characterize the identity of the criminal-bribe–taker of an employee of the internal affairs bodies is a special title.

The largest number of persons who committed a crime had the special title of "police captain". This can be explained by the fact that the internal affairs bodies have a corresponding special title for each position. For example, a senior traffic police inspector cannot receive a special rank higher than "senior police lieutenant", and in the investigated criminal cases, these persons were most often brought to justice. Firstly, this indicates a high prevalence of grassroots corruption in the internal affairs bodies. Secondly, employees holding positions for which the assignment of a special rank of the middle commanding staff is provided do not seek career growth, since they see the possibility of illegal enrichment in their position.

Most of those convicted under this article are married and have minor children. The presence of minor children and a spouse is one of the motivating factors for committing a corruption-oriented crime in order to ensure a decent life for their family through illegal enrichment. This path is obviously wrong and dangerous not only for society, but also for close relatives of the person committing the crime, since when the appropriate punishment is imposed, the entire family of the convicted employee is negatively affected, whether it is a punishment in the form of imprisonment or a fine. However, it should be noted that today there is a trend towards the so-called "civil marriage", which from a legal point of view is correct to call cohabitation, when a man and a woman living together do not register their marriage officially, but at the same time have children together.

Thus, the study of theoretical provisions concerning the identity of the criminal, in conjunction with the empirical data obtained, can offer the following definition: the identity of the criminal of an employee of the internal affairs bodies receiving a bribe is a person who has selfish motives in relation to service in the internal affairs bodies, a negative attitude to the current prohibitions and restrictions, norms of morality and morality, holding the position of an average commanding officer, convenient for receiving a bribe.

Based on the above definition, as well as empirical data of judicial practice, the portrait of the personality of the criminal of an employee of the internal affairs bodies who commits taking a bribe can be characterized as follows: this is a male employee of the internal affairs bodies aged 36 to 40 years, having a selfish motivation and abusing his official position for the purpose of illegal enrichment, having service experience in the bodies of internal affairs from 11 to 15 years old, filling the position of the middle commanding staff, having a dependent minor child, married. The peculiarity of an employee of the internal affairs bodies committing a crime is that he does not have a criminal record, since persons who do not have a criminal record can enter the service of the internal affairs bodies. However, the above portrait of the identity of the criminal of the bribe-taker of an employee of the internal affairs bodies cannot characterize all employees, but only the category that is prone to committing corruption crimes.

The identity of the criminal is one of the most important elements of the criminological characteristics of bribery in the internal affairs bodies. This statement is confirmed by the fact that without the characteristics of the person committing the crime, it is impossible to determine the motivation for committing the crime, to see the mechanism of criminal behavior. The conducted research indicates that judicial practice cannot fully characterize the identity of the criminal-the bribe-taker of an employee of the internal affairs bodies, since the motivational component is often reduced to a formal description, and the formation of motivation can occur for a long time before the commission of a crime. The characteristics of the criminal's personality may be important for the prevention of bribery in the internal affairs bodies, since the theoretical description of the identity of the criminal-the bribe-taker of an employee of the internal affairs bodies can be used when accepting a candidate for service, as well as for further monitoring of current employees.