Criminal Liability for Knowingly False Expert Opinion in the Field of Procurement of Goods, Works and Services to Meet State and Municipal Needs: Pro et Contra
- Authors: Yamasheva E.V.1
-
Affiliations:
- Institute of Legislation and Comparative Jurisprudence under the Government of the Russian Federation
- Issue: Vol 10, No 4 (2023)
- Pages: 131-136
- Section: Criminal law
- URL: https://journals.eco-vector.com/2410-7522/article/view/623440
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/RJLS623440
- ID: 623440
Cite item
Abstract
In 2018, a new norm was introduced into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on criminal liability for knowingly false expert evidence in the procurement of goods, works, and services to meet state and municipal needs. At the same time, administrative liability was introduced for a similar offense. Such comprehensive regulation was aimed at increasing the efficiency of theft prevention mechanisms when purchasing goods, works, and services to meet state and municipal needs. The “package” introduction of the two most stringent types of legal liability was received positively by the scientific community. On the one hand, filling the identified gap should be considered necessary, but on the other hand, an analysis of judicial practice shows that these provisions of the criminal law and legislation on administrative offenses are not reflected in law enforcement practice, and illegal acts are characterized by high latency. A study of foreign legislation has shown that there are no provisions for such a special crime as knowingly false expert opinion in the field of activity in question. The article presents various approaches of judicial authorities regarding the analyzed elements of crime and administrative offense in the field of procurement. The conclusions draw attention to the need for broad discussion of the issue of decriminalization of knowingly false expert opinion in the field of procurement.
Full Text
About the authors
Ekaterina V. Yamasheva
Institute of Legislation and Comparative Jurisprudence under the Government of the Russian Federation
Author for correspondence.
Email: crim2@izak.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6605-5915
researcher
Russian Federation, MoscowReferences
- Economic Security (Criminal law enforcement mechanisms). Ed. by I.I. Kucherov, O.A. Zaitsev, S.L. Nudel. Мoscow: LAW FIRM CONTRACT, 2021. (In Russ.).
- Kolesnikov EV. Federal law: problems of typology. State power and local self-government. 2020;(4)9–12. (In Russ.).
- Svininykh EA. Review of the main legislative innovations on public procurement. Defense-industrial complex: legal issues. 2019;(1):31–36. (In Russ.).
- Gravina A.A., Zaycev O.A., Zhilkin M.G., et al. Scientific and practical commentary on chapter 22 “Crimes in the field of economic activity” of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: in 2 volumes. Vol. 2. Ed. by I.I. Kucherov, O.A. Zaycev, S.L. Nudel. Мoscow: LAW FIRM CONTRACT; 2020. (In Russ.).
- Belyaeva OA. Conflict of interests in public procurement. Journal of Entrepreneurial and Corporate Law. 2019;(1):13–18. (In Russ.).
- Zyryanov SM. Problems of constructing the compositions of administrative offenses in the articles of the Special part of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. Journal of Russian Law. 2020;(8):105–126. (In Russ.).
- Nudel SL, Pechegin DA. Trends of criminal policy in the field of protection of economic activity in the conditions of digitalization. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Juridicheskie nauki (Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences). 2022;(56):309–335. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17072/1995-4190-2022-56-309-335
- Gladkikh VI. Zloupotrebleniya v sfere zakupok tovarov, rabot, uslug dlya obespecheniya gosudarstvennykh ili munitsipal’nykh nuzhd (st. 200.4 UK RF): teoreticheskii analiz. Rossiiskaya yustitsiya. 2019;(3):51–54. (In Russ.).