Implementing Operational Investigative Measures to Prevent Crimes: Problematic Issues of Legislation and Key Directions of Implementation

Introduction: crime prevention and solution are crucial tasks of operational units of all subjects conducting law enforcement intelligence operations. At the same time, the study of the regulatory legal framework and scientific literature shows that its legal regulation is characterized by certain shortcomings and significant gaps. So, for example, there is no unambiguous understanding of the relationship between concepts of crime prevention and crime deterrence, the legislation does not provide for the ability to carry out operational investigative measures to solve the problem of crime prevention, etc. Purpose: based on the analysis of legislation and available scientific publications, to formulate proposals for improving the Federal Law “On law enforcement intelligence operations” in terms of the legal regulation of crime prevention, consider relationship of the concepts “crime prevention” and “crime deterrence”, as well as briefly characterize key directions and the content of crime prevention. Methods: comparative legal, theoretical methods of formal and dialectical logic; private scientific methods: empirical, legal-dogmatic and method of interpretation of legal norms. Results: the article outlines crucial legal problems of crime prevention, formulates proposals for their resolution in the form of draft amendments to relevant articles of the Federal Law “On law enforcement intelligence operations”. The article presents interpretations of the concepts “crime prevention” and “crime deterrence” and concludes about their non-identity – crime deterrence is part of crime prevention. The content of general and individual deterrence is considered, and the reader’s attention is drawn to the active use of operational search forces, means and methods in the work on their implementation. The author argues that the root cause of any crime commission is the microsocial conflict of a person and society, which arose as a result of socio-psychological maladaptation of a person. Conclusions: crime deterrence is part of crime prevention and is implemented in the direction of general and individual deterrence by determining and eliminating causes and conditions that contribute to the commission of crimes, as well as identifying persons whose lifestyle and behavior demonstrate possible commission of crimes. It is emphasized that, although crime prevention is fixed as a task of law enforcement intelligence operations in the operational-investigative legislation, the law does not contain the means to solve this problem in the form of grounds for conducting operational search measures. So, there is a gap in the legal regulation of the established socially useful law enforcement practice. In order to eliminate this shortcoming, it is necessary to amend Article 1 of the Federal Law “On law enforcement intelligence operations”, supplementing the existing possibility to carry out law enforcement intelligence operations “by carrying out operational investigative measures” with the phrase “and other actions”. It also seems appropriate to supplement Article 7 with the basis for conducting operational investigative measures in order to “obtain information for identification, prevention, suppression or solution of the illegal act being prepared, being committed or having been committed, as well as about the persons who are plotting, preparing, committing or have committed it”.

Keywords: law enforcement intelligence operations; operational search measures; tasks; grounds; prevention; deterrence.