Introduction: law enforcement practice and scientific research in the field of the theory of intelligence-gathering activities prove that current Russian intelligencegathering legislation contains quite a few legal gaps and contradictions. The article provides a scientific analysis of a number of problematic issues concerning legal regulation of intelligence-gathering activities conducted in the Russian Federation, with an emphasis on the functioning of operational units of the penal system of the Russian Federation. Aim:to work out proposals to improve national intelligence-gathering legislation by reviewingintelligence-gathering legislation of CIS countries, analyzing the works of scientists on the theory of intelligence-gathering activities and regulatory framework for the work of operational units. Methods: comparative legal method, theoretical methods of formal and dialectical logic, specific scientific methods: legal-dogmatic method, interpretation of legal norms. Results: the article considers the inconsistency between the purpose of intelligence-gathering activities enacted in law and both the law enforcement practice and its legally defined tasks, the absence of a number of significant tasks, as well as the grounds for conducting intelligence-gathering activities by operational units of the penal system, the lack of legal regulation of the content of intelligence-gathering activities and their procedure. To prove the existence of these shortcomings, we analyze the most common intelligence-gathering measures such as questioning and inquiries. Having studied intelligence-gathering laws of several CIS countries we found some norms regulating intelligence-gathering activities in the penitentiary system, the use of which, in our opinion, is possible in Russian context. Based on this, we make proposals to improve legal regulation of intelligence-gathering activities, in particular, by disclosing the concept of each intelligence-gathering activity in the norms of intelligence-gathering law. Conclusions: the article develops and substantiates proposals for improving Russia’sintelligence-gathering law and concludes that it is necessary to transform fundamentally the legislative regulation of intelligence-gathering activities in Russia by adopting the appropriate code.
Keywords: intelligence-gathering activities; intelligence-gathering measures; shortcomings; problems; intelligence-gathering law; theory of intelligence-gathering activities; intelligence-gathering code.
Candidate of Sciences (Law), Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Operational Investigative Activities of the Faculty of Law of the Vladimir Law Institute of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia, Vladimir, Russia
, e-mail email@example.com
1. Atmazhitov V.M., Bobrov V.G. O zakonodatel’nom regulirovanii operativno-rozysknoideyatel’nosti: nauchnyi doklad
[On the legislative regulation of intelligence-gathering activities: a scientific report]. Moscow: ID Shumilova I.I., 2003.
2. Atmazhitov V.M. On the nature and legal basis of intelligence-gathering activities: a scientific report. In: Konstitutsionnopravovyeproblemyoperativno-rozysknoideyatel’nosti: sbornik materialov Vserossiiskogo kruglogo stola (3 noyabrya
2011 g.) [Constitutional and legal problems of intelligence-gathering activities: proceedings of the all-Russian round table
(November 3, 2011)]. Compiled by K.B. Kalinovskii. Moscow: Petropolis, 2012. Pp. 69–86. (In Russ.).
3. Bobrov V.G. On some issues of legislative regulation of intelligence-gathering activities. Politseiskoe pravo=Police Law,
2005, no. 2, pp. 75–83. (In Russ.).
4. Goryainov K.K. Some directions of development of intelligence-gathering activities in the penal system. Operativnik
(syshchik)=Field Investigator (Detective), 2006, no. 1 (6), pp. 17–20. (In Russ.).
5. Znikin V. K. Public intelligence-gathering measure cannot be an investigative action. Vestnik Kuzbasskogo instituta=Bulletin
of the Kuzbass Institute, 2019, no. 4 (41), pp. 142–146. (In Russ.).
6. Kvasha Yu.F., Vasil’ev N.N. Osnovnye napravleniya (kontseptsiya) operativno-rozysknoi deyatel’nosti operativnykh
podrazdelenii organov i uchrezhdenii, ispolnyayushchikh ugolovnye nakazaniya: uchebno-metodicheskie materialy po
kursu “Organizatsiya i taktika ORD organov, ispolnyayushchikh nakazaniya” [The main directions (concept) of intelligencegathering activities of operational divisions of bodies and institutions executing criminal punishments: educational and
methodological materials for the course “Organization and tactics of IGAs of bodies executing punishments]. Moscow:
Akademiya MVD Rossii, 1994. Pp. 22–23.
7. Lugovik V.F. The intelligence-gathering code of the Russian Federation (the author’s draft of a federal law). Yuridicheskaya
nauka i pravookhranitel’naya praktika=Legal Science and Law Enforcement Practice, 2015, no. 1 (31), pp. 109–135.
Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/operativno-razysknoy-kodeks-rossiyskoy-federatsii-avtorskiy-proektfederalnogo-zakona/viewer (accessed January 6, 2021).
8. On intelligence-gathering activities: the law of the Republic of Belarus. Official website of “Etalon”– National Center
for Legal Information of the Republic of Belarus. Available at: https://etalonline.by/document/?regnum=H11500307
(accessed January 24, 2021). (In Russ.).
9. On intelligence-gathering activities: the law of the Republic of Kazakhstan no. 154-XIII dated September 15, 1994.
Information and legal system of normative legal acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan: official website. Available at: http://
adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/Z940004000_/links (accessed January 24, 2021). (In Russ.).
10. Oganesyan S.S. What spelling is correct: “разыскной”or “розыскной”? In: Tkachenko E.S. (Ed.). Aktual’nye
voprosysovershenstvovaniya rossiiskogo zakonodatel’stva i deyatel’nosti ugolovno-ispolnitel’noi sistemy: sbornik
nauchnykh trudov [Topical issues of improving Russian legislation and the activities of the penal system: collection of
scientific papers]. Vladimir: VYuI FSIN Rossii, 2019. P. 286–291. (In Russ.).
11. Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of October 2, 2003 no. 345-O “On refusal to accept for
consideration the request of the Soviet District Court of the city of Lipetsk to verify the constitutionality of Part 4 of Article 32 of
the Federal Law of February 16, 1995 “On Communication”. In: Operativno-rozysknye meropriyatiya: osnovaniya i usloviya
ikh provedeniya: sbornik reshenii Evropeiskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka, Konstitutsionnogo i VerkhovnogoSudov
Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Intelligence-gathering activities: grounds and conditions for their implementation: collection of
decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional and Supreme Courts of the Russian Federation].
Compiled by K.K. Goryainov, L.E. Shchetnev. Vladimir: VYuI FSIN Rossii, 2017. Pp. 48–50.