Counter terrorism- activities of state authorities and local governments in:

a) prevention of terrorism, including the identification and subsequent elimination of the causes and conditions conducive to the commission of terrorist acts (prevention of terrorism);

b) identification, prevention, suppression, disclosure and investigation of a terrorist act (fight against terrorism);

c) minimizing and (or) eliminating the consequences of terrorism.

Legal basis for countering terrorism

The legal basis for countering terrorism is the Constitution of the Russian Federation, generally recognized principles and norms international law, international treaties of the Russian Federation, Federal Law on Countering Terrorism, regulatory legal acts of the President of the Russian Federation.

Basic principles of countering terrorism

Countering terrorism in the Russian Federation is based on the following main principles: principles:

Ensuring and protecting fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen;

Legality;

The inevitability of punishment for carrying out terrorist activities;

Systematic and comprehensive use of political, informational and propaganda, socio-economic, legal, special and other measures to counter terrorism;

Cooperation of the state with public and religious associations, international and other organizations, citizens in countering terrorism;

Confidentiality of information about special means, technical methods, tactics for implementing counter-terrorism measures, as well as the composition of their participants;

Inadmissibility of political concessions to terrorists;

Minimizing and (or) eliminating the consequences of terrorism;

TYPES OF TERRORIST ACTS AND WAYS OF THEIR IMPLEMENTATION.

Terrorist acts may be of the following types.

1. Sabotage(explosion, spraying of toxic substances, etc.). Explosions are carried out in vehicles or buildings with the intention of causing damage and causing casualties, as well as open space to destroy people. Suffering as a result of explosions large number random people, therefore, it is precisely this tactic that leads to the most powerful psychological effect. Another type of explosive activity is the use of suicide bombers Islamic terrorists. Terrorists also mine various objects: residential buildings, shops, banks, hotels, airports, highways, and industrial facilities.

2. Kidnapping. Significant figures capable of attracting public attention are kidnapped: famous politicians, officials, journalists, diplomats. They are committed in order to achieve the fulfillment of political demands, to intimidate the ruling strata, and to obtain funds for the activities of the organization.

3. Attempt and murder. It is distinguished by demonstrative targeting, therefore it is effective for targeted psychological impact for a narrow audience

4. Robbery (expropriation). It is carried out both for the purpose of obtaining the funds necessary for the struggle, and for propaganda purposes.

5. Hijacking- capture vehicle: airplane, railway train, car, ship.

Capturing buildings.

7. Armed attack without death and causing minor property damage. It is carried out by terrorist organizations at the stage of formation, when experience in conducting large-scale operations has not yet been accumulated, and is also actively active organizations who only need to demonstrate the ability to conduct armed operations.

8. Cyberterrorism (cyberwar)- attacks on computer networks. Political terrorism is not the only type of violent activity in the political sphere. Political assassinations and guerrilla warfare stand apart from terrorist activities: At the same time, especially dangerous forms crime is not a monopoly of terrorists; ordinary bandits often resort to terrorist methods.

Anti-corruption efforts in the Russian Federation are based on the following basic principles:

1) recognition, provision and protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen;

2) legality;

3) publicity and openness of activities government agencies and local governments;

4) the inevitability of responsibility for committing corruption offenses;

5) integrated use of political, organizational, information and propaganda, socio-economic, legal, special and other measures;

6) priority application of measures to prevent corruption;

7) cooperation between the state and civil society institutions, international organizations and individuals.

Measures to prevent corruption

Prevention of corruption is carried out by applying the following basic measures:

1) the formation in society of intolerance towards corrupt behavior;

2) anti-corruption examination of legal acts and their projects;

3) presentation in accordance with the procedure established by law qualification requirements for citizens , applying to replace government or municipal positions and positions of state or municipal service, as well as verification in the prescribed manner of information provided by these citizens;

4) establishment as a basis for dismissal of a person holding a state or municipal service position included in the list established by regulations legal acts Russian Federation, from the position being filled state or municipal service or for application in relation to his other measures of legal liability their failure to provide information or the provision of knowingly false or incomplete information about their income, property and property-related obligations, as well as submission of knowingly false information about income, about the property and property-related obligations of their spouse and minor children;

5) introduction into the practice of personnel work of federal government bodies, government bodies of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, local government bodies of the rule, according to which long-term, impeccable and effective performance by a state or municipal employee of his official duties must be taken into account when appointing him to a higher position, assigning him a military or special rank, class rank, diplomatic rank or with his encouragement;

6) development of institutions of public and parliamentary control for compliance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on combating corruption.

What measures, in your opinion, should an optimal strategy to combat corruption in Russia contain?

· limiting the stay of governors in power - no more than two terms;

restoration of the election of governors

· restoration of political competition, adoption of the law on opposition;

· Exemplary serious punishments

· Financial reporting

· Adoption of the LAW!!!

The first is legislative changes in the field of criminal law and processes related to both international obligations Russia, and with the current situation in the country.

The second and, according to him, much more the hard part The plan is precisely the creation of anti-corruption incentives. It depends "on general level life in the country, salary level, on how unconditionally and strictly the laws are applied to those who break the law, in relation to the so-called corrupt officials, those who take bribes and commit other corrupt acts." At the same time, Medvedev expressed the opinion that highest form such motivation is when it becomes obvious to the person who is going to receive a bribe that this should not be done, because it could ruin his whole life.

The third is “a change in legal consciousness, a change in people’s thinking.”

Define a government decision. What are the main types of government decisions?

State decision- Selection and justification of certain actions of government bodies aimed at achieving public goals

Types of government decisions:

• Political and administrative - direction of the country, determination of powers, etc.
• Programmed and unprogrammed

Factors in the decision-making process:

1. Decision maker (DM)
2. Decision-maker-dependent variables
3. Variables independent of the decision maker
4. Restrictions on the parameters of dependent and independent variables - the range of feasible solutions
5. Alternatives
6. Criteria for evaluating alternatives
7. Possibility of implementing the decision made

Rational policy model:

• Define the problem
• Understand all the requirements for all decisions that will need to be made
• Make a list of all alternatives
• Identify resources for each alternative
• Calculate the costs and benefits associated with each option
• Make a decision based on all relevant information, focusing on max benefits and min costs.

As is known , the process of making not only government decisions, but also decisions as such is studied in science from the points of view normative and behavioral theories. First Some of them treat it as a process rational choice of management goals in complex situations. Moreover, it may well be detailed and operationalized in order to find optimal solutions. To solve this problem it is proposed to use various mathematical models, operations research and other rational-logical tools.

Another approach looks at this process as a form of specific human interaction, which cannot be explained and described by purely rational and quantitative methods. First of all, this is due to the peculiarities of human behavior, which, as is known, can be motivated by various kinds of affects and irrational reasons. and then from the point of view of adherents of this approach, The goals that people set for themselves are too complex to be reduced to quantitative indicators. And there are significantly more possible alternatives to solving the problem than are known to the subject or that can be included in consideration. Thus, the main emphasis here is on varied - including quality - description of various factors influencing decision-making in a specific situation and the corresponding behavior of the subject.

Main theoretical approaches:

• Normative – G. Simon
• Behavioral – Ch. Lindblum

Any management decision is based on choice (minimum 2), the decision must be mandatory - normative approach– there is always a goal and values, specification of tasks with With the help of certain actions, consequences are determined, then the choice of alternatives and the achievement of goals.

The idea of ​​the impossibility of consistently carrying out a decision-making algorithm, because it is very difficult to bring abstract values ​​to tasks according to resources - behavioral approach – it is impossible to take into account the totality of factors the system must integrate goals and strategies, rather than first defining goals and then choosing strategies. There must be a constant adjustment of goals and strategy, because there is no constant. You need to start with small goals and achieve them.

It seems, from a practical point of view, that it is advisable to use an integrated approach, using not only methods) of a qualitative description of the situation, but also means of quantitative analysis (especially in relation to the study of individual, primarily structured phases and states of the decision-making process). This is the only way to most fully characterize both universal and specific features of the process of formation and implementation of state goals.

Types of solutions

¨ Political and administrative

¨ Programmed and unprogrammed

• Political and administrative.

Political decisions– decisions based on the authority of the person making them (DM) and providing for distribution (redistribution) public resources in the interests of certain social groups.

Administrative decisions – solutions aimed at implementing government functions organs in accordance with existing norms and regulations.

It is necessary to distinguish political and administrative decisions.

Political-- concentrated expression political leadership. They are subject to implementation common interests and the general goals of social groups or a given community. Even if political decisions are made at the regional level or within a local community, they affect interests of the state union of people, functioning of state power.

Administrative decisions are acts of management actions that regulate the functioning of certain types of production, economic, social and cultural life of people and the current practical activities of individual organizations.

Political decisions, unlike administrative ones, are always directly or indirectly addressed certain community groups people, serve as a means of regulating relations between them, are a way expression and implementation of social interests and goals. They are the result activities of subjects of political power and political leadership.

According to the principle policy priorities in state management, political decisions are dominant meaning in relation to administrative and managerial ones.

· Programmed and unprogrammed

Programmed decisions are routine, repetitive, having analogues in the past (budget adoption).

Unprogrammed - innovative (adoption of federal targeted programs, national projects)

Programmed Solutions are a response to recurring organizational problems. When the rules are formulated, programmed decisions can be made by the manager's subordinates, freeing him up to solve other problems.

Non-programmed solutions are a response to the emergence of unique, ill-defined and unstructured situations that have important consequences for the organization. Many unprogrammed solutions include strategic planning because uncertainty is high and decisions are complex

Government decisions are grouped on many grounds. In particular:

· by subject level in the system of state power and management - decisions of federal, regional and local bodies;

· by the nature of goals and objectives -- political or administrative decisions, leadership and executive, strategic or operational-tactical, national or related to individual areas of state life;

· in the spheres of life of society - decisions on economic, social, problems of state construction and management, cultural construction, etc.;

· in terms of the scope of coverage of the management object - system-wide, general political, macroeconomic, microsocial decisions (related to individual groups of production, economic and social groups); on management functions - issues of planning, organization, control, etc.

Examples of political decisions serve: government programs, socio-economic, socio-political concepts and military-strategic concepts, legislative acts constitutional nature, adopted by the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, Decrees of the President of Russia on general issues state activities, etc.

Among administrative and managerial decisions should be called resolutions The Government of Russia, as well as orders and directives of ministries and departments.

Decisions at the regional level are formulated in the form of laws adopted by representative bodies of power, constitutions of republics, charters of regions, territories, resolutions of heads of administrations of constituent entities of the Federation, etc. They can be both political and legal and administrative acts.

Administrative decisions federal government bodies and subjects of the Federation may carry a political aspect to the extent that they act as a means of implementing general federal policy or the Basic Law of the state. And in general, the difference we have emphasized between political and administrative decisions is relative, since, as stated, public administration is by its nature a political phenomenon. Politics is the determining level (in terms of significance) of management. This is also recognized by some foreign authors. For example, the French political scientist M. Poniatowski divides the management of public affairs into three levels: politics means what to do and why; execution - how to do it and with what help; administration is an auxiliary tool.

This work is devoted to a general description of the principles of anti-corruption and their role in the field of preventing and suppressing corruption.

Key words: To corruption, anti-corruption, principles, anti-corruption legislation, corruption offense.

International ratings show that the level of corruption in Russia remains quite high. Corruption of government structures and officials hinders the progressive development of a market economy, the creation and functioning of democratic institutions in the country and, as a result, a decrease in the trust of citizens and the international community in government power.

The effectiveness of anti-corruption measures on the part of government agencies and civil society institutions today leaves much to be desired, since the system of measures is insufficiently perfect, complex and expensive to implement, and the principles of anti-corruption are often neglected by many.

Significant prevalence of corruption, negative consequences to which it leads, failure to achieve the goals of minimizing corruption in modern stage indicate the relevance of considering the principles of anti-corruption and their role in the field of preventing and suppressing corruption.

In the system of initial principles of anti-corruption, an important place belongs to the principles on which these activities should be built and carried out. In order to increase the effectiveness of anti-corruption activities, it is necessary to clarify the general characteristics of the principles and determine their role in the field of preventing and suppressing corruption.

The principles are the fundamental principles in the activities of the relevant structures and formations to combat corruption.

Basic fundamental principles fight against corruption are enshrined in Article 3 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation dated December 25, 2008 N 273-FZ “On Combating Corruption”:

Anti-corruption efforts in the Russian Federation are based on the following basic principles:

1) recognition, provision and protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen;

2) legality;

3) publicity and openness of the activities of state bodies and local governments;

4) the inevitability of responsibility for committing corruption offenses;

5) integrated use of political, organizational, information and propaganda, socio-economic, legal, special and other measures;

6) priority application of measures to prevent corruption;

7) cooperation of the state with civil society institutions, international organizations and individuals.

But the listed principles are only spelled out in the law; their content is not disclosed. In practice, there may be other principles depending on the subjects and types of influence, as well as different interpretations of existing principles in the law.

Let's take a closer look at the principles specified in the law:

The principle of recognition, observance and protection of human and civil rights and freedoms is that when implementing anti-corruption measures, the state guarantees equality of rights and freedoms for affected persons, regardless of gender, nationality, origin, property and official status, place of residence, beliefs, as well as other circumstances. This principle is to a certain extent the embodiment and concretization of the principle of humanism.

The principle of legality is expressed in the fact that the activities of subjects of individual prevention should be based and regulated on the basis of the developed legislative framework. Principle of legality It is quite rightly considered one of the most important and universal principles that are essential for all branches of law. Its consistent implementation is an indispensable condition for the normal functioning of the entire state mechanism.

The content of legality in state and municipal anti-corruption management is considered from the perspective of several aspects that are in organic unity - primarily from the point of view of the main substantive and procedural components of legality: 1) the legal validity of management decisions made in general and in terms of combating corruption in particular; 2) the traditions of respect for the law that have developed in society, the mandatory implementation of its decisions by all subjects of management relations; 3) guarantee of the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of citizens, their protection from corruption-based humiliation of human dignity; 4) professionalism and legal culture of who is the “author” management decision, and those entrusted with its implementation; 5) state and service discipline, strict fulfillment of requirements, procedural forms and methods provided for by law for the development, adoption and implementation of management decisions; 6) administrative and official regulations, the creation of ethics commissions, monitoring compliance with requirements for official conduct and resolving conflicts of interest, transition to work based on performance indicators based on personal merit and career achievements; 7) rationality and legal validity of the use of material, political, personnel, information, spiritual, moral and other resources to ensure the rule of law.

The task of combating corruption with the help of legislative measures is to cover the development of almost the entire legal system. The state must have effective means of control and supervision over the proper implementation of laws and other regulations in the field of anti-corruption policy.

The implementation of the principle of publicity and openness in the activities of state bodies and local governments, as a principle of anti-corruption, plays an important role. Part 6 of Article 8 of the Federal Law “On Combating Corruption” establishes the obligation to post information on income, property and property-related obligations of persons holding municipal service positions on the Internet information and telecommunications network on the official websites of local governments. The principle of accessibility of information about the activities of municipal employees corresponds with the principle of publicity and openness of the activities of local government bodies, enshrined in Art. 3 of the Federal Law of December 25, 2008 No. 273-FZ “On Combating Corruption”. With the development of information networks, the placement of information about the activities of local government bodies on the Internet on the official websites of the local government body, as well as in other sources posted on the Internet, becomes important in implementing the principle of accessibility about the activities of municipal employees.

This principle is also associated with the implementation of the following measures: ensuring that it is inadmissible to restrict access of all interested parties to information about facts of corruption, corruption-causing factors and anti-corruption policy measures; introduction into practice of mandatory analysis of bills and departmental legal documents for corruption potential; increasing the legal literacy of the population with the participation public associations and media; support and encouragement of those media and public associations that are engaged in anti-corruption propaganda, dissemination of the ideas of law and order in the country; Constantly informing the public about the implementation of anti-corruption programs in Russia and abroad; public opposition to the myth of the invincibility of corruption in the country.

The principle of the inevitability of responsibility for committing corruption offenses - despite the fact that corruption-related illegal attacks belong to the category of highly latent acts, law enforcement agencies in their activities must strive to ensure that all participants in corruption receive a well-deserved punishment for their illegal actions. The inevitability of responsibility is understood as: the mandatory application of criminal punishment and other measures of criminal law; mandatory influence on the offender by the competent authorities; negative assessment violations by the state and society; the reality of its action and implementation. The law names the inevitability of responsibility for corruption offenses as one of the principles and aims to emphasize the seriousness of the anti-corruption policy and focus on specific results of anti-corruption activities. This principle means that for each fact of corruption violation (subject to proof of guilt, of course) an adequate punishment must be imposed. To this end, it is necessary to further improve operational investigative activities in order to identify, disclose, suppress and prevent crimes related to corruption.

The inevitability of responsibility, being truly ensured by the efforts of the state, demonstrates its determination to actually implement an anti-corruption policy, excluding impunity for corrupt officials. This principle is associated with such a guiding principle of anti-corruption law as the recognition of the increased public danger of corruption offenses of persons holding positions provided for by the Constitution and other laws of the state. The point is that the state classifies corruption crimes as serious and establishes severe sanctions for their commission, allowing for the possibility of confiscation. And here it is appropriate to say about the need to concentrate efforts on the fight against top-level corruption (corruption of senior officials). This struggle should extend to all levels of government (federal, regional, local) and the higher the status of the official, the more sanctions should be applied against him. For example, N.V. Shchedrin proposes to link the severity of restrictions with the classification of government positions, as well as with the status of the legislative body.

Principle integrated use political, organizational, information and propaganda, socio-economic, legal, special and other measures reflect the specifics of corruption as a phenomenon that requires an adequate and systemic response.

The comprehensiveness of the use of anti-corruption measures is focused both on preventive work and on the direct fight against corruption and the elimination of their consequences. A thoughtful attitude to the implementation of this principle in practice will allow you to avoid excesses and show trials, turning the activity in question into one of the components public administration.

The principle of priority application of measures to prevent corruption- this principle sets the tone for the implementation of the entire array of regulations on the public civil service, as well as those regulations that determine the procedure for exercising the rights of citizens and organizations in administrative relations. The regulatory framework for the activities of state and municipal employees should not be corruptive and “push” them to arbitrary law enforcement. Society itself must play an important role in the implementation of this principle.

The principle of cooperation between the state and civil society institutions, international organizations and individuals emphasizes the general social nature of the problem of corruption.

For genuine cooperation between the state and society, many conditions are necessary, many of which have not yet developed in our country. These conditions include: high level development of democratic institutions, political and civic activity of the population, real freedom and independence of the press, real transparency of the actions of the authorities and its control over the institutions of civil society. This principle is most poorly implemented both in the text of the commented Law and in the current one. Russian legislation.

It can be concluded that corruption is becoming the norm, not the exception, including among the political, ruling and economic elite. Law enforcement agencies, themselves partly affected by corruption, do not have sufficient capacity and the necessary real independence to combat institutional corruption.

Thus, the current criminological situation predetermines the need to develop an effective state anti-corruption program, to develop an effective regulatory and legal framework, the basis of which should be the relevant principles enshrined at the level of the foundations of the constitutional system modern Russia and implemented in the practical activities of various subjects.

It is necessary to improve the current legislation and develop a unified conceptual mechanism. One of the main principles of the fight against corruption and organized crime should be openness and transparency of the activities of judicial and executive authorities, the media, citizens and public formations, the formation of an anti-corruption worldview among Russian citizens, including through the use of media opportunities.

The state is a certain way of organizing society. It does not exist in isolation from its surroundings. social environment. Therefore, it is precisely from the activity of the free, responsible people, their vital energy, the level of civil, legal, political culture and education depend on the construction of a legal, effective state in which corruption has been defeated.

With clear and conscientious implementation of all the principles listed in the work, the cohesion of society in the fight against any kind of manifestations of corruption, personal interest law enforcement agencies to ensure law and order in the country, there will be a chance to bypass the criminalization of all spheres of life through corruption, and this will also serve as a major step forward towards building a civil society.

List of used literature

1. Federal Law “On Combating Corruption” dated December 25, 2008 N 273-FZ (latest edition) // Legal system “Consultant Plus”

2.Ozhegov S., Shvedova N.Yu. Dictionary Russian language: 80,000 words and phraseological expressions. - 4th ed., add. - M.,
1998. - P. 397.

3. Konnov I.A., Zelenin N.I. Problems of corruption in Russia and ways to solve them // Current issues humanities and natural sciences. 2014. No. 9. P. 278

4. Anti-corruption: textbook and workshop for academic undergraduates / ed. ed. E. V. Okhotsky. - 2nd ed., rev. - M.: Yurayt Publishing House, 2016. - 367 p. - Series: Bachelor. Academic course.

5. Godunov I.V. Fundamentals of anti-corruption: textbook / intro. Article by N.D. Nikandrov - Moscow: Russian Academy of Education, University Russian Academy Education, Research Institute for Combating Organized Crime 2013. - 302 p.

6. Anti-corruption: Educational and methodological manual/ Rep. ed. M. E. Zhikharevich, T. B. Pasman; 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: American Bar Association, 2013. - 200 p. - (From the series: Criminal Law).

7. Shchedrin N.V. On the principles of combating corruption // Current problems of economics and law. - 2013. - No. 1. - p.280-284.

Ekimova Olesya Alekseevna – 3rd year student of group 1103-02i (542) of the Faculty of Law of Pskov State University.

§4. Basic principles of anti-corruption

§5. Anti-corruption entities and their powers

Chapter 2. Measures to prevent corruption §1. Anti-corruption examination of regulatory legal acts and their projects

§2. Organizational and legal ways to exclude unjustified interference in the activities of civil servants in order to induce them to commit corruption offenses

§3. Anti-corruption restrictions imposed on a citizen who previously held a civil service position

§4. Public and parliamentary control in the field of anti-corruption

Chapter 3. Legal status of a civil servant in connection with ensuring the prevention of corruption

§1. Qualification requirements for citizens applying for civil service positions

§2. Basic rights of a civil servant related to the performance of professional duties

§3. Basic anti-corruption responsibilities of a civil servant and requirements for his official conduct

§4. Anti-corruption prohibitions in connection with public service

Chapter 4. Conflict of interest in the public service §1. The concept and content of conflict of interest in the public service

§2. Powers of the commission to comply with requirements for official conduct of civil servants and resolve conflicts of interest

§3. Responsibilities of a civil servant and a representative of his employer to prevent conflicts of interest

§2. Administrative procedures for the performance of public functions (provision of public services)

§3. Monitoring the implementation of administrative regulations and appealing against their violations

Chapter 6. Prevention of corruption risks when placing orders for government needs §1. Legal basis for preventing corruption when placing orders for government needs

§2. Anti-corruption support for order placement methods

§3. Anti-corruption requirements for procurement participants and specialized organizations

§4. Corruption risks when performing R&D and their prevention

§2. Powers and responsibilities of representatives of the state control (supervision) body when conducting an inspection

§3. Scheduled and unscheduled inspections. Anti-corruption requirements for their implementation

§4. Basic rights of legal entities and individual entrepreneurs in connection with the inspection

Chapter 8. Responsibility for corruption offenses §1. Responsibility of individuals and legal entities for committing corruption offenses

§2. Criminal, administrative, civil and disciplinary liability for corruption offenses

§2. Subjects carrying out inspections and their powers

§3. Subject of inspection and grounds for its implementation

§4. Administrative procedures for conducting an inspection

§5. Using scan results

Chapter 10. Anti-corruption monitoring §1. Subject, tasks and goals of anti-corruption monitoring

§2. Monitoring criminal and judicial law enforcement practices in the fight against corruption

Information on the application by courts of maximum criminal sanctions to those guilty of committing certain corruption crimes in 2007-2009. (V %)

Comparative information on rarely and frequently imposed types of criminal punishment for committing certain corruption crimes in Russia in 2007-2009.

§2. Promising directions of public-state anti-corruption interaction

Workshop on mastering educational material Glossary

Questions for self-test and exam preparation

§4. Basic principles of anti-corruption

The principles on which anti-corruption activities are based, based on those defined in Art. 3Federal Law of December 25, 2008 N 273-FZ “On Combating Corruption” can be divided into general legal and special.

The following principles have general legal significance: recognition, provision and protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen; legality; publicity and openness of the activities of state bodies and local governments; the inevitability of responsibility for committing corruption offenses.

Special legal significance for anti-corruption purposes can be assigned to the principles of: integrated use of political, organizational, information and propaganda, socio-economic, legal, special and other measures; priority application of measures to prevent corruption; cooperation between the state and civil society institutions, international organizations and individuals.

The combination of these anti-corruption principles makes sense when considering their functional purpose.

Firstly, anti-corruption activities are based on the use of various measures, both punitive and preventive. Secondly, these principles are multi-vector, because they are focused on different anti-corruption participants from a wide range of entities (state authorities, local governments, civil society institutions, international organizations, individuals). This situation creates high risks of going beyond the legality of those anti-corruption actors who have neither special nor professional training and skills in anti-corruption activities. Unfortunately, anti-corruption experience Russian history shows that the goals of combating corruption in practice often take on the properties of opportunistic considerations, and sometimes even illegal actions on the part of those who are called upon to carry out true counteraction. In this regard, the statement of the famous French thinker C. Helvetius that knowledge of certain principles easily replaces ignorance of certain facts becomes relevant.

Ultimately, through a combination of principles, it can be emphasized that combating corruption has common legal grounds for all entities involved in it without exception. In this regard, it makes practical sense to analyze the content of those principles, if observed, there is likely to be widespread interaction between different anti-corruption actors.

The principle of integrated use of political, organizational, informational and propaganda, socio-economic, legal, special and other anti-corruption measures provides not only for the coordination of the actions of entities involved in the process of implementing these measures. The beginnings of this principle are laid in the activities of the Anti-Corruption Council under the President of the Russian Federation, within the framework of which responsible representation can be noted in each of the areas that comprehensively make up the principle under consideration. Along with this, the comprehensive nature of the application of the listed anti-corruption measures is reflected in the National Anti-Corruption Plans and the National Anti-Corruption Strategy.

In this regard, it should be noted that the risks associated with combating corruption “blindly” are completely excluded. Meanwhile, the implementation of the principle under consideration should have the property of such a combination in which the implementation of one of the areas, if possible, takes into account its consequences for another independent area of ​​​​anti-corruption. It is important to emphasize that amateur implementation of directions (especially at the level of constituent entities of the Russian Federation) is unacceptable and is fraught with the formation of results contrary to those expected. For example, additional incentives for employees performing official duties in conditions of increased corruption risks with the so-called “compensation package”, without proper organization of work to comply with the requirements for official conduct, will, at a minimum, discredit the measures taken to prevent corruption.

The principle of priority application of measures to prevent corruption is expressed in the early adoption of preventive measures aimed, first of all, at eliminating the causes and conditions conducive to corruption. This principle requires comprehensive implementation. For example, based on the results of inspections carried out by the prosecutor's office, during which shortcomings in the legislation were identified that contributed to corruption, along with prosecutorial response measures, substantive law-making initiatives can be taken that exclude corruption determinants at the legislative level. In addition, this principle presupposes a balanced approach to the selection of measures not only within the framework of their degree (punitive and preventive, in favor of the latter). It is also important to have the right combination of general and special measures to prevent corruption.

In this regard, let us turn to the same example, but in its different content. Thus, the introduction of mechanisms for additional internal control over the activities of employees whose duties are exposed to the risk of corruption (through the use of technical means, such as the installation of web cameras in office premises) should be justified in use only when other measures, primarily general prevention ( for example, the same “compensation package”) are ineffective. In other words, special means of preventing corruption in the form of excessive “tightening the screws” (moreover, often feigned), when other measures work, can do more harm than good.

Along with this, for the correct implementation of the principle under consideration, it is certainly important to understand the limits of preventive activities outlined by the status and functions of various entities involved in combating corruption. An analysis of law enforcement practice shows that the insufficiency or lack of competence of organizers (performers) in activities to prevent corruption to a decisive extent predetermines miscalculations, errors and systemic failures for the general goals of combating corruption. So, for example, conducting an anti-corruption examination of legal acts by the developers of these acts may turn out to be not only biased, but also unauthorized for the purpose of eliminating “identified” corruption norms, and especially in cases where the examination was carried out by unauthorized entities.

The principle of cooperation between the state and civil society institutions, international organizations and individuals in combating corruption is given attention special attention in anti-corruption conventions. For example, Article 13 of the UN Convention against Corruption notes the need for public institutions to facilitate the active participation of “individuals and groups outside the public sector, such as civil society, non-governmental organizations and community-based organizations, in the prevention of corruption and fight against it." Based on the recommended measures for the participation of civil society institutions in anti-corruption conventions, we can identify those whose implementation is relevant to the current Russian reality. In the conventional reading, these are measures related to:

1) with increased transparency and promotion of public involvement in decision-making processes;

2) ensuring efficient access to information for the population;

3) with the implementation of public awareness activities that contribute to the creation of an atmosphere of intolerance towards corruption, as well as the implementation of public education programs, including training programs in schools and universities.

In terms of implementation of these provisions into domestic practice, the following can be noted.

The implementation of the first measure can be used in a wide range. In particular, it can be seen in the conditions of reforming the models of socio-economic and administrative policy of the state, according to which the need for a new understanding of the place and role of non-profit organizations is dictated, including the denationalization of the market for the provision of a number of services that were previously the subject of a monopoly on the part of the state . Obvious legal grounds for the participation of the population in management decision-making can be considered in the context of the requirements of the Federal Law of October 6, 2003 N 131-FZ "On the General Principles of the Organization of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation", Federal Law of June 12, 2002 N 67-FZ " About basic guarantees voting rights and the right to participate in a referendum of citizens of the Russian Federation" (clause 53 of article 2). The norms of natural resource legislation everywhere note the mandatory participation of citizens, public and religious organizations in resolving issues relating to their rights in the relevant area, as well as participation in the preparation of decisions , the implementation of which may lead to adverse consequences for them. In particular, such provisions are contained in Art. 3Water Code of the Russian Federation.

There are also sufficient normative legal grounds for the implementation of the second measure of citizen participation in activities to prevent corruption, namely, related to ensuring effective access to information for the population. In accordance with Art. 38 of the Law of the Russian Federation of December 27, 1991 N 2124-1 “On the Mass Media,” citizens have the right to promptly receive through the media reliable information about the activities of government bodies and organizations, public associations, and their officials. In terms of the intended purpose of combating corruption, one can evaluate the norms of the Federal Law of May 2, 2006 N 59-FZ “On the procedure for considering appeals from citizens of the Russian Federation,” which provides for a set of decisions on issues related to the procedure for ensuring citizens’ access to information.

The implementation of the third measure, concerning the formation of an information field of intolerance towards corruption, including through the implementation of educational programs at various levels, must be associated not just with the active use of modern telecommunications and educational technologies. Information support is just a form that can have constant or variable properties. Much more important is the content and mechanisms for presenting anti-corruption material, which should not be faceless, but, on the contrary, be targeted and professionally competent.

For example, for the business community, those anti-corruption programs (educational, informational) will be constructive, the content of which is set not by experts who arbitrate corruption situations, but by responsible persons of public authorities who have the appropriate powers to prevent corruption and respond to its manifestations.

corruption counteraction offense

The adopted Federal Law “On Combating Corruption” defines corruption, establishes the basic principles and organizational foundations combating corruption, defines measures to prevent it, establishes special requirements for state and municipal employees, and provides for the liability of individuals and legal entities for corruption offenses. In accordance with the Law, corruption is abuse of official position, giving and receiving bribes, abuse of power, commercial bribery or other illegal use by an individual of his official position contrary to the legitimate interests of society and the state in order to obtain benefits in the form of money, valuables, other property or services property nature, other property rights for oneself or for third parties, or the illegal provision of such benefits to the specified person by other individuals. Corruption will also be the commission of these acts on behalf of or in the interests of a legal entity.

Anti-corruption- activities of federal government bodies, government bodies of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, local government bodies, civil society institutions, organizations and individuals within the limits of their powers:

a) to prevent corruption, including identifying and subsequently eliminating the causes of corruption (prevention of corruption);

b) to identify, prevent, suppress, disclose and investigate corruption offenses (fight against corruption);

c) to minimize and (or) eliminate the consequences of corruption offenses.

Anti-corruption efforts in the Russian Federation are based on the following: basic principles:

1) recognition, provision and protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen;

2) legality;

3) publicity and openness of the activities of state bodies and local governments;

4) the inevitability of responsibility for committing corruption offenses;

5) integrated use of political, organizational, information and propaganda, socio-economic, legal, special and other measures;

6) priority application of measures to prevent corruption;

7) cooperation of the state with civil society institutions, international organizations and individuals.

The principles have system-forming significance, forming norms and guiding law enforcement, ensuring its uniformity. It is the principles that should serve as a guide in resolving legal conflicts. Principle (from lat. principium- basis, beginning) - fundamental principle, initial, guiding idea, basic rule of behavior, activity.

The principle of recognition, provision and protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen is constitutional and, moreover, universal. In accordance with Art. 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, man, his rights and freedoms are the highest value. Recognition, observance and protection of human and civil rights and freedoms is the responsibility of the state. Article 18 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation states: “The rights and freedoms of man and citizen are directly applicable. They determine the meaning, content and application of laws, the activities of the legislative and executive powers, local self-government and are ensured by justice.”

In the Law under commentary, this principle acquires special meaning, since corruption as a negative social phenomenon leads to a violation of the rights of citizens, to non-compliance with the conditions of normal competition between subjects economic activity, to discredit the institution of public civil service in the state.

Principle of legality is also a constitutional and industry-wide principle Russian law. Legality is a state of constant and accurate implementation of high-quality and fair legislation, ensured by the inevitability of the use of state coercive measures in the event of violations. The regime of legality is a certain state of the real level of compliance of existing social relations with laws and other regulations. And yet, in each area, the principle of legality has its own nuances and content. The context of the commented Law allows us to highlight the following areas of its implementation:

1. accurate implementation of the law by state and municipal employees, excluding manifestations of corruption;

2. accurate implementation of the law by citizens and organizations that should not initiate corrupt relationships;

3. strict observance and execution of the law by law enforcement and other authorities in the process of combating corruption. As a result, anti-corruption activities aim to restore the state of legality.

The principle of publicity and openness of the activities of state bodies and local governments, Unfortunately, it has not yet taken its rightful place in our legislation. The reason for this is the lack of fundamental laws on government bodies and their activities. Most often, this principle is replaced by the principle of publicity, which is much narrower in its scope. For example, the Government of the Russian Federation is guided in its activities by the principle of openness. (Federal constitutional law dated December 17, 1997 No. 2-FKZ “On the Government of the Russian Federation”).

In the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the principle of openness is enshrined only in relation to judicial proceedings (Article 123). We can find this principle in some sectoral laws - openness of information about the activities of state bodies and local governments and free access to such information, except in cases established by federal laws (Federal Law of July 27, 2006 No. 149-FZ “On information, information technologies and information protection"), openness of the civil service and its accessibility to public control, objective informing of the public about the activities of civil servants (Federal Law “On the Civil Service System of the Russian Federation”). Privatization of public and municipal property is based on the recognition of the equality of buyers of state and municipal property and the openness of the activities of state authorities and local governments (Federal Law “On the Privatization of State and Municipal Property”).

In general, the authorities are devoted to issues of information openness Federal laws“On information, information technologies and information protection, “On personal data”, “On ensuring access to information about the activities of courts in the Russian Federation”, “On ensuring access to information on the activities of state bodies and local governments”, “On the procedure coverage of the activities of government bodies in state media”, Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation “On ensuring access to information about the activities of the Government of the Russian Federation and federal executive authorities”. However, despite the steps taken in this direction, it cannot be said that a genuine regime of information openness of the authorities has been created in the country. Meanwhile, it is the publicity and openness of power that corresponds to the idea of ​​full-fledged public administration, which presupposes the control of power by society. States in which a mechanism for information openness of power has been created are less corrupt. In the commented context, the principle of publicity and openness (transparency) also carries a preventive anti-corruption load - firstly, the openness of government activities reduces corruption opportunities, secondly, it highlights any deviations and violations, helping the work of law enforcement agencies, thirdly, it allows citizens and organizations engage in the anti-corruption process.

The principle of inevitability of responsibility as such, it disappeared from Russian regulatory legal acts (remember that it was one of the basic principles of Soviet criminal legislation). Nevertheless, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation continues to operate with the concept of the inevitability of responsibility, and even called it as before the principle of the inevitability of legal responsibility, not only in the criminal sphere, but also tax law. In modern Russia, this concept is also used in ratification statements international conventions(“The Russian Federation proceeds from the understanding that the provisions ... of the Convention must be applied in such a way as to ensure the inevitability of responsibility for the commission of crimes falling within the scope of the Convention”). The fact that the commented Law names as one of the principles the inevitability of responsibility for corruption offenses is intended to emphasize the seriousness of the anti-corruption policy and focus on specific results of anti-corruption activities. This principle means that for each fact of corruption violation (subject to proof of guilt, of course) an adequate punishment must be imposed. This principle is further elaborated in Art. 13 and 14 of the commented Law.

The principle of integrated use of political, organizational, information and propaganda, socio-economic, legal, special and other measures reflects the specifics of corruption as a phenomenon that requires an adequate and systemic response. The comprehensiveness of the use of anti-corruption measures is focused both on preventive work and on the direct fight against corruption and the elimination of their consequences. A thoughtful attitude to the implementation of this principle in practice will allow us to avoid excesses, campaignism, and show trials, turning the activity in question into one of the components of public administration.

The principle of priority application of measures to prevent corruption, if we consider it in a systematic connection with the principle of comprehensiveness of measures, it focuses on organizing daily work in a normal manner, instilling intolerance towards corruption in society, raising the prestige of the public civil service and ensuring its stability, and educating a new generation of state and municipal employees. This principle sets the tone for the implementation of the entire array of regulations on the public civil service, as well as those regulations that determine the procedure for exercising the rights of citizens and organizations in administrative relations. The regulatory framework for the activities of state and municipal employees should not be corruptive and “push” them to arbitrary law enforcement. Society itself must play an important role in the implementation of this principle.

The principle of cooperation between the state and civil society institutions, international organizations and individuals emphasizes the general social nature of the problem of corruption.

State corruption is a problem not only for the state apparatus itself, it is also a question for society itself, consisting of citizens who consider this phenomenon, if not normal, then quite tolerable. Of course, for genuine cooperation between the state and society, many conditions are necessary, many of which have not fully developed in our country. These conditions include: a high level of development of democratic institutions, political and civic activity of the population, genuine pluralism of opinions, real freedom and independence of the press, real transparency of the actions of the authorities and its controllability by the institutions of civil society. When it comes to cooperation, only one entity cannot dictate the terms. Unfortunately, this principle is most poorly implemented both in the text of the Law under comment and in the current Russian legislation. It has yet to develop population-oriented methods and mechanisms capable of encouraging the public and individual citizens in such cooperation, collecting objective information about the scale and methods of corruption among officials. Reliance on civil society in the fight against crime in general and corruption in particular is an important area of ​​law enforcement in democratic countries. In Art. 22 of the Council of Europe Convention on criminal liability for Corruption refers to the protection of collaborators of justice and witnesses and proposes to provide effective and adequate protection to those who report corruption offenses and cooperate with authorities conducting investigations and proceedings.