The article deals with the problems of law enforcement in the group of
malfeasances. Official crimes are most dangerous due to the fact that they undermine
the prestige of the authorities and directly violate the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations. In this regard the legislator has established criminal liability for
officials who abuse their functional duties. In particular the author studies the problems
of qualification arising in the legal assessment of crimes enshrined in Ch. 30 of the
Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, due to the highest level of their blanketness
and evaluativeness. Examples of judicial and investigative practice on competition issues
of general and special rules are given. Difficulties are revealed in the legal assessment
of the actions of officials when determining the signs of abuse of office, enshrined
in Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Arguments are presented that
are a clear demonstration of the fact that the solution to the identified problems of applying
the norms of the criminal law lies in the plane of reducing the level of conflict of laws of
criminal legislation. Practical proposals are being made to include amendments to the
Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 09.07.2013
No. 24 “On judicial practice in cases of bribery and other corruption crimes” (clause 12.1)
and Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated
16.10.2009 No. 19 “On judicial practice in cases of abuse of office and abuse of office”
(p. 21.1). The solution of the stated problems in the field of application of the norms of the
criminal law consists in the development of a uniform practice of application of the norms
of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, reduction of the level of gaps in criminal
legislation, the development of methodological and scientific recommendations with the
participation of law enforcement officials and scientists, the preparation of draft laws and
plenums of the Supreme Court aimed at elimination of gaps and gaps.
Leading Researcher of the Research Center of the Academy of Management of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, Moscow, Russian Federation, PhD. in Law, Associate Professor
, e-mail email@example.com
1. Alekseev S. S. Obshchaya teoriya prava. Tom 2 [General theory of law. Vol. 2]. Moscow, 1982. 360 p. (In Russ.).
2. Izosimov S. V. Otvetstvennost’ za prestupleniya protiv gosudarstvennoj vlasti, interesov gosudarstvennoj sluzhby i
sluzhby v organah mestnogo samoupravleniya [Responsibility for crimes against state power, interests of public service
and service in local government bodies]. Nizhny Novgorod, 2002. 98 p. (In Russ.).
3. Izosimov S. V. Sluzhebnye prestupleniya [Official crimes]. Nizhny Novgorod, 2003. 152 p. (In Russ.).
4. Pronina M. P. Sovremennoe sostoyanie pravoprimeneniya v ugolovnom zakonodatel’stve [The current state of law
enforcement in criminal legislation]. Probely v rossijskom zakonodatel’stve – Gaps in Russian legislation, 2017, no. 5,
pp. 110–114. (In Russ.).
5. Pchelkina V. V. (red.) Slovar’ inostrannyh slov [Dictionary of foreign words]. Moscow, 1987. 608 p. (In Russ.).