Extortion of a bribe: features, differences and types of responsibility

Bribery is one of the most common crimes in modern society. It is necessary to distinguish between two main categories of bribe takers: those who try to give a bribe for the purpose of obtaining personal gain and those who are engaged in extorting a bribe, promising to solve the problem.

To combat this type of criminal acts, Article 290 and Article 291 of the Criminal Code of Russia have been introduced and are in force in the Russian Federation, providing for criminal liability of varying severity. Specifically, a demand for a bribe with a threat of causing damage by a person holding a position in government agencies is qualified under clause 5 of Article 290.

Definition of extortion of a bribe in the Criminal Code of Russia

The requirement to transfer property assets, accompanied by the threat of inaction or failure to provide the necessary assistance to a person inclined to give a bribe to a responsible official, is extortion under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the period for which is provided in accordance with the severity of the crime committed.

For example, the head of the personnel department demanded a bribe from a person applying for a job for registration; or a university teacher during a session extorts a certain amount of money from a student for help in passing an exam, etc.

Such actions usually occur in two forms:

Open requirement

A citizen is directly required to pay for taking actions or inaction in relation to him (the HR department extorts a bribe for applying for a job).

Veiled demand

They do not directly extort a bribe or use open threats. Nevertheless, conditions are created for a person to force him to give a bribe. For example, a boss creates conditions that prevent an employee from performing his duties.

Additional nuances

During the investigation of such crimes, difficulties arise in determining the following situations:

1. Only officials can be held liable for a bribe. But can a professor be classified as an official or will sanctions apply only to representatives of the dean’s office who combine leadership and teaching activities?
2. It happens that a student gave money to the teacher, but did not receive the desired grade. On the part of the student, providing a monetary reward will be considered as giving a bribe. Under what article the teacher should be held accountable and whether there will be sanctions at all depends on the circumstances of the case.

Ways in which bribes are extorted

In most situations, they don’t talk specifically about a bribe out loud, but you can guess about its demand based on the following signs:

• the official makes hints about receiving a certain amount for solving the problem;
• the official, in response to a request, says that he does not have such powers or cannot do so, while with facial expressions or gestures he shows that a decision is possible with appropriate payment for his services;
• the amount of money extorted is not announced, but is written on paper, typed on a calculator or on a smartphone screen.

Administration of the city of Nevinnomyssk

Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Receiving a bribe

1. Receipt by an official, a foreign official or an official of a public international organization personally or through an intermediary of a bribe in the form of money, securities, other property or in the form of illegal provision of services of a property nature, the provision of other property rights for committing actions (inaction) in for the benefit of the bribe-giver or the persons represented by him, if such actions (inaction) are included in the official powers of the official or if, by virtue of his official position, he can contribute to such actions (inaction), as well as for general patronage or connivance in the service -

punished

a fine in the amount of up to one million rubles, or in the amount of wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to two years, or in the amount of ten to fifty times the amount of the bribe with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a period of up to three years,

or correctional labor for a period of one to two years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a period of up to three years,

or forced labor for a term of up to five years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to three years, or imprisonment for a term of up to three years with a fine in the amount of ten to twenty times the amount of the bribe or without it.

2. Receiving a bribe in a significant amount by an official, a foreign official or an official of a public international organization -

punished

a fine in the amount of thirty to sixty times the amount of the bribe with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for up to three years

or imprisonment for a term of up to six years with a fine of thirty times the amount of the bribe.

3. Receipt by an official, a foreign official or an official of a public international organization of a bribe for illegal actions (inaction) -

punished

a fine in the amount of forty to seventy times the amount of the bribe with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for up to three years

or imprisonment for a term of three to seven years with a fine of forty times the amount of the bribe.

4. Acts provided for in parts one to three of this article, committed by a person holding a public position in the Russian Federation or a public position in a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, as well as the head of a local government body, -

are punished

a fine in the amount of sixty to eighty times the amount of the bribe with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for up to three years

or imprisonment for a term of five to ten years with a fine of fifty times the amount of the bribe.

5. Acts provided for in parts one, three, four of this article, if they are committed:

a) by a group of persons by prior conspiracy or an organized group;

b) with extortion of a bribe;

c) on a large scale, -

shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of seventy to ninety times the amount of the bribe, or imprisonment for a term of seven to twelve years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for up to three years and with a fine in the amount of sixty times the amount of the bribe.

6. Acts provided for in parts one, three, four and paragraphs “a” and “b” of part five of this article, committed on an especially large scale –

shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of eighty to one hundred times the amount of the bribe with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for up to three years, or imprisonment for a term of eight to fifteen years with a fine in the amount of seventy times the amount of the bribe.

Notes.

1. In this article, Articles 291 and 291.1 of this Code, a significant amount of a bribe is recognized as an amount of money, the cost of securities, other property, services of a property nature, other property rights exceeding twenty-five thousand rubles, a large amount of a bribe - exceeding one hundred fifty thousand rubles, especially large bribes - exceeding one million rubles.

2. In this article, articles 291 and 291.1 of this Code, a foreign official means any appointed or elected person holding any position in the legislative, executive, administrative or judicial body of a foreign state, and any person performing any public function for a foreign state, including for a public agency or public enterprise; An official of a public international organization means an international civil servant or any person who is authorized by such an organization to act on its behalf.

Commentary to Art. 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

1. Taking a bribe is one of the most dangerous crimes against the interests of the service.

The subject of receiving a bribe is money, securities, other property, including those withdrawn from circulation or restricted in circulation (narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, weapons, ammunition, etc.). The law also includes property services (renovation of an apartment, construction of a summer house) and property rights (right to use property, right of economic management, operational management, easement, etc.) as the subject of receiving a bribe.

When determining the subject of a crime in this version, one should be guided by clause 9 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated February 10, 2000 N 6, where, based on the meaning of the law, the subject of a bribe, along with money, securities and other property, is proposed to include benefits or services of a property nature subject to payment, but provided free of charge (providing tourist vouchers, apartment renovation, construction of a summer house, etc.).

Benefits of a property nature should be understood, in particular, as an understatement of the value of transferred property, privatized objects, a reduction in rental payments, and interest rates for using bank loans. In this case, the specified benefits and services of a property nature must receive a monetary value in the verdict.

The law also recognizes property rights as the subject of a bribe (on the subject of a bribe, see also the commentary to Article 201).

Intangible services that do not entail property benefits for the bribe recipient (for example, providing the opportunity to purchase a rare product or service, issuing a positive review of work) are not the subject of receiving a bribe.

2. The objective side of the crime is expressed in the receipt by an official (another subject of the crime) personally or through an intermediary of the subject of a bribe. Part 1 of the commented article indicates the following options for the behavior of an official for which he receives a bribe:

1) commission of actions (inactions) in favor of the bribe-giver or persons represented by him, which are included in the official powers of the official;

2) the commission of actions (inactions) in favor of the bribe-giver or persons represented by him, which are not included in the official powers of the official, but he, by virtue of his official position, can facilitate their commission by another official;

3) general patronage of the service;

4) general connivance in the service.

The commission of the actions (inactions) themselves in the interests of the bribe giver or in the interests of the persons he represents is not covered by the crime under consideration. Therefore, if such actions contain an independent element of crime, additional qualification of these actions is required.

Actions (inaction) of an official included in the official powers of the official should be understood as actions (inactions) that he is entitled to perform in accordance with his official powers and which formally comply with the requirements of the law, other regulations and other legal acts (clause 10 of the Resolution Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation dated February 10, 2000 N 6). These are legal actions of a person that do not go beyond the scope of his official competence, which become criminal precisely because they are committed for a bribe.

It should be noted that receiving remuneration for activities not related to the performance of official duties cannot be considered a bribe.

An official can receive a bribe not only for the commission of certain actions within the scope of his official duties, but also for the behavior of other officials that is beneficial for the bribe recipient, which he can facilitate by virtue of his official position.

An official position that facilitates the commission of certain actions in favor of the bribe-giver by other officials should, in particular, be understood as the significance and authority of the position held, being subordinate to other officials in relation to whom the bribe-taker is in charge. At the same time, the use by an official of only personal connections and relationships, if they are not related to the position held, cannot be considered as use of official position.

General patronage in the service presupposes the unjustified creation of various favorable conditions for the bribe-giver or the persons he represents for subordinates in the service: their undeserved encouragement, extraordinary unjustified promotion, and the commission of other actions not caused by official necessity. General connivance should be considered as an official’s failure to take action for omissions or violations in the official activities of the bribe-giver or the persons he represents, and failure to respond to his unlawful actions.

With general patronage and connivance in the service, specific actions (inactions) that the official must perform may not be specified, but they are necessarily assumed.

The time of transfer of the subject of the bribe (before or after the commission of an action (inaction) in the interests of the bribe-giver or the persons represented by him) does not affect the presence of corpus delicti and the qualification of the act.

Thus, two types of bribery can be distinguished: bribe-bribery and bribe-gratitude. In the first case, the transfer of the subject of the bribe determines the behavior of the official required by the bribe giver and is a necessary condition for him to perform certain actions (inaction). In this situation, there is a preliminary agreement between the bribe giver and the bribe recipient to transfer the subject of the bribe (before or after the commission of actions (inaction)). A thank-you bribe occurs when the subject of the bribe is transferred for an action or inaction (legal or illegal) already committed by an official, in the absence of a prior agreement.

At the same time, it is necessary to distinguish a bribe of gratitude from the so-called ordinary gift. Yes, Art. 575 of the Civil Code allows the giving of ordinary gifts to state (municipal) employees, the value of which does not exceed 3 thousand rubles. However, it should be borne in mind that this provision of the Civil Code is not applicable to criminal law.

Article 575 of the Civil Code speaks of a gift agreement, which excludes a reciprocal transfer of a thing or right or a reciprocal obligation on the part of the person accepting the gift. Thus, if the act committed by a person contains the elements of receiving a bribe (whether it is a bribe-bribery or a bribe-reward), criminal liability arises regardless of the amount of remuneration received.

The subject of a bribe can be received either by the official himself (personally or through an intermediary), or provided to the official’s relatives and friends with his consent or if he did not object to this and used his official powers in favor of the bribe giver. The actions of an intermediary in receiving or giving a bribe should be qualified under Art. 291.1 of the Criminal Code as mediation in bribery.

3. The elements of accepting a bribe are formal. In accordance with Part 1 of the commented article, a crime from the objective side can be committed only by an official receiving the subject of a bribe personally or through an intermediary. If in an act aimed at obtaining a bribe, there is primarily no moment of delivery or transfer of the subject of the bribe, this means that the official has not yet begun to carry out the objective side of this crime.

Consequently, such actions cannot be assessed as an attempt to take a bribe, since the attempt, as a general rule, is interrupted only in the process of executing the crime until the end of the crime.

Under certain conditions, actions aimed at obtaining a bribe can be qualified as preparation for this crime, which can be interrupted before the execution of its objective side begins.

4. The crime is completed from the moment the official accepts at least part of the transferred values. In the case when the money that is the subject of a bribe is transferred to the account of an official, the receipt of the bribe should be considered completed from the moment it is received in the appropriate account. If the subject of receiving a bribe is any service or benefit of a property nature, then the crime is considered completed from the moment the bribe-taker began to use such a service or benefit of a property nature, or from the moment he received the relevant documents for the service or benefit (for example, a tourist voucher, ticket for a concert, a document on forgiveness of a monetary debt, etc.). In cases where the subject of the bribe is property rights, the crime should be considered completed from the moment of their acquisition.

When receiving a bribe, the actions (inactions) themselves performed by a person in favor of the bribe giver are not included in the objective side, therefore, for the recognition of this composition as completed, it does not matter whether the action (inaction) agreed upon by the parties was actually performed or not. A bribe-taker who has committed, in the interests of the bribe-giver or the persons represented by him, illegal actions that constitute another crime, is subject to liability for a set of crimes - under Part 2 of the commented article and the corresponding article of the Criminal Code (for example, illegal exemption from criminal liability, falsification of evidence, official forgery, etc. .P.).

If the conditional transfer of valuables does not take place due to circumstances beyond the control of the bribe giver and bribe recipient, the act should be classified as an attempt to receive a bribe. An attempt, for example, should be considered the acceptance by an official of the subject of a bribe in the process of conducting an operational-search activity to expose it; failed extortion of a bribe (clause “b”, part 5, article 290 of the Criminal Code); acceptance of imitation cash. At the same time, the mere intention expressed by a person to receive a bribe cannot be qualified as an attempt to take a bribe, if no specific actions were taken to implement it.

It should be borne in mind that the acceptance of the subject of a bribe by an intermediary for its subsequent transfer to an official does not yet form a complete corpus delicti for receiving a bribe, and in the event of the arrest of an intermediary who did not have time to transfer the bribe to an official, it is qualified as an attempt to receive a bribe under Part 3 of Art. 30 and the corresponding part of Art. 290 CC. The actions of the intermediary are qualified as an attempt to mediate bribery (Part 3 of Article 30 and the corresponding part of Article 291.1 of the Criminal Code).

5. The subjective side of the crime is characterized by guilt in the form of direct intent. The intent of the bribe-taker must include the awareness that the subject of the bribe is transferred for the performance or non-performance in the interests of the giver of certain actions related to the use of his official powers. Therefore, the receipt by an official of material assets allegedly for committing an action (inaction), which he cannot carry out due to lack of official authority or the inability to use his official position, should be qualified, if there is intent to acquire these assets, as fraud under Art. 159 of the Criminal Code. The owner of valuables in such cases is liable for attempted bribery (Part 3 of Article 30 and Article 291 of the Criminal Code), if the transfer of valuables was aimed at carrying out the desired action (inaction) by an official.

In cases where a person receives money or other valuables from someone, allegedly for transfer to an official as a bribe, and, without intending to do so, appropriates them, what he has done should be qualified as fraud. The actions of the owner of valuables in such cases are subject to qualification as an attempt to give a bribe. It does not matter whether the specific official to whom the bribe was supposed to be transferred was named.

If an official, using his official position, in order to obtain material assets, misleads the transferor of such assets regarding the legality of their transfer, declaring, for example, the need to pay a fine or penalty, state duty, the act also does not constitute a bribe and is qualified as fraud committed by a person using his official position (Part 3 of Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

6. The motive for accepting a bribe is self-interest. Therefore, if an official accepts illegal remuneration with the aim of converting it in favor of the state (municipal) body or institution in which he works, or spending it on any public or state needs, there is no corpus delicti of this crime.

7. The subject of the crime is a special one - an official, a foreign official or an official of a public international organization.

In accordance with Note 2 to the commented article under a foreign official in Art. Art. 290, 291 and 291.1 of the Criminal Code means any appointed or elected person holding any position in the legislative, executive, administrative or judicial body of a foreign state, and any person performing any public function for a foreign state, including for a public department or public enterprise. An official of a public international organization is an international civil servant or any person who is authorized by such organization to act on its behalf.

8. Part 2 of the commented article contains a qualified crime - receipt by an official, a foreign official or an official of a public international organization of a bribe in a significant amount. In accordance with Note 1 to the commented article, the significant amount of the bribe in Art. Art. 290, 291 and 291.1 of the Criminal Code recognize the amount of money, the value of securities, other property, property services, and other property rights exceeding 25 thousand rubles.

9. Part 3 of the commented article establishes liability for the receipt by an official, a foreign official or an official of a public international organization of a bribe for illegal actions (inaction). Illegal actions (inaction) of an official should be understood as unlawful actions (inaction) committed using official powers in favor of the bribe-giver or persons represented by him, as well as actions (inaction) containing signs of a crime or other offense (falsification of evidence in a criminal case, failure to draw up a protocol about an administrative offense, when this is mandatory by law, making a decision on the basis of knowingly forged documents, entering information into documents that does not correspond to reality, etc.) (clause 10 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation of February 10, 2000 N 6).

10. Part 4 of the commented article provides for stricter liability for acts provided for in Parts 1, 2 or 3 of the commented article, committed by a person holding a public office of the Russian Federation or a public office of a subject of the Russian Federation, as well as the head of a local government body.

A particularly qualified crime (Part 5 of the commented article) is the commission of acts provided for in Parts 1, 3 or 4 of the commented article:

a) a group of persons by prior conspiracy (see Part 2 of Article 35 of the Criminal Code) or an organized group (see Part 3 of Article 35 of the Criminal Code);

b) with extortion of a bribe;

c) on a large scale.

A group of persons by prior conspiracy will occur only if two or more officials took part in the crime, who agreed in advance to jointly commit a crime using their official position. It does not matter what amount each official received.

In accordance with Part 3 of Art. 35 of the Criminal Code, an organized group is characterized by stability, a higher degree of organization, distribution of roles, and the presence of an organizer and leader. Based on this, an organized group may include persons who are not officials who have previously united to commit one or more crimes. If there are grounds for this, they are liable in accordance with Part 4 of Art. 34 of the Criminal Code as organizers, instigators or accomplices, i.e. with reference to Art. 33 of the Criminal Code.

In both cases of group receipt of a bribe, the crime is considered completed from the moment the bribe (or part thereof) is accepted by at least one of the officials.

Extortion of a bribe is a demand by an official to give a bribe under the threat of committing actions that may cause damage to the legitimate interests of a citizen (for example, under the threat of illegal prosecution) or putting him in such conditions under which he is forced to give a bribe in order to prevent harmful consequences for his legally protected interests (for example, illegal delay by an official in the process of issuing a license).

If the briber is interested in the unlawful behavior of an official, seeks to circumvent the law, the established procedure for resolving a particular issue, achieve satisfaction of his illegal interests, evade deserved responsibility, etc., extortion as a qualifying sign of receiving a bribe is absent. A threat on the part of the bribe-taker to commit legal actions against the bribe-giver, although affecting his interests, cannot be considered as extortion.

According to Note 1 to the commented article in this article, as well as in Art. Art. 291 and 291.1 of the Criminal Code, a large amount of a bribe is recognized as an amount of money, the cost of securities, other property, property services, other property rights exceeding 150 thousand rubles. Responsibility for receiving a bribe on a particularly large scale (over 1 million rubles) is established in Part 6 of the commented article.

An analysis of the current version of the commented article allows us to draw attention to the fact that the qualifying characteristics provided for in Part 5 of this article cannot formally be imputed when a crime is committed by the subjects specified in Part 4 of the same article; the especially large-scale indicator does not apply to situations where specified in Part 5. This provision, in our opinion, is a gap in the legislation and must be eliminated.

What is the level of responsibility of the person who reports the fact of corruption if this fact is not proven?

A person who knowingly provides false information that discredits the honor and dignity of another person or undermines his reputation may be prosecuted under Article 129 “ Slander” of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

In what cases can a bribe-giver be exempt from criminal liability?

A person who gives a bribe is exempt from criminal liability if there was extortion of a bribe by an official or if the person voluntarily informed the body that has the right to initiate a criminal case about giving a bribe. (Note to Article 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

Are funds and other valuables that were the subject of a bribe returned to the bribe-giver?

Seized money and other valuables that are the subject of a bribe or commercial bribery and recognized as material evidence are subject to conversion to state revenue on the basis of paragraph 4 of part three of Article 81 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation as acquired by criminal means.

Exemption of a bribe-giver or a person who committed commercial bribery from criminal liability based on voluntary reporting of a crime does not mean the absence of corpus delicti in the actions of these persons. Therefore, they cannot be recognized as victims and have no right to claim the return of valuables transferred to them in the form of a bribe or the subject of commercial bribery.

Money and other valuables cannot be converted into state income in cases where demands have been made against a person to give a bribe or to illegally transfer money, securities, or other property in the form of commercial bribery, if before the transfer of these valuables the person voluntarily declared this body that has the right to initiate a criminal case, and the transfer of money, securities, and other property took place under their control with the aim of arresting red-handed the person who made such demands. In these cases, money and other valuables that were the subject of a bribe or commercial bribery must be returned to their owner.

If, in order to prevent harmful consequences, a person was forced to transfer money or other valuables to the extortionist, then they must be returned to their owner. (Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 02/10/2000 No. 6 (as amended on 02/06/2007) “On judicial practice in cases of bribery and commercial bribery.”)

How to prove and act in cases where you are asked to give a bribe

To avoid becoming an accomplice of an extortionist, a person from whom a bribe is demanded should do the following:

• do not agree to the persuasion of the extortionist or his intermediary;
• record the fact of extortion on video or recorder;
• write a statement, rather than call on your smartphone, to law enforcement agencies. You can also fill out an application electronically on the law enforcement agency website. Contacting law enforcement in person or via the Internet will significantly speed up the solution to the problem of extortion.

If the extortionist is an employee of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, you should contact the federal security service. Submitting an application to law enforcement agencies removes suspicions of bribery or complicity in it.

How to avoid punishment

The legislation provides for several conditions under which the guilty person will be released from future legal liability. These include voluntary reporting of a crime to the police. The second circumstance is that the recipient of the material benefit himself extorted gratitude and created the conditions for receiving it. The third factor is the active cooperation of the police in the investigation of bribery crimes.

Thus, two parties are to blame for the bribe. Therefore, both participants will be held accountable. And if the person transferring the reward can be exempt from legal liability, then the recipient of the valuables will be punished, regardless of cooperation in the investigation of the offense.

Extortion of a bribe: differences from ordinary extortion

This concept involves the transfer of the required amount of money to a citizen for whom it was not intended. For example, transferring a bribe to an intermediary, who in fact is him, that is, he took the money and appropriated it without transferring it to the official for whom it was intended

These criminal acts are classified under Article 291.1, which establishes liability for mediation in giving or receiving a bribe, and under Article 159, which establishes liability for fraudulent actions.

In addition, extortion of a bribe refers to this type of criminal act when the person demanding the bribe did not complete the extortion and in fact did not receive the bribe.

In the Criminal Code, receiving and giving a bribe is qualified by Article 290, but the concept of extortion of money and other things is not defined in the Criminal Code. It is often confused with ordinary extortion, qualified by Article 163, but these are different types of criminal acts.

• Extortion involves demanding the transfer of property or rights to it, while extorting a bribe is considered a property crime.
• In the first case, every capable citizen can be a criminal; in the second, the object can be any official (an employee of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, a university teacher, a government employee holding a responsible position, etc.).
• When extorting a bribe, the main feature is the demand of the responsible official to transfer money or other property values ​​to him in order to resolve the issue of the citizen giving the bribe. According to the Criminal Code, the main feature of extortion of money and other things is coercion to transfer property values ​​or rights to it through the threat of causing damage to the health, life or property of the victim.
• In the first case, the demand is accompanied by the use or threat of violence, in contrast to the second, when there is no threat of violence.

Legal concept of bribery

A bribe is usually understood as all forms of incentives for an official in exchange for the performance of functions within the framework of his official position. This applies to the transfer of money, material assets, the provision of services, encouragement of close relatives of an official, as well as the transfer of expensive gifts. For its part, the recipient of the valuables, using his powers, makes biased decisions and in every possible way contributes to satisfying the interests of the dishonest client.

Legal liability for giving a bribe in the Russian Federation is provided not only for the actual receipt of a benefit, but also for the offer or demand for it.

When does a teacher ask for a bribe?

The teacher asks for a bribe in different cases. As we said earlier, he may be driven by an urgent need to receive a large sum of money. On the other hand, there are additional motives for using official position.

For example, if a teacher is no longer satisfied with his salary and decides to earn extra money. This is the worst possible motive. Human greed knows no bounds. And to determine that a teacher is driven by a thirst for profit, you need to check several factors:

1. Rumors at the university. If the majority of students from different courses and faculties know about bribes to the teacher, then we put a plus in favor of greed.
2. Intensity of extortion. If a teacher asks for a bribe for the first time, then he hesitates, doubts and monitors the student’s reaction in order to immediately refuse. An experienced corrupt official will not doubt his power and capabilities; he conducts delicate but persistent negotiations with students. At the same time, there are often ultimatums: either this or nothing more.
3. Selling your manuals and textbooks inside the university is the same as a bribe. Many teachers are published in publishing houses, and their books are purchased by the university. However, the lecturer can only tell you about his manual and tell you where you can rent or buy it.

So, all these factors indicate that the teacher is asking for a bribe out of a desire to profit from the students.

But there is also a third type of teachers who do not accept a bribe and threaten the student with expulsion. You need to be careful not to see a hint of a bribe in the teacher’s words. A simple threat can be an expression of indignant emotions. If you bring a bribe to such a teacher, it is unlikely that he will accept it. Most likely, the student will be expelled immediately.

Thus, to be sure that the teacher is asking for a bribe, you need to analyze his behavior and words. Perhaps he was not thinking about the bribe at all, but only wanted to encourage you to take action in your studies.

A teacher asks for a bribe - what to do?

If a teacher demands a bribe, then

1. Make some noise at the university. Raise your ears to the dean's office and rector's office. It is necessary to create a resonance so that all students are indignant and rebel against such treatment. Yes, this method is not always favorable in outcome. The university management is trying to get rid of the hype, so the student can be kicked out along with the teacher so that the matter does not progress.
2. Start by contacting the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation. A police station would be a good place to start. Write a statement against the teacher that he is extorting a bribe. Perhaps the matter should be limited to just this article. The teacher will be summoned for questioning and then the case will be sent to court. Or it will be dealt with by the procurator, who will pursue the case to the end. Perhaps the student will be involved in the operation to catch the teacher red-handed.
3. If the case was closed under the article “Extortion”, but the teacher remained working at the university, and you were expelled, then there is a way out. You can call upon public organizations and the media to publicize the circumstances of the case. In this case, the university management will not be able to remain silent. After all, rumors can reach higher authorities. Therefore, they will give you an answer and reinstate you at the university.

So, we told you about three development options if a teacher asks for a bribe and you don’t want to pay. You can move through the options step by step, starting with the local one. Or choose one of them and act responsibly.

Is a gift considered a bribe to a teacher?

Yes, a gift can be considered a bribe to a teacher if it exceeds the value of 3,000 rubles. In addition, the gift must be dedicated to a holiday or given for some important occasion. For example, if a student defended his thesis, he can congratulate and thank his supervisor. But it is important to choose the right gift.

If you are giving a gift from a single person, then it is better to spend a maximum of 1000 rubles on a gift. In this case, you will maintain your dignity, will not get caught, and your teacher will not get into an awkward position.

It is best to chip in for general gifts for teachers from the entire stream or group. Moreover, you cannot force your classmates to forcibly donate money to the general budget. They can only be called upon to hand over money, but nothing more.

Again, you can rent for about 1000-2000 rubles. The total cost should include a banquet table, flowers and gifts for scientific supervisors.

You can give small souvenirs and inexpensive gifts on Knowledge Day, Teacher's Day and the day of defending diploma projects.

The teachers themselves now directly refuse not only gifts, but also flowers and sweets. Why? Do they also fall under the article?

Are flowers considered a bribe to a teacher?

Flowers can be considered an expensive gift if their price exceeds 3,000 rubles. However, no one will open a case because the teacher was given flowers for Knowledge Day in the amount of 6,000 rubles.

The fact is that flowers cannot be resold or returned. They have an expiration date, so their value decreases every day. In addition, none of the teachers would think of using their official powers for a bouquet of flowers or a box of chocolates.

But before you give your supervisor the most expensive and beautiful bouquet, ask him for permission. There are teachers and teachers who immediately refuse to take gorgeous flowers for free. They leave them in the student’s hands, or force them to take them to the department and give them to all teachers.

Thus, the anti-corruption program in our country is working. People who are vested with official powers begin to feel a better sense of legal responsibility.