Bribe to a doctor. Protecting a doctor from bribery.
Art. 290 Part 3 of the Criminal Code can lie in wait for any doctor. Some people “take” it themselves, while others have money stuffed into their pockets as a provocation...
A simple example, one might say, everyday. A citizen comes to the doctor and offers, for a fee of 1-1.5 thousand rubles, to write out a sick leave or medical certificate for a student. Introduced by familiar doctors. “I’m from Pyotr Fedorovich”...for me...for family reasons... (And at this time, a recording is being made as part of an operational experiment). The doctor sympathizes... yes, there seems to be some wheezing... and issues a sick leave certificate. The briber gives the money to the bribe taker. Caught taking a bribe? Is it over?
In this example, as in many others, there are several reasons for the doctor's excuses. It all depends on the actual circumstances of the case.
There are many cases from practice.
Our lawyers have positive decisions in cases protecting doctors from bribes.
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the limitation period
Colleagues, the article is really good, there are references to international law, which made me very happy, however, an incident happened in my life: the Plaintiff filed a statement of claim in court against my client (Defendant). The court accepted the claim and considered it in a simplified manner, because The defendant changed his place of residence and, on top of everything, was on a business trip. Upon returning from a business trip, he sought legal help. The essence of the claims came from the loan agreement. My client (Defendant) borrowed a certain amount of money, paid the money back on time, and received a receipt from the Plaintiff. The receipt was drawn up on December 23, 2014. The deadline for refunding funds was December 31, 2014. December 21, 2022 The Plaintiff sent a statement of claim to the court through the Russian Post Office. The court accepted the application and considered it in March 2022. made a default judgment to recover funds from the Defendant in full. In April 2022 We applied for cancellation of the default judgment, the decision was canceled. And then we noticed that the statement of claim was initially signed not by the plaintiff himself, but by an unidentified person. The application was not accompanied by a power of attorney for the representative; the name of the Plaintiff is written, but the signature is not his. The limitation period ended on December 31, 2022. and from January 1, 2018 should have been missed. The court of first instance left without consideration the Plaintiff's statement of claim, signed by an unidentified person (Part 4 of Article 222 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). The next day (May 23, 2022), another representative of the Plaintiff submits a statement of claim to the court in the proper form, attaching a power of attorney and the name of the representative. The defendant makes a statement about missing the limitation period, because The plaintiff missed the deadline by 4 months and 23 days. However, the court excludes from the statute of limitations the period during which the statement of claim was in court from the moment of filing - December 21, 2022. until May 22, 2022 and denies the Defendant the application of Art. 196 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The interests of the Plaintiff were represented in court by a lawyer during the initial and re-examination of the claim. he had a lawyer's warrant and a lawyer's certificate. My question is quite simple. Could improper behavior of the Plaintiff's representative, expressed in filing and signing a statement of claim for the Plaintiff himself (in fact, an abuse of authority), be a circumstance of interruption of the limitation period or a circumstance of interruption of the limitation period? If so, then how can such behavior of the Plaintiff (not empowering his representative), violating the law, entail any legal consequences in the form of suspension of the statute of limitations? In itself, suspension, interruption, or interruption of the limitation period is a tool for the Plaintiff to preserve the possibility of filing a claim in court in the future, without fear that his claim will be rejected on the basis of missing the limitation period. However, what to do with the situation when the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff’s representative or a generally unknown person) intentionally filed a statement of claim with the goal of “what if it goes wrong” and any legal consequences occur in the form of recovery of funds, interruption of the statute of limitations, etc. d. When answering the question why we didn’t refer to the receipt, that’s what the Client wanted. He believes that in this case there is a limitation period and we do not have to prove any other circumstances.
Bribe to the bailiff
According to Art. 291 the number of people suspected of committing a crime - attempted bribery - increased.
For example, the bailiff issues a resolution prohibiting registration actions in relation to the car of citizen A. (the owner), who sold the car by proxy to citizen B. (the new owner). According to the documents, the woman is still the owner of the foreign car, but the car is pledged to the bank (the woman bought the car on credit and did not pay for it in full). Citizen B. began to repay the loan to the bank. For lifting the ban at the traffic police MREO, he offered the bailiff a bribe. The bailiff notified the management of the Office of the Federal Bailiff Service about inducing him to commit a corruption offense.
Classically, according to the law, this could be a fine of two million rubles.
The help of a lawyer is also advisable here. If his work is positive, punishment can be avoided.
Art. 290 (bribe to a bailiff), like receiving a bribe by a bailiff, is also not uncommon. Our lawyers have a number of positive decisions in cases protecting bailiffs from bribery.
When giving a bribe is a complete crime
It is generally accepted that giving a bribe is a completed crime from the moment an official accepts at least part of the valuables transferred to him (for example, from the moment they are transferred to the official or credited with the official’s consent to the account specified by him). It does not matter whether the bribe recipient received a real opportunity to use or dispose of the assets transferred to him at his own discretion.
The above actions committed in the context of an operational investigation should also be classified as a completed crime, regardless of whether the valuables were confiscated immediately after their acceptance by the official.
In cases where the subject of a bribe is the illegal provision of services of a property nature, the crime is considered completed from the beginning of the execution, with the consent of the official, of actions directly aimed at acquiring property benefits (for example, from the moment of destruction or return of a promissory note, transfer of property to another person on account fulfillment of the bribe-taker’s obligations, etc.).
If an official refuses to accept a bribe, the person’s actions directly aimed at transferring it are subject to qualification, depending on the size of the bribe, as an attempted crime under Art. 291 or art. 291.1 CC.
The mere promise or offer to an official to transfer illegal remuneration for his actions (inaction) in the service, which due to circumstances beyond the control of the culprit was not realized, must be considered as preparation for giving a bribe (Part 1 of Article 30 and, accordingly, Part 3 –5 Article 291 of the Criminal Code) in the case when the amount of the announced remuneration exceeds 10 thousand rubles. If the amount does not exceed the specified amount, the act, taking into account the provisions of Part 2 of Art. 30 of the Criminal Code and sanctions Art. 291.2 of the Criminal Code is not criminally punishable.
Thus, to qualify the giving of a bribe, including a “petty” one, as a completed crime, the key condition is to establish the fact that the official accepted at least part of the subject of the bribe.
But this issue must be resolved individually in each specific case based on the actual circumstances of the case. Acceptance of a bribe by an official can be expressed not only in the direct physical receipt of the subject of the bribe (for example, the official takes the money in his hands, puts it in his pocket or bag, puts it in a desk drawer or in the “glove compartment” in the car), but also in behavior of an official indicating acceptance of a bribe, even in the absence of his direct physical contact with the subject of the bribe. For example, a bribe-giver, in conditions that are obvious to the traffic police inspector, puts money on the seat in the passenger compartment of an official car, after which the inspector, having returned the documents, lets him go, or the bribe-giver puts the money on the table in the office of the official, and he, without taking it in his hands, approvingly speaks out or nods his head, etc.
When establishing the presence or absence of the fact of acceptance of a bribe by an official, the law enforcement officer should evaluate all the circumstances as a whole (the conversation between the bribe giver and the bribe taker, their non-verbal communication (gestures, facial expressions), behavior before the transfer of the bribe, at the time of its transfer and after).
Sincerely, lawyer Zakhar Lebedev, partner of the law firm Antonov and Partners.
Responsibility for a bribe
Liability for receiving a bribe depends on who receives it and for what actions (or inactions), taking into account their legality or illegality. The more serious the act, the greater the punishment.
But in order to be held accountable for a bribe, guilty actions and a cause-and-effect relationship must be established. If something is not there, then there is no responsibility.
Article 290. Receiving a bribe
1. Receipt by an official personally or through an intermediary of a bribe in the form of money, securities, other property or benefits of a property nature for actions (inaction) in favor of the bribe giver or persons represented by him, if such actions (inaction) are within the official powers of the official or he by virtue of his official position, may contribute to such actions (inaction), as well as for general patronage or connivance in the service - is punishable by a fine in the amount of seven hundred to one thousand minimum wages, or in the amount of the wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of seven months to one year or imprisonment for up to five years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for up to three years.
2. Receiving a bribe by an official for illegal actions (inaction) is punishable by imprisonment for a term of three to seven years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to three years.
3. Acts provided for in parts one or two of this article, committed by a person holding a public office of the Russian Federation or a public office of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, as well as the head of a local government body, are punishable by imprisonment for a term of five to ten years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a period of up to three years.
4. Acts provided for in parts one, two or three of this article, if they are committed:
a) by a group of persons by prior conspiracy or an organized group;
b) repeatedly;
c) with extortion of a bribe;
d) on a large scale - is punishable by imprisonment for a term of seven to twelve years with or without confiscation of property.
Note.
A large bribe is an amount of money, the value of securities, other property or property benefits exceeding three hundred times the minimum wage.
Limitation period for criminal prosecution
The limitation period for criminal prosecution is a period of time after which it is no longer possible to bring the perpetrator to the established responsibility. It is counted from the date of completion of the crime. The statute of limitations is directly dependent on the danger of the crime to society. Minor crimes. For crimes classified in this group, the most severe punishment is imprisonment for up to 3 years. The period within which it is possible to bring them to justice expires 2 years from the date of the crime. The most common offenses are: theft, fraud, misappropriation, embezzlement, if there are no qualifying criteria; infliction of bodily harm related to minor harm to health, and harm of moderate severity without aggravating circumstances, beatings, threats of murder or serious harm; slander; home penetration; arbitrariness; non-payment of alimony; evasion of taxes and other payments without aggravating features, provided for in Art. 199; insulting a government official and others. Unlawful acts of moderate gravity. In this group, the punishment for intentional acts cannot exceed 5 years in prison, and for careless acts - 3 years. The statute of limitations ends 6 years from the date the crime occurred. These are the following acts: Qualified types of theft: causing significant damage to the victim; with penetration into the storage; from clothing or luggage with the victim. Fraud, misappropriation, embezzlement – causing significant damage and committed by a group of persons. Robbery, extortion in the absence of circumstances aggravating liability. Sexual intercourse between an 18-year-old and a person under 16 years of age. Abuse of powers by the head of a commercial organization, art. 201 and officials of government agencies and organizations with state participation without aggravating features. Traffic violations resulting in serious harm or death to victims, and others. Serious crimes. Serious crimes are committed only with intent, the most severe punishment for them is a maximum of 10 years in prison. The statute of limitations for such acts is 10 years. Such crimes include: especially qualified thefts: with penetration into a home; in large and extra large sizes. Fraud: using official position; resulting in deprivation of the right to housing. Robbery: by a group of persons; with the use of weapons. Qualified types of robbery: with the use of violence; with penetration into housing; on a large scale. Intentional infliction of harm to the health of the victim, classified as serious injury, without particularly qualifying signs. Rape with grave consequences. A number of offenses in the field of illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and their precursors. Receiving and giving bribes for illegal actions and others. Particularly serious criminal acts. The category of the highest degree of severity of crimes under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, for which one can be deprived of liberty for a long period - more than 10 years, is subject to a statute of limitations of 15 years from the date of the act. These are the most dangerous crimes for society, such as: murder; some crimes related to the trafficking of prohibited substances, drugs, psychotropic substances, committed in amounts ranging from significant to especially large; banditry; creation of a criminal community, organization, participation in them, etc. It is possible that a report of a crime may be received by law enforcement agencies after the statute of limitations has expired, or it will come to an end when it is carried out. Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Article 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation establishes that in such situations a criminal case cannot be initiated. Therefore, if as a result of the inspection the elements of a crime are established, it is possible to make a decision to refuse to initiate a criminal case on the basis of the above norm. When the statute of limitations for liability for a crime expires during the investigation or inquiry, the criminal case initiated in connection with its commission is also terminated by a decision of the person who is in proceedings. If the suspect or accused objects to this decision, the proceedings on the case are completed in accordance with the general procedure, and they are sent to court. When the statute of limitations expires on a case pending in court - if it was received after the expiration of the period, or it expired during the trial, with the consent of the defendant, the court also makes a decision to terminate it. If the defendant does not agree to the termination of proceedings on such grounds, the trial continues as usual. Senior Assistant Prosecutor S.V. Valova
