Not long ago, the State Duma adopted a law amending Article 215.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “Unauthorized connection to oil pipelines, oil product pipelines and gas pipelines or rendering them unusable.” What are the legal consequences of these changes and do they affect ordinary citizens? According to this law, criminal liability is established for repeated unauthorized connection to an oil pipeline, oil product pipeline or gas pipeline. Let us note that the first illegal “tie-in” is considered an administrative offense, liability for which is established by Article 7.19 of the Administrative Code.
Many people underestimate the severity of the law, so they thoughtlessly end up in the dock. The reason is the low level of legal literacy. In particular, when it comes to Article 215.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, at first glance it seems that a legal entity or company that has certain equipment to engage in the theft of state oil may incur criminal liability. But we tend to forget about the massive unauthorized tapping into city gas pipelines.
Just look at the statistics of shutdowns for non-payment; it becomes obvious that a certain proportion of consumers, at any cost, will try to resume gas supplies, and not always through legal means.
Unauthorized tapping is the use of gas after its supply has been interrupted or tapping without special permission. The introduction of criminal liability measures was prompted by the fact that the number of unauthorized connections to the energy transmission system has increased over the years. It turned out that administrative penalties are not enough to stop such violations.
Meanwhile, they are characterized by a huge degree of public danger. In addition to the fact that the crime includes theft of energy resources, unauthorized tappings create the threat of gas or oil leakage, which can lead to fires and explosions and is associated with loss of life, destruction and environmental problems.
It is important to understand that criminal liability arises if administrative punishment was previously applied to the accused. In an earlier version, Article 215.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation implied liability for rendering oil and gas pipelines unusable. Since 2022, the crime includes not only rendering unusable, but also the very fact of unauthorized connection.
Many years of work experience allows me to act as a lawyer under Article 215.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in St. Petersburg. I provide consultations and provide legal assistance in criminal cases related to oil and gas pipelines.
| The layer's services | Cost, rub. |
| Telephone consultation | For free |
| Legal advice during a personal meeting with examination of documents | from 5 000 |
| Work of a lawyer in criminal cases related to oil and gas pipelines | from 60 000 |
Punishment under Article 215.3
Article 215.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation consists of 5 parts. Part 1 describes the main elements of the crime. Acts classified under Part 1 of the article are considered crimes of moderate severity. Unauthorized connections pose a public danger, as they undermine public and state security. Qualified and especially qualified personnel are specified in parts 2 and 3 of this article.
Unauthorized connection to oil pipelines, oil product pipelines and gas pipelines committed by a person subjected to administrative punishment for a similar act is punishable by:
- A fine of up to 80,000 rubles;
- Mandatory work up to 360 hours;
- Correctional labor for up to 2 years;
- Forced labor for the same period;
- Imprisonment for the same period.
Unauthorized connection to main oil and gas pipelines is punishable by a fine of up to 200,000 rubles, or compulsory work for up to 400 hours, or imprisonment for up to 4 years.
Destruction of gas pipelines, oil pipelines and petroleum product pipelines, as well as automation systems, communications or alarm systems associated with their operation for hooligan or selfish reasons is punishable by:
- Fine from 400,000 rubles to 500,000 rubles;
- Compulsory work for up to 480 hours;
- Correctional labor for up to 2 years;
- Forced labor for up to 5 years;
- Imprisonment for up to 5 years.
Aggravating circumstances include the fact that a crime was committed by a group of persons by prior conspiracy. In this case, the term of imprisonment is increased to 6 years. If unauthorized connection or damage to pipelines entails serious consequences or death of a person, then the term of imprisonment can be 8 years.
Another comment on Art. 215.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation
1. The subject of the crime in question includes: oil pipelines, oil product pipelines, gas pipelines, as well as technologically related objects, structures, communications, automation, and alarm systems.
2. The objective side of the crime is characterized by the commission of an act, which may consist of the destruction, damage or otherwise rendering unusable oil pipelines, oil product pipelines, gas pipelines, technologically related objects, structures, communications, automation, and alarm systems.
The deterioration of these items entails criminal liability only if it has resulted or could have resulted in a disruption of their normal operation. Thus, Part 1 provides for two elements of a crime, one of which is material (the onset of socially dangerous consequences is obligatory), and the second refers to elements of a specific danger.
3. The subjective side of the crime is characterized by guilt in the form of direct intent. A mandatory feature is a motive - selfish or hooligan motives.
Peculiarities of a lawyer’s work under Article 215.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation
Crimes related to unauthorized connection to a gas or oil pipeline differ in that criminal cases under Article 215.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are initiated after the fact. This means that the investigation has sufficient evidence against the accused. Obviously, it is almost impossible to terminate a criminal case at the pre-trial investigation stage. The most acceptable outcome is the imposition of a non-custodial sentence. The defendant is unlikely to be satisfied with forced or compulsory labor, so the only option left is to pay a fine. However, without proper legal support you should not count on this type of criminal liability. At the stage of conducting a case, there are a lot of nuances that make it possible to consider the crime in several episodes at once.
Searching for several episodes in a crime is beneficial for the investigation. No matter how paradoxical it may sound, Themis does not always remain blind, and banal inaction on the part of the accused will only aggravate his situation. If everything is left to chance, it is possible that the accused will receive the maximum punishment. The first thing a lawyer has to deal with is an analysis of the legality of the charges brought and an assessment of the actions of law enforcement officers in terms of their compliance with the norms of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The work of a lawyer under Article 215.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is much more difficult than we imagine. The defense attorney not only participates in the trial. He spends most of his time preparing. Also, during the pre-trial investigation, the lawyer accompanies his client and ensures that his rights are not violated. During the interrogation, the lawyer can give advice. An experienced investigator knows all the intricacies of the procedure and can formulate a question in such a way that any answer to it will be provocative. Another trick investigators often use to extract confessions is intimidation. We are not talking about direct threats here. The investigator promises a minimum punishment if there is a confession, and also promises a maximum punishment if there is no confession. The lawyer will stop all kinds of pressure on his client and tell the accused how to correctly answer this or that question.
The accused will be able to avoid criminal liability only if the fact of unauthorized connection to the pipeline was discovered for the first time. This is not so difficult to prove, but without proper legal experience it is not always possible. The direct participation of a lawyer in a court hearing is aimed at ensuring that all the interests of the defendant are respected.
The main goal of the defense is to avoid a custodial sentence and minimize punitive damages.
The fact is that in addition to the court fine, the accused is imposed a fine by the gas service. The calculation system is quite complex; it is based not on the amount of gas consumed, but on the power of the connected devices. Therefore, the numbers may seem exorbitant. A competent lawyer will help make calculations in such a way that the accused is responsible only for the fact of unauthorized connection.
Commentary on Article 215 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation
1. Judicial proceedings are carried out in the form of a court session, but the case cannot always be considered in one court session. The reasons for this may be various circumstances that become obstacles to procedural actions. The emergence and overcoming (elimination) of some obstacles depends on the actions of the participants in the civil process, the existence and elimination of others is not connected with their expression of will. Removing obstacles that arise may also require varying amounts of time.
The current Code of Civil Procedure contains forms of the court's response to obstacles to the consideration of a case that arise in the judicial process. In particular, the court may temporarily suspend the performance of procedural actions during the trial. Suspension of proceedings in a case is an indefinite termination of all procedural actions of the court, caused by objective reasons (independent of the will of the court and persons participating in the case), the specific duration of which cannot be determined.
The distinction between the adjournment of a case (see commentary to Article 169 of the Code of Civil Procedure) and the suspension of proceedings can be made according to the following criteria: on grounds - circumstances, the occurrence of which is associated with the possibility of applying the norms of a particular institution; according to the period of temporary suspension of procedural actions; according to procedural consequences.
The grounds for suspending proceedings in a case are expressly indicated in the law and are divided into two groups: the commented article lists the grounds for suspending proceedings in a case that are obligatory for the court; in Art. 216 of the Code of Civil Procedure are optional grounds, the application of which depends on the discretion of the court itself. The list of grounds for suspending proceedings in any of the above cases is closed and is not subject to broad interpretation.
When suspending proceedings in a case, the period for stopping procedural actions does not depend either on the discretion of the court or on the wishes of other participants in the process, since the grounds for suspending proceedings on the case are objective circumstances. The possibility of resuming proceedings in a case is associated by law with the disappearance of the circumstances that served as the basis for its suspension (see commentary to Article 217 of the Code of Civil Procedure). Naturally, when making a ruling to suspend proceedings in a case, the judge cannot predict the exact time when the above circumstances will cease. When postponing proceedings in a case, the period of temporary suspension of procedural actions in the case is always precisely determined by the court, i.e. the date and time of the next court hearing are indicated, of which all persons participating in the case are notified in the manner prescribed by current legislation. Thus, the period for which the trial is postponed refers to the procedural deadlines assigned by the court (judge), but its limit parameters are not established in the Civil Procedure Code.
Suspension of proceedings in a case entails suspension of all procedural deadlines. Part 1 art. 110 of the Code of Civil Procedure establishes that the course of all unexpired procedural deadlines is suspended simultaneously with the suspension of the proceedings. From the day the proceedings are resumed, the procedural deadlines continue (Part 2 of Article 110 of the Code of Civil Procedure). When adjourned, procedural deadlines are not suspended, but continue to run, including the general deadline established by law for consideration of the case in the appropriate instance.
Both procedural institutions require a temporary suspension of all procedural actions. However, both the suspension of the proceedings and the postponement of the hearing of the case do not exclude the possibility of implementing at this time the institutions of securing a claim and securing evidence.
After the adjournment of the case, the proceedings begin from the very beginning (Part 3 of Article 169 of the Code of Civil Procedure), at the same time Part 4 of Art. 169, due to the principle of procedural economy, presupposes the possibility, under conditions determined by law, to confirm previously given explanations to the participants in the process without repeating them.
The consequences of suspension of proceedings in a case by the legislator, unfortunately, are not clearly defined, except in the case of suspension of proceedings in a case in connection with procedural succession (see commentary to Part 2 of Article 44 of the Code of Civil Procedure). In practice, if the period from the moment of suspension of the proceedings to its resumption is long, taking into account the principle of immediacy, it is advisable to repeat the consideration of the case from the very beginning, since during this time the participants in the process can not only change their position on the case, but also forget everything previously said and explored in this process. The interpretation of the rules of judicial proceedings in Ch. 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which does not contain rules allowing participants to refer to evidence previously examined in another court session without re-examining it, except in cases of adjournment of the trial.
Proceedings in the case, if there are grounds specified in the law, may be suspended when considering the case not only in the court of first instance, but also in any other court (see, for example, the commentary to Article 44 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which allows for the possibility of procedural succession at any stage of the civil process, which is a mandatory basis for suspending the proceedings by virtue of paragraph 2 of the commented article). According to the current Code of Civil Procedure, it is also possible to suspend proceedings in a case at a preliminary court hearing. This is directly stated in Parts 4 and 5 of Art. 152 Code of Civil Procedure. The suspension of the proceedings in these cases is also formalized by issuing a court ruling, which can be appealed (see commentary to Part 5 of Article 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure).
The suspension of enforcement proceedings is also carried out by the court, but according to the rules of Section. VII Civil Procedure Code. At the same time, the grounds for mandatory suspension of enforcement proceedings (see commentary to Article 438 of the Code of Civil Procedure) and optional grounds (see commentary to Article 437 of the Code of Civil Procedure) are practically similar to the grounds for suspension of proceedings in the case specified in the commented article and Art. 216 Code of Civil Procedure, respectively. Other procedural issues related to the suspension of enforcement proceedings (timing, consequences, renewal, etc.) are resolved in a similar way.
The list and content of the grounds for suspending the proceedings listed in the commented article have undergone some changes and clarifications in comparison with the previously valid Code of Civil Procedure. The question of the existence of grounds and the need to suspend the proceedings may be raised at the initiative of the participants in the civil process or independently by the court if it has become aware of these circumstances.
2. In para. 2 of the commented article contains only the general term “party”, therefore, the circumstances specified in this paragraph may serve as grounds for a mandatory suspension of the proceedings if they arose or apply to both the plaintiff and the defendant in the case. In contrast to the previous law, the new Code of Civil Procedure directly establishes the need to suspend the proceedings in the case of the occurrence of the circumstances specified in paragraph. 2 of the commented article, in relation to third parties making independent claims regarding the subject of the dispute.
Paragraph 2 of the commented article establishes as a mandatory basis the death of a citizen, the reorganization <1> of a legal entity, if these cases allow for succession, i.e. transfer of material rights and obligations from a party to the case or from a third party making independent claims regarding the subject of the dispute to the legal successor. Otherwise, if the disputed legal relationship does not allow succession, then the proceedings are subject to termination by virtue of paragraph. 7 tbsp. 220 Code of Civil Procedure (see commentary to Article 220 Code of Civil Procedure). In these cases, it is necessary to distinguish between reorganization (Articles 58 - 60 of the Civil Code) and liquidation of a legal entity - the latter does not allow succession, however, during liquidation, a special procedure established by law for satisfying the claims of creditors (Article 64 of the Civil Code) applies.
——————————— <1> In paragraph 1 of Art. 214 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the RSFSR contained the wording “cessation of the existence of a legal entity,” which necessitated the interpretation of this wording from the point of view of the essence of the institution of suspension of proceedings.
The conclusion about the possibility of legal succession in the disputed legal relationship under consideration is made by the court on the basis of the rules of substantive law and the evidence presented by the parties of the possibility of transfer of rights and obligations, which can, for example, be: documents confirming the death of a citizen or recognition of him as deceased, as well as the presence of heirs ready to enter into an inheritance; decision of the relevant authorities on the reorganization of a legal entity, transfer acts, constituent documents of the reorganized entity, etc.
The commented article talks about procedural succession, which is possible on material grounds (grounds specified in the current civil legislation) only after the initiation of a civil case. Otherwise (if the succession occurred before the initiation of civil proceedings), there are no grounds for suspending the proceedings in the case and the court resolves the issue of the possibility of replacing an inappropriate defendant at the appropriate stages of the civil procedure (see commentary to Article 41 of the Civil Procedure Code) or takes this circumstance into account when issuing a judicial decision act.
In addition, succession on other material grounds (assignment of the right of claim, transfer of debt) does not entail the consequences specified in the commented article, since in these cases the replacement of a person both in the material legal relationship and in the process occurs simultaneously or the court may postpone the trial of the case for short period of time.
3. In para. 3 of the commented article clarifies the wording of a party’s loss of legal capacity - a mandatory basis for suspending proceedings in a case. This situation may be caused in practice by the loss of legal capacity of a party to the case, which is only an individual, since the legal capacity of a legal entity is inextricably linked with its legal capacity. Loss of legal capacity entails loss of legal capacity, which deprives a legal entity of the opportunity to be a participant in civil procedural legal relations. In this case, we can talk about either liquidation or reorganization of a legal entity, but not about its loss of legal capacity. The consequences of such actions are indicated in paragraph 2 of this commentary.
A citizen is recognized as incompetent or partially capable in accordance with the procedure established by law (see commentary to Chapter 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure).
Due to the fact that recognition of a citizen as having limited legal capacity or incapacity is established in a special proceeding only on the basis of a court decision, the basis for suspending the proceedings in the case will be a court decision recognizing the citizen as incompetent or partially capable. Partial restriction of legal capacity can serve as a basis for suspending proceedings only in cases where the dispute under consideration concerns property rights in respect of which the citizen is recognized as having limited legal capacity.
In accordance with Art. 285 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a court decision to recognize a citizen as incompetent or with limited legal capacity by the guardianship and trusteeship body is the basis for appointing a guardian or trustee to the person. If this does not happen, then this circumstance is also a mandatory basis for suspending the proceedings.
The initiation of proceedings on the recognition of a citizen who is a party to the case during the consideration of the case as incompetent or partially capable entails the consequences established by paragraph. 5 of the commented article. Thus, this circumstance constitutes another basis for the mandatory suspension of the proceedings.
4. The fourth paragraph of the commented article establishes as a mandatory basis for suspending the proceedings the participation of the defendant in hostilities, performing tasks in conditions of emergency and martial law, as well as in military conflicts. If the plaintiff is in a similar position, then in order to suspend the proceedings, the court must receive from him or his representative a request for this in the form of a petition or statement. Despite the fact that the law contains the wording “request of the plaintiff,” the court, upon receipt of this request, cannot refuse to satisfy it if it is supported by documentary evidence.
To carry out the actions specified in the commented paragraph, the party must have the appropriate status (military personnel, employees of internal affairs bodies, prosecutors, etc.) or they must be subject to the relevant laws <1>. Otherwise, the facts under consideration cannot be grounds for suspending the proceedings.
——————————— <1> See, for example, Federal Constitutional Laws of May 30, 2001 N 3-FKZ “On State of Emergency”, dated January 30, 2002 N 1-FKZ “On martial law”, Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 31, 1994 N 280 “On the procedure for establishing the fact that military personnel and other persons have performed tasks in a state of emergency and during armed conflicts and providing them with additional guarantees and compensation.”
5. One of the mandatory grounds for suspending proceedings in a case by virtue of paragraph. 5 of the commented article is the impossibility of considering a case before a decision is made on another case or issue being considered in civil, criminal or administrative proceedings. In this regard, this norm corresponds to Art. 118 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The facts considered in other civil, criminal or administrative proceedings must be relevant to the civil process that is subject to stay. In addition, these facts will have prejudicial significance in matters of circumstances established by the court in relation to persons participating in both proceedings.
In contrast to the current APC, in the Civil Procedure Code the obligation to suspend proceedings in a case by the court is made dependent on the type of legal proceedings, and not on the jurisdictional body that has jurisdiction over the consideration of the case. The current Civil Procedure Code, unlike the Arbitration Procedure Code, does not say anything about the consideration of a case in the constitutional (statutory) court of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation as a mandatory basis for suspending the proceedings.
It is necessary to distinguish between the suspension of proceedings in accordance with paragraph. 5 of the commented article from leaving the application without consideration (see paragraph 5 of Article 222 of the Code of Civil Procedure). Despite the external similarity, the norms of the latter institution are applied if there is a previously initiated case in the proceedings regarding a dispute between the same parties, on the same subject and on the same grounds, i.e. identical case is being considered.
6. Established in paragraph. 6 of the commented article, the mandatory basis for suspending the proceedings in the case corresponds to Art. 103 of the Federal Constitutional Law of July 21, 1994 N 1-FKZ “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation” <1>, which establishes that in the period from the moment the court makes a decision to appeal to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and until the adoption of the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the proceedings in the case or the execution of the decision made by the court in the case is suspended.
——————————— <1> NW RF. 1994. N 13. Art. 1447.
When establishing the need to verify the compliance of the law to be applied with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the court must issue a reasoned ruling on this. A request to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is drawn up in the form of a separate document (clause 3 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of October 31, 1995 No. 8 “On some issues of the application by courts of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the administration of justice”) <1>. The request must comply with the requirements established in Art. Art. 37, 38 of the Federal Constitutional Law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation”.
——————————— <1> BVS of the Russian Federation. 1996. N 1.
What can a lawyer offer?
No lawyer gives a guarantee of winning a case, and this is considered normal among professional lawyers. However, every potential client wants to receive quality legal services. In St. Petersburg, K.S. Aleksandrov is engaged in the defense of charges under Article 215.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. This is a fairly well-known practicing lawyer, a member of the Leningrad Regional Chamber of Lawyers. He specializes in such crimes, so he will always offer his clients the most rational way out of any situation.
First of all, the lawyer will give comprehensive answers to all the client’s questions. Usually it is necessary to provide advice on general legal issues, as well as provide explanations of certain regulatory and legislative documents. In this case, the lawyer will assess the current situation, predetermine the further development of events, based on the norms of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and offer several defense strategies.
The services provided by lawyer K.S. Aleksandrov differ favorably from one-time legal services in that they are comprehensive. This means that the client receives turnkey protection. He does not need to think about how to defend his rights at each procedural stage. The lawyer draws up the necessary documents, participates in interrogations, initiates additional examinations, and requests that the collected materials be included in the case.
The essence of the strategy for each business is individual. The lawyer guarantees the confidentiality of information received from the client. In addition, all his actions are previously discussed with the client and will in no way cause him harm. Experience of participation in similar cases and analysis of judicial practice allows a lawyer to develop and implement an optimal defense strategy.
A lawyer in St. Petersburg guarantees an open pricing policy. The cost of services is the most exciting issue. Any analyst will confirm that high-quality lawyer services cannot be cheap. This is due to the specialist’s workload and is justified by the large labor costs in preparing for the court hearing.
