Master of laws Garashova L.N.
Kostanay State University named A.Baytursynov. Kazakhstan
DETECTIVE ACTIVITY AS A MAIN METHOD OF REVEALING OF THE CORRUPTION
CRIMES
Nowadays the
government of the state is worried by the present station of fighting against
corruption crimes because the practice of fight against corruption crimes shows
arising of the number of the law-enforcement bodies officials of high post that
undoubtedly caused a large resonance in community.
This problem is peculiar not only to our
republic but also other countries, because the present stage of development is
characterized with considerable changes in economic, political and social
spheres. In this connection The RK President N.A. Nazarbayev in his message to
people of Kazakhstan calleddecisive and unmerciful fight with corruption as one
of the general priorities of our state. For realization of this task there were
adopted general legal resolutions, activity of which directed to the perfection
of the fight against corruption [1].
In spite of the
measures taken by the state both the lawful and organizational character the
score of corruption crimes in the law-enforcement bodies isn’t decreased.
According to the statistics specific weight of corruption crimes is 0,95-1
percent from the common quantity of crimes in the republic. For example, for 5
months of 2007 in comparison with the same period of 2006 disclosing of
corruption crimes increased for 11,9 percent (from 929 to 1040). At the same
time the principle of inevitability of punishment isn’t carried out on the
proper level. So in the period from 2008 till 2009 investigation of 1844
criminal cases was completed. 1215 cases of them were sent to court. Others
were stopped: on the non-rehabilitate reasons – 304 cases, on the rehabilitate
reasons – 325 cases.
Corruption is one
of the general factors of negative influence on social and economic situation
in the country, a drag on economic and political development. We suppose that
the struggle against this type of crime must be carried out on three main
directions:
-
recently a number of important and
effective decisions were taken on the direction of the activity of the state
bodies on elimination of reasons of corruption crimes;
-
increasing of effectiveness of the
operative and officials functions of the law-enforcement bodies in the sphere
of corruption fight;
-
Activation of acts of public
institutes and citizens on eradication of corruption display.
From the above
stated directions of the fight against corruption crimes the realization of
detective activity plays great meaning because without the disguise methods
it’s not possible to solve the present problem. That’s why detective activity
must occupy the important place in disclosing of corruption crimes.
The analysis of
law application activity of different subdivisions carrying on the struggle
against corruption shows that revealing and disclosing of corruption crimes in
many cases don’t manage without help and participation of detective
subdivisions of the republic. According to the Article 6 of the RK Law “About
detective activity” bodies of internal affairs, national security, military
intelligence of Defence Ministry, financial policy, the guard service of the RK
President andcustomshave the right to carry out detective activity [3].
Revealing of
crimes supposes establishment of the fact of crime committing and the
information about them isn’t received by the law-enforcement bodies through the
official ways (latent crimes). The number of latent crimes in accordance with
criminologists’ appreciation two or more times exceeds officially registered
criminality. On application of victims
for help to the law – enforcement bodies and keeping of crimes by the law –
enforcement bodies from the register is vital componentof crimes which is still
concealment. Other concealment component of crimes is actions coursing
damagenot separate citizens but public or state interests. They include illegal
drug abuse, weapons, explosive substances, crimes in the sphere of economic
activity, crimes against interests of service in commercial and other
organizations, crimes against state service (first of all referred to
corruption), separate types of fraud and some others. Latent criminality is one
of the conditions of formation and long existence of stable criminal groups,
increasing of the number of criminals-professionals. In this connection the
task of revealing ofconcealment crimes acquire the special actuality.
The task of crime revealing includes three
component parts: disclosing of the persons committed crimes; establishment of
corpus delicti indications of misconduct for solving the question of criminal
case institution; determining of victim.
The present task is solved by the
realizing of operative search when it is carried out the initiative collection
of primary detective information about indications of criminal activity and
persons who connected with it. At present time many researches directed to
increasing of effectiveness of detective activity are fulfilled. In our opinion
working out of recommendations on revealing of corruption crimes in the system
of law – enforcement bodies allows to better the fight with corruption.
In
the point 2 of Article 6 of the RK law “About the fight with corruption” it’s
indicated that revealing, suppression, prevention of corruption crimes and
institute criminal proceeding against person founded guilty in committing
crimes are carried out by bodies of procurator, national security, internal
affairs, customs and frontier service, tax and military police.
You
see the subjects of revealing of corruption crimes and subjects of detective
activity coincide partially. For example,according to the law “about the
detective activity” bodies of procurator don’t concern the state bodies authorized
to carry out the detective activity. However such situation of the law doesn’t
infringe upon the bodies of procurator in revealing of corruption crimes so far
as the Article 35 of the RK law “About procurator” provides procurator with
sufficient authorities on supervision under detective
activity.
Subjects of
detective activity irrespective of belonging to law-enforcement bodies have a
right to carry out detective measures on revealing of corruption crimes. The law “About detective activity” provides
detective staffs and services with the right getting of the explanations from
suspects, conducting of checks,to carry out other actions of checking and
searching character which give the opportunity to solve the question of
institution of criminal case.
Conducting
of detective measures is more effective and in some cases the only method of
revealing of corruption crimes because allows to collect necessary information
enough for institution of criminal case. If the collected facts in the process
of detective activity enough for institution of criminal case they can be … to
the investigation brunches and consider as an occasion for institution of
criminal case.
Revealing
of facts of corruption connected with protection of activity of organized
criminal formations can be conditioned by carrying out special detective
measures in the respect of leaders and members of such groups.In this case the
question is about operative working out of organized criminal formation. That’s
why advisably to point out some operative groups one of which purposefully to
examine the criminal relations between officials-“corruptioners” and leaders
and also the members of the organized criminal groups.
It
is mentioned in works of leading scientists – lawyers that “… fight with
organized criminality isn’t separated from the fight with corruption and must
have a complex character” [4]. It is confirmed by practice. So in the result of
operative works out of organized criminal formations the law – enforcement
bodies reveal more and more corruption crimes committed by persons who are at
the high official post.
Obvious case is
carrying out specialized measures by officials of the RK Committee of National
Security (2005-2006) as a result of which were established facts of influence
and interlocking of with the officials of customs “Khargos” and other law
–enforcement bodies on organizing contraband import of goods of general
consumption from China to Kazakhstan.
Vice commander of DCC of Almaty region S.L. Ramasanov, chief commander
of DFOC E.S. Mamazhanov and other persons were founded guilty and sentenced to
imprisonment by the Medeu district court of Almaty on the 8th of
August 2006 [5].
In
this connectionit’s become unavoidable the participation of informants who have
contacts in criminal sphere and also inculcation into criminal groups of
officials of operative subdivisions and “confidents” that is a person who
renders such assistance on payment or free basis [6].
In the aim of
revealing of corruption crimes, operative brunches and services must thoroughly
learn the forming operative situation on service object. For this aim all
possible sources of information: confidents and agents, representatives of
community, citizens’ letters and applications, materials of control examine and
information of officials, publication, on radio and television, materials of
other law – enforcement bodies can be used.
Analysis of law
applicable activity shows that officials of Security Services often use
provocation as a method of revealing of corruption crimes. It’s preceded the
falsification of materials of operative examine, call of witnesses, who are
distant relatives or friends of functionaries. Worked well provocation of
bribery is often accompanied such unlawful actions such as using of violence
and tortures with respect to arrested on the cases of corruption crimes.
Such
fact that in the court trial defendants often change their testimonies and
apply that evidence were taken under pressure show the usage of provocation in
the fight with corruption crimes. It’s interested in such fact that is it the lawful right of operative
officials on the provocation of corruption acts as the method of fight with
corruption?
We
suppose that lawyers A.Istomin and D. Lopatkin take correct place in this
question. They write: “The actions of officials of law – enforcement bodies in
the frame of operative experiment or crime committing “under supervision”
aren’t considered as the provocation of bribe giving in that case if they act
either on reliable facts or after the victim’s application, with respect to
whom was committed a crime (bribe blackmail) or on the fact of committed bribe.
These methods are used with the aim of exposing and apprehending of a criminal
red-handed”[7].
In conclusion it
would be noticed that certainly the detective activity is the main method of
revealing of corruption crimes. However there are problems both legislative and
organized character which influence upon effectiveness of a fight with the fact
researched by us. The above mentioned facts once more testify the urgency of
considered problem.
Literature:
1. Nazarbayev N.A. Kazakhstan-2030: prosperity, security and improvement of
well-being of all kazakhstants: President’s message to the people of
Kazakhstan. Almaty, 2005.
2. Statistic facts of the Centre on legal statistics and special regard the
Republic of Kazakhstan general procurator.
3. The Republic of Kazakhstan Law “About detective activity” from September
15, 1994. Number 13. Almaty, Daneker, 2001, p.16.
4. Khalikov A.N. About measures of
fight with organized criminality and corruption// Law and order. 12.M., 2006
5. Oleinik V.I. Questions of further improvement measures on prevention of
organized criminality//Legal monitoring as a mean of quality increasing of law creative
activity: Collection of materials of
international scientific and practical conferences. October, 302007.
6. Organized criminality: Lecture course. Peter, 2002, p. 368:ill. (Series
“Textbooks for higher schools”)
7. Istomin A., Lopatcin D. Provocation or exposing of criminal?
//Lawfulness.M., 2005.