Knowingly false denunciation: liability under Article 306 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in 2022

False denunciation is a fairly common crime, as it is used in various situations. It can be used as a way of protection or settling personal scores, an attempt to eliminate competitors, or interfere with their activities. Regardless of the purpose for which it is committed, this crime poses a serious public danger. The types of punishments for knowingly false denunciation are established by Art. 306 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

If an inaccurate report of a crime is addressed to the authorities that are given the right to investigate such complaints and initiate criminal cases, most often they turn to the police. The denunciation is also sent to state authorities or local government, and they forward the message according to their jurisdiction. They deliver it in person, send it by mail, communicate it by phone or with the help of strangers. The form of communication can be written or oral.

Qualifying signs of a knowingly false denunciation

An untruthful slander is such offenses that consist of accusing a specific person of committing any crime and providing such information to employees of those law enforcement agencies that have the right to initiate a criminal case on this fact. These organizations include:

Prosecutor's Office;
Police Department;
Customs authorities;
Bodies of inquiry and investigation;
Tax authorities, etc.

The attacker deliberately reports to law enforcement authorities about the execution of an illegal act, but he certainly knows that no such actions were committed. If the offender states solely about the possibility or characteristics of the offense, we are talking about libel. A statement in a newspaper is also considered libel.

01
Free consultation with a criminal lawyer

Free hotline (Moscow and regions of the Russian Federation)

8 800 707 84 52 03

Consultations in a mobile application

Prices for legal services in criminal cases

False information from witnesses regarding a specific incident may be qualified not under Article 306 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on incorrect testimony, but under Article 307, which deals with the provision of untruthful testimony and untruthful results of expert research. The specific qualification of the act of slander at the time of the court verdict does not have a significant impact, but the following circumstances are taken into account:

The presence of direct intent of the attacker;
Determining the specific motive of the offender.

Essential features of a crime

To correctly classify the actions of the guilty person, one should take into account the main features that characterize a false denunciation:

A crime report must clearly describe the fact that a crime has been committed or the person responsible for it. Moreover, the fact may not yet have taken place definitively, since we are talking about the commission of a crime. The denunciation may not be supported by any evidence.
Information should be data that does not correspond to reality, i.e. be false. This could be information about a person who was not involved in the crime, or about an event that did not actually happen. Providing distorted information about an incident is also considered a false denunciation. For example, the victim reports that valuables were stolen from him during the crime, although in reality this did not happen.
Falsity of information should be reflected in the unreliability of the factual circumstances of what happened, and not in the applicant’s legal assessment of these facts. If the events are described correctly, but classified incorrectly, there is no corpus delicti.

The manner in which the crime was reported is not relevant to determining it as a false report.

Self-incrimination both in the commission of a real and non-existent crime is also qualified under Art. 306 of the Criminal Code. An exception can be made only in cases where the offense was forced due to physical or psychological coercion in accordance with Art. 40 CC.

It should be noted that on the basis of anonymous denunciations it is not allowed to initiate criminal cases in accordance with Part 7 of Art. 141 of the Criminal Procedure Code. However, applications containing information about an impending or completed crime are accepted for consideration and an audit is carried out on their basis.

Investigative authorities spend time and energy on carrying out operational actions, distracting them from the fight against real crimes. This violates the interests of justice, so such anonymous denunciations also fall under Art. 306 of the Criminal Code, if during the inspection it turns out that the information is unreliable.

The crime is considered committed from the moment the addressee receives the message, regardless of the result, even if, as a result of operational measures, a case is not opened and the person who was reported is not brought to justice.

The communication of personal opinions or assumptions to law enforcement agencies will not be considered a false denunciation if they are not presented as reliable facts.

Subjective and objective characteristics of the crime

The information that constitutes a slander may be completely untrue or partially incorrect. Accordingly, the criminal has the opportunity to report an uncommitted crime or deliberately change the course of real events, hide the places, dates or circumstances of crimes. Information regarding denunciation is characterized by the following factors:

The information does not correspond to actual reality;
The information contains characteristics of the objective and subjective side of the crime.

A crime is considered committed at the moment when the guilty person informs law enforcement officials about the possible execution of illegal actions. The slander can be formalized in any form: in a written document, orally when communicating with law enforcement officials. Criminal and administrative liability begins for citizens from the age of 16.

Criminal punishment for knowingly false denunciation

The classification of the crime is carried out in accordance with parts of Art. about the implementation of an obviously unfair reservation. For such an atrocity, the offender can be held accountable, so the following forms of punishment exist:

A fine of up to 120,000 rubles;
Forced confiscation of the criminal's income for a period of up to a year;
Mandatory physical work for up to 480 hours;
Correctional labor for a period of up to 2 years;
Administrative arrest for up to six months;
Imprisonment of the offender for up to two years.

If aggravating circumstances were present at the time the crime was committed and the victim was accused of committing a serious or especially serious crime, then the offender faces one of the following types of punishment:

A fine from 100 to 300,000 rubles;
Confiscation of income for a period of 2 years;
Forced physical labor for up to three years;
Imprisonment for a period up to those years.

If a truly untruthful denunciation or statement about a person committing a grave or especially grave crime is accompanied by falsification of evidence, then forced labor for up to five years or imprisonment for up to six years can be used as a punishment.

Allegation of knowingly making a false statement

Every person, regardless of social status, financial situation or age, can become a victim in the case of committing a probably false slander, so it is worth knowing how to prove the fact, punish the perpetrator in court, and also how many years they give for such atrocities. Surely, an incorrect denunciation is considered carried out by contacting the criminal to law enforcement agencies. In this case, the attacker can write a statement with incorrect information, provide information orally, and also insist on organizing an investigation.

The initiation of a criminal case for committing a false slander begins at the moment when the fact of the denunciation is disclosed. An application for committing a false denunciation is drawn up in accordance with the sample on which a standard document is drawn up. This paper must contain the following information:

The position and initials of the person in whose name the application is being drawn up;
Applicant’s personal data and contact information;
Statement of the features of the case;
Requirements to initiate a criminal case and a detailed investigation.

If the victim wishes to demand compensation for moral damage from the attacker, then it is necessary to file a claim with the courts with the appropriate requirements. The legislative basis for obtaining such a result is the article on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation of citizens.

The victim indicates the amount of material compensation for moral damage based on the severity of the harm caused. Accordingly, the victim can indicate any amount, but the court will determine damages in an amount that corresponds to the actual facts.

Author of the article

Dmitry Leonov

Work experience 15 years, specialization - housing, family, inheritance, land, criminal cases.

Author's rating

721

Articles written

712

about the author

Useful information on criminal cases

Prosecution for libel
Article for libel on the Internet
False report of rape
Defense against libel
Charge of libel
Theft accusation without evidence
Sue for personal insult
Personal insult complaint
Fine for libel
Liability for slander of an official
Violent actions - Article 132 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation
If the boss yells and humiliates: where to complain?
Insulting a minor child: article
Neighbor threatens violence: what to do
Responsibility for violation of confidentiality of correspondence
Libel lawsuit
Punishment for public insult to a person
Does a teacher have the right to insult a student?
Infringement of the rights of minor children
Attempted rape
Blackmail on the Internet - Article 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation
Rape charge
Responsibility for non-payment of wages
Criminal liability for violation of privacy
What to do if you receive threats over the phone
Punishment for knowingly false testimony
Sample statement about threat to life
Insulting a police officer while on duty

My own lawyer

Knowingly false denunciation is one of the fairly common crimes against justice. This prevalence is explained by the fact that denunciation is often used as a means of eliminating competitors, complicating their commercial activities, settling personal scores, etc.). In some cases, deliberately false reporting of a crime is used as a defense technique, for example, reporting unlawful use of force by police officers.

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation noted the particular danger of a deliberately false denunciation in the Review of its practice for the second quarter of 2013. He indicated in it. that a deliberately false denunciation of the commission of a crime encroaches not only on the interests of justice, but also on the rights of the individual, belittling his dignity. When deciding on the existence of this crime, it is necessary to establish whether the reported information serves as a means of protecting one’s interests, whether it does not contain signs of slander or denunciation, whether it is deliberately false or associated with the subjective or objective delusion of the perpetrator, or whether it is in a cause-and-effect relationship with violence applied to him.

The above provisions show how difficult it can be to resolve the issue of knowingly false denunciation, despite the apparent simplicity of the crime under consideration. There are different opinions among lawyers regarding the qualification of actions under this composition.

Article 306 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not indicate the bodies whose false communication constitutes the corpus delicti of this crime... Based on this, we can say that the presence of the corpus delicti provided for in Art. 306 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, does not correlate with the authority to which the message was received.

The court is not a criminal prosecution body, but... in cases of private prosecution, the statement of crime is accepted by the magistrate. If in such a case the magistrate determines that there was a knowingly false denunciation, then in addition to issuing an acquittal, he sends an information letter about the fact of a knowingly false denunciation to the body carrying out the criminal prosecution together with the materials it has.

In practice and in theory, there are certain differences in the assessment of an act when a deliberately false report of a crime is disseminated, for example, through the media. According to a number of legal scholars, a knowingly false report about a person committing a crime, communicated to third parties or in the media, should be qualified as libel.

According to other lawyers, this position is not correct. Since the distinction between the elements of “slander” and “knowingly false denunciation” should be carried out on the subjective side.

Thus, a knowingly false denunciation is understood as a message ultimately addressed to law enforcement agencies about a crime allegedly being prepared or committed and/or a person participating in it. The message may also be made to other authorities, which are obliged to forward the said message as appropriate. At the same time, a report of a crime made to individuals, private or public organizations does not constitute the crime in question due to the absence of an obligation for such entities to send reports according to their affiliation and, thus, to involve authorities in the consideration of reports.

A false denunciation can be submitted either orally or in writing, as well as by telephone, through other persons, etc. Whether the informer gave his real name or made an anonymous denunciation has no legal significance. However, the last statement is disputed by many lawyers, since anonymous messages are not verified.

But not all anonymous requests are not checked. Thus, in accordance with paragraph 129 of the Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia dated September 12, 2013 N 707, anonymous requests about an unlawful act being prepared, committed or committed are registered and subject to forwarding to a unit of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia or another government body in accordance with their competence . If the anonymous statement contains information about a terrorist act committed or being prepared, it is reported by an authorized employee of the records management unit to the head of the territorial body and, in accordance with his resolution, is transferred to the duty department for immediate registration in the KUSP (clause 130 of the said Instructions). And then the decision on the advisability of conducting an inspection based on an anonymous appeal that does not contain the information specified in paragraph 130 of the Instructions is made by the head of the internal affairs agency.

Similar provisions on checking anonymous requests are contained in the instructions of a number of other law enforcement agencies.

So, in some cases, anonymous crime reports are subject to verification. If the report is confirmed, a criminal case is initiated. What if the audit revealed that the report of a crime is untrue? In this case, can the lack of information about the identity of the applicant serve as a basis for deciding whether there is no corpus delicti for this crime? Obviously not, since the presence of a crime is not established on the basis of whether the offender is known or unknown.

Therefore, the composition of a false denunciation will occur regardless of whether the person making the appeal was personified or anonymous.

It should be noted that liability for false reporting of an act of terrorism is provided for by a special provision. At the same time, liability under this offense is possible only for false reporting of an impending act of terrorism. In the case of a knowingly false denunciation of an act of terrorism, the actions of the perpetrator are qualified under Art. 306 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

For a knowingly false denunciation to exist, it is necessary that the denunciation be false, i.e. not true. It may only refer to a crime where the persons involved are not reported, or it may involve accusing a specific person of a crime they did not commit, or accusing them of a more serious crime than actually committed, etc.

Falsity must cover factual circumstances, and not their legal assessment. Hence, if the applicant, having correctly described the event, gives it an incorrect legal qualification, there will be no element of knowingly false denunciation.

Communicating your assumptions, opinions or guesses to law enforcement agencies, if they are not presented as reliable information, does not constitute a false denunciation.

There is no false denunciation if a citizen reported true facts about an impending crime, which the perpetrators subsequently voluntarily refused to commit.

The subjective side of this crime is characterized only by direct intent. The perpetrator is aware that he is providing the relevant authorities with deliberately false information about a crime or an imaginary criminal.

The presence of a goal of bringing an innocent person to criminal responsibility is sometimes unreasonably correlated with the subject to whom the denunciation is sent - it is argued that if it is addressed to a person or body that has the right to initiate a criminal case, then such a goal exists, but if to another subject, then there is no such goal. This approach to resolving the issue of the existence of the crime in question seems somewhat simplified. When solving the problem posed, even taking into account the mandatory purpose of bringing to criminal liability for the presence of elements of a knowingly false denunciation, in our opinion, it is necessary to take into account that the intended purpose of the actions of the perpetrator may be different depending on the situation and the presence of the immediate (intermediate) goal and the final goal. For example, the accused makes a deliberately false denunciation, the essence of which is that unauthorized means were used against him, under the influence of which he incriminated himself. The purpose of such actions is to discredit law enforcement officers and avoid criminal liability. At the same time, the perpetrator is indifferent to whether the persons accused by him will actually be brought to criminal responsibility or not. The main thing is to achieve the necessary result, the means of achieving which is a deliberately false denunciation. Bringing an innocent person to criminal liability in such cases will be an intermediate, desirable, but not obligatory goal, which should be regarded as the presence of a subjective side of the crime. Accordingly, it can also occur when a denunciation is sent to authorities or persons who do not have the right to initiate a criminal case, but are obliged to respond to a report of a crime.

Establishing a purpose specific to the crime in question also serves to distinguish a knowingly false denunciation from related crimes, in particular, from slander associated with accusing a person of committing a serious or especially serious crime (Part 5 of Article 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

In practice, the prevailing position is that in case of slander, the intent of the perpetrator is aimed at discrediting another person, while the purpose of initiating a criminal case or bringing an innocent person to criminal liability is absent

Understanding the intended purpose of a deliberately false denunciation helps not only to distinguish between related crimes, but in some cases is also the basis for non-recognition of a crime in the actions of the perpetrator. In practice, the absence of the goal of bringing an innocent person to criminal responsibility, for example, when a knowingly false denunciation is a method of defense, means that its use does not form a crime under Art. 306 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Hence, deliberately false testimony of a suspect (accused) about the participation in the commission of a crime of another person does not constitute a deliberately false denunciation, since this testimony is given with the aim of evading criminal liability and is a way of defending against accusations.

Thus, there is no element of knowingly false denunciation if denunciation is a way of defending against accusations. But here the question arises: is it possible to defend oneself in ways that are contrary to the law and constitute crimes?

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation spoke on this matter, which in its Determination of April 4, 2013 N 661-O, essentially indicated that giving citizens the right to present evidence in their defense against suspicion or accusation of committing a crime does not mean the possibility of its implementation by illegal , including by criminal means. The accused in this case has the right either to remain silent or to testify in such a way as to clearly not violate the rights of other persons or to resort to methods of defense prohibited by law. In this regard, it is quite legitimate to raise the question of some adjustment of judicial practice and recognition of the presence of a knowingly false denunciation also in cases where its main purpose is an attempt to evade criminal liability.

Often, people under investigation report a crime committed against them by police officers. Despite the fact that subsequently during the court hearing the court establishes that such a statement is untrue, a criminal case is filed for knowingly false denunciation. During the trial, defendants often claim that they confessed under pressure from police officers or investigators.

Subsequently, when the court pronounces a verdict, such evidence as the protocol of interrogation of the suspect, accused, verification of testimony on the spot and others with the participation of the suspects or accused themselves are recognized as admissible, relevant and form the basis of the guilty verdict, and the version that the convicted person during preliminary investigation, “testimonies were extracted” or he “signed clean protocols”, which the investigator subsequently filled out at his own discretion, are unreasonably perceived as a method of defense chosen and used during the judicial investigation by the defendant and the defense, who believe that this method is not prohibited by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation , despite the fact that the defendant declares crimes committed against him by police officers, provided for in Art. Art. 285, 286, 303 CC.

According to this application, in accordance with the requirements of Art. Art. 144, 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a decision must be made to initiate a criminal case or to refuse to initiate one in relation. Despite this, the court does not send the relevant information containing a statement and information about the crime committed to the preliminary investigation body for verification in the prescribed manner and proper execution, provided for by the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court is limited to interrogating law enforcement officers in a court hearing on the merits of the application, unreasonably assuming the functions of a preliminary investigation body when checking the defendant’s version, despite the fact that for this category of crimes the verification and preliminary investigation are carried out by investigators from the Investigative Department of the Investigative Committee of the Investigative Committee at the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation. Many lawyers believe that in this case, the defendant’s statements about a crime must be regarded as a method of defense, are not legally justified and are inherently a deep misconception, since Art. 306 of the Criminal Code does not provide for any restrictions regarding the subject of this crime, which in this case is general. However, I believe that at this stage such judicial practice is justified, since the verification of reports of the use of unauthorized investigative methods is carried out in a non-procedural manner with a clear justification bias for law enforcement officers. The initiation of a criminal case based on such statements is as rare as an acquittal by the courts in our country.

A false denunciation can be made for a variety of reasons and is considered completed from the moment the message is received by the relevant authority. The consequences for qualification are not important, but are taken into account when assigning punishment and affect the cost of the claim that is filed in such cases, in order to compensate for damage caused to the state or individual.

Thus, according to domestic judicial practice, the presence of a knowingly false denunciation depends on the following main aspects: - the motive of the actions of the suspect or accused (the desire to evade responsibility or take revenge on a law enforcement official); — the content of the denunciation, i.e. its connection with the subject of proof in a criminal case in which the informer is brought to criminal responsibility; — the procedural status of the informer (whether he is a suspect (accused) in a criminal case or not yet).