Астанин В.В. Критерии определения результативности борьбы с коррупцией в криминологическом исследовании и на основе экспертных данных в соотношении с рекомендациями международных антикоррупционных конвенций

Аннотация: International regulation of money-laundering consists of many international treaties. But there is no any definition of money-laundering in the treaties. Doctrine of law tries to make up for the deficiency. In the article different interpretations of the concept are shown. Having analysed provided positions, the author defines moneylaundering of criminal proceeds as the process of rendering them the legal state and their next leading into legal economic turn-round. In the article the necessity of moving the money-laundering’s rule into the chapter about crimes against justice is criticized. The necessity of using the term “proceeds” in Criminal Code is proved because the term meets the requirements of international law. But the definition of “proceeds” should be given in explanatory note to the article for moneylaundering. The article notes that money-laundering is the crime concerned with criminal proceeds but not unlegal proceeds. The author pays attention that there is no concordance of opinions in the question about predicate crimes. As it is supposed, there is no necessity to exclude any crimes from the list of predicate crimes. That’s why it is important to withdraw from the present rule and unfile the crimes which are in articles 174 and 1741 of Russian Criminal Code by applying “liminal” approach. Inconsistence of money-laundering’s rules with each other and with international law is marked in the article. To pursuit of Russian duty, enacted by treaties, it is supposed to be necessary to reproduce international money-laundering’s rules in Russian Criminal Code. Mental element in money-laundering crimes is essential to be amended and the construction “if a person knows or has good reasons to believe, that proceeds were obtain by committing a crime” should be inserted. According to international law, money-laundering is accomplished with the purpose of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the property or of assisting any person who is involved in the commission of the predicate offence to evade the legal consequences of his actions. The same purpose should be defined in Russian Criminal Code. In addition, it is necessary to withdraw from two articles, determining liability for money-laundering, and to leave one of them, containing indicias of both articles. On basis of the conducted research the author makes his own conclusions and proposes his own version of Criminal Code’s article: “Money-laundering of criminal proceeds by a person who committed a predicate crime, or other person knows or has good reasons to believe, that proceeds were obtain by committing a crime, for the purpose of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the property or of assisting any person who is involved in the commission of the predicate offence to evade the legal consequences of his actions, – is punished…” The explanatory note to the article should be set forth in the following way: “1. Money-laundering of criminal is the process of rendering them the legal state, committed by the conversion or transfer of the proceeds, concealment or disguise of the true nature, source, location, disposition, movement, rights with respect to or ownership of property, knowing that such property is proceeds; acquisition, possession or use of property, knowing, at the time of receipt, that such property was proceeds. 2. All objects of civil law may be considered as proceeds.”

Abstract: International regulation of money-laundering consists of many international treaties. But there is no any definition of money-laundering in the treaties. Doctrine of law tries to make up for the deficiency. In the article different interpretations of the concept are shown. Having analysed provided positions, the author defines moneylaundering of criminal proceeds as the process of rendering them the legal state and their next leading into legal economic turn-round. In the article the necessity of moving the money-laundering’s rule into the chapter about crimes against justice is criticized. The necessity of using the term “proceeds” in Criminal Code is proved because the term meets the requirements of international law. But the definition of “proceeds” should be given in explanatory note to the article for moneylaundering. The article notes that money-laundering is the crime concerned with criminal proceeds but not unlegal proceeds. The author pays attention that there is no concordance of opinions in the question about predicate crimes. As it is supposed, there is no necessity to exclude any crimes from the list of predicate crimes. That’s why it is important to withdraw from the present rule and unfile the crimes which are in articles 174 and 1741 of Russian Criminal Code by applying “liminal” approach. Inconsistence of money-laundering’s rules with each other and with international law is marked in the article. To pursuit of Russian duty, enacted by treaties, it is supposed to be necessary to reproduce international money-laundering’s rules in Russian Criminal Code. Mental element in money-laundering crimes is essential to be amended and the construction “if a person knows or has good reasons to believe, that proceeds were obtain by committing a crime” should be inserted. According to international law, money-laundering is accomplished with the purpose of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the property or of assisting any person who is involved in the commission of the predicate offence to evade the legal consequences of his actions. The same purpose should be defined in Russian Criminal Code. In addition, it is necessary to withdraw from two articles, determining liability for money-laundering, and to leave one of them, containing indicias of both articles. On basis of the conducted research the author makes his own conclusions and proposes his own version of Criminal Code’s article: “Money-laundering of criminal proceeds by a person who committed a predicate crime, or other person knows or has good reasons to believe, that proceeds were obtain by committing a crime, for the purpose of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the property or of assisting any person who is involved in the commission of the predicate offence to evade the legal consequences of his actions, – is punished…” The explanatory note to the article should be set forth in the following way: “1. Money-laundering of criminal is the process of rendering them the legal state, committed by the conversion or transfer of the proceeds, concealment or disguise of the true nature, source, location, disposition, movement, rights with respect to or ownership of property, knowing that such property is proceeds; acquisition, possession or use of property, knowing, at the time of receipt, that such property was proceeds. 2. All objects of civil law may be considered as proceeds.”