?
Эффективность уголовного наказания за коррупционные преступления
The paper examines factors influencing the effectiveness of criminal punishment for corruption
crimes. The research methodology includes the main method of scientific cognition (dialectical), a systematic
approach, general scientific methods: analysis and synthesis (in understanding corruption acts), comparison (law
enforcement practices, types of criminal punishment); private scientific methods: mathematical and criminal
statistical (in calculating indicators and identifying correlations), sociological (survey of respondents-officers
responsible for preliminary investigation, judges, convicts, citizens), analysis of documents, etc. The empirical
basis consists of the results of a criminological study conducted by the author in 2018–2020. as part of an
interregional research team (Vladimir, Volgograd, Kazan, N. Novgorod, Syktyvkar), as well as criminal statistics
data, materials of judicial practice. The paper analyzes the state of the problem of determining the effectiveness
of criminal punishment. The results obtained are projected onto the sphere of corruption crimes. The law
enforcement practice of sentencing for corruption crimes for the period 2016–2020 is presented on the basis of
judicial statistics. The author substantiates the necessity of determining the criteria for evaluating effectiveness
of criminal punishment in the area under examination. These include the achievement through punishment of
the goals stated by the law-maker. It is proposed to focus on the results of criminological research when assessing
the effectiveness of the execution of punishment. Additional criteria for effectiveness can be: the proportion of
convicts who consider the punishment imposed on them fair/unfair; the proportion of convicts who have fully/
partially compensated for the damage caused, etc. The conclusion is made about insufficient effectiveness of
the most commonly used types of punishment, as well as the low deterrent effect of the fine. It is demonstrated
that the humanism inherent in modern anti-corruption legislation is not recognized by convicts, thereby the trust
provided by the state is not justified against the background of the corruption acts committed. The author argues
the expediency of returning confiscation as a full-fledged type of criminal punishment for corruption crimes. The
disclosure of the potential of criminal punishment in the form of imprisonment and the restoration of property
confiscation can increase the effectiveness of the criminal law response to the threat of corruption.