“Multi-storey law”: subjectivity of liability for corruption

Objective: to identify objective and subjective factors of legal inequality in counteracting corruption.

Methods: the article uses the universal dialectical method of cognition, as well as general scientific (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction) and specific scientific methods (comparative legal, historical, specific sociological, formal legal, systematic methods, questioning).

Results: the philosophical-legal methodology of corruption research is quite productive. Fundamental research in the field of law allow differentiating between objective and subjective factors of corruption. The parameters of the legal culture development in society are an objective factor of the invulnerability of top-level corruption. The subjective factor is that the government agencies miss the anti-corruption potential characteristic of this stage of cultural development. The author offers a gradation of corruption by levels: grassroots, middle and higher level. Top-level corruption is proved to be the most latent and untouchable for criminal legal impact. The conducted research allowed formulating the main directions of anti-corruption practice: consistent elimination of the estate law rudiments and modeling of socio-legal mechanisms to fully realize the potential of this stage of ascent to law in counteracting corruption. The article presents the results of a public poll on the impunity of high-ranking officials involved in corruption. The anti-corruption strategies of foreign countries (China, Singapore, etc.) were studied as a comparative legal research.

Scientific novelty: the work reveals the mechanism of stability of the estate law rudiments, which includes the following elements: a) the highest authorities ensure corruption impunity for a group of like-minded people, associates, executors of the supreme will; b) the elite is introduced into law-abiding behavior and deprived of corruption prospects. It was found that the effectiveness of anti-corruption practices depends on the possibility to overcome the boundaries established by estate law against destruction of its rudiments.

Practical significance: the proposals and conclusions of the research can be used to improve criminal legislation and its application, as well as to form a scientific basis for interdisciplinary research on anti-corruption policy and practice.

1. Alekseev, S. S. (2001). Ascent to law. Search and solutions. Moscow: NORMA. (In Russ.).

2. Avtorkhanov, A. G. (1991). Mystery of Stalin’s death. Novyi mir, 5, 194–233. (In Russ.).

3. Bekisheva, S. R. (2017). Legal state and the rule of law: problems of correlation and practical implementation in the Russian legal system. Law Нerald of Dagestan State University, 18–25. (In Russ.).

4. Bekkariya, Ch. (1939). On crimes and punishments. Moscow: Law Publishing House of the USSR People’s Commissariat of Justice. (In Russ.).

5. Chepus, A. V. (2014). General characteristics of the institute of bringing senior officials of the subjects of the Russian Federation to justice. Legal Science and Law Enforcement Practice, 4(30), 107–111. (In Russ.).

6. Chiricos, T. G., & Bales, W. (1991). Unemployment and Punishment: An Empirical Assessment. Criminology, 29(4), 701–724. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1991.tb01085.x

7. Denisov, S. A. (2018). “Two-storey” law. In V. D. Perevalov (Ed.), Issues of law interpretation: collective monograph based on the results of the 2nd Alekseev’s Readings (pp. 76–82). Ekaterinburg: Ural State Law University named after V. F. Yakovlev. (In Russ.).

8. Ershov, Yu. G. (2019). Corruption as a threat to statehood. In Topical issues of scientific support of the Russian state policy in combating corruption: collection of works based on the results of the 3rd All-Russian scientific conference with international participation (pp. 80–90). Ekaterinburg: Institute of Philosophy and Law, Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russ.).

9. Gafurova, N. (2020). The Rule of Law as a Universal Principle of Ensuring Human Rights. Review of Law Sciences, Special edition. (In Russ.). https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/verhovenstvo-prava-kak-universalnyy-printsip-obespecheniya-prav-cheloveka

10. Gurov, A. I. (1995). Red mafia. Moscow: Samocvet, MIKO “Kommercheski vestnik”. (In Russ.).

11. Inshakov, S. M., & Kazakova, V. A. (2019). Strategies of corruption counteraction: classical and actual. Moscow: Rusayns.

12. Kordonskiy, S. G. (2008). Estate structure of post-Soviet Russia (Part. 1). Universe of Russia, 3, 37–66. (In Russ.).

13. Kordonskiy, S. G., Dekhant, D. K., & Molyarenko, O. A. (2012). Estate components of Russia’s social structure: hypothetical-deductive analysis and modeling. Universe of Russia, 2, 62–102. (In Russ.).

14. Lynch, El., Mudge, Al., Knowles, S., Kitson, Al., Hunter, S., & Harvey, G. (2018). “There is nothing so practical as a good theory”: a pragmatic guide for selecting theoretical approaches for implementation projects. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 857. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3671-z

15. Martyanov, V. S. (2019). Double standards in defending corruption as a challenge to public concent. In Current issues of scientific support for the state anti-corruption policy in the Russian Federation, 1. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17506/articles.anticorruption.2018.2451

16. Morshhakova, T. G. (2009). Rule of law and constitutional principles of uniformity of judicial application. In Rule of law and issues of its provision in law enforcement practice (pp. 296–339). Moscow: Statut. (In Russ.).

17. Nechaeva, E. V. (2019). On the criteria for determining the degree of correction of those sentenced to criminal penalties. Penal law, 14(3), 222–227. (In Russ.).

18. Pankevich, N. V. (2015). Anticorruption policies in the spaces of social exclusion. In Social Sciences and Contemporary World, 3, 78–89. (In Russ.).

19. Seliverstov, V. I. (2017). The serving imprisonment convicted of economic and official crimes with the use of their intellectual and creative potential: new research project. Ugolovno-ispolnitelnoe pravo, 12(1), 34–38. (In Russ.).

20. Soto, H. (2007). The Other Path: The Economic Answer to Terrorism (transl. from Eng. by B. Pinsker). Chelyabinsk: Socium. (In Russ.).

21. Ulmer, J. T. (2012). Recent Developments and New Directions in Sentencing Research. Justice Quarterly, 29(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2011.624115

22. Volkov, V. V. (2014). The Influence of Socio-Economic Status of Defendants on Court Decisions. The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, 4, 62–85. (In Russ.).

23. Zhujkov, V. M. et al. (2010). Rule of law and issues of its provision in law enforcement practice: collective monograph. Moscow: Statut. (In Russ.).

24. Zhukov, A. P. (2008). Responsibility of executive authorities in the system of separation of powers of the Russian subjects: Cand. Sci. (Law) thesis. Rostov on Don. (In Russ.).