UDC: 343.36
BBC: 67.408.
Melnikov E.A.
Falsification of the results of operational investigative activities and evidence in criminal proceedings: controversial issues of characterizing the objective aspect and the subject
Keywords: falsification of evidence, operational investigative measures, abuse of authority, objective aspect of the crime, crimes against justice, an official
The Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in its resolution №20 dated June 28, 2022 "On Certain Issues of Judicial Practice in Criminal Cases of Crimes Against Justice" provided a number of clarifications regarding the objective aspect of falsifying the results of operational investigative activities and evidence in criminal proceedings (Part 2 – part 4 of art. 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). A number of these clarifications significantly correct the approaches that were previously common in law enforcement practice. The Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation left some controversial issues without consideration. There is still no unity of opinions in the doctrine, which is why contradictory law enforcement practice is being formed. Resolution of certain issues (the method of falsification, the list of perpetrators of the crime) will require making editorial changes to the legislation. The purpose of the study is to characterize de lege lata and de lege ferenda to the objective aspect and the subject of falsification of the results of operational investigative activities and evidence in criminal proceedings (Part 2 – part 4 of art. 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), taking into account existing controversial issues. Materials and methods. The formal-logical method was used as a key methodological approach in the study, which made it possible to correlate the norms of the legislation with their theoretical interpretation by various specialists in the field of criminal and criminal procedure law, as well as explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Through a dialectical approach, the author made a number of proposals de lege ferenda to improve the disposition of the norms contained in Parts 2 – 4 of art. 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In addition, the author used discursive, textual, interdisciplinary and institutional methods of scientific cognition. Results. The analysis of provisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in Resolution № 20 dated June 28, 2022 "On Certain Issues of Judicial Practice in Criminal Cases of Crimes Against Justice" shows that, contrary to the opinion widely held in the doctrine, destruction of evidence is no longer considered as one of the ways to falsify it. The relevant act in this part may be qualified according to the norms of Chapter 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. If falsification of evidence or the results of operational investigative activities is committed in a manner that makes it an independent crime, then qualification according to the totality of crimes is required. In particular, the objective aspect of the crime provided for in Part 4 of Article 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not include actions of officials aimed at inducing a person to commit a crime or using violence against him. These actions require independent qualification according to the norms of Chapter 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In conformity with the position of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, if falsified evidence is presented by a defense lawyer or prosecutor, the crime provided for in Part 2 of Article 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is considered completed from the moment the evidence is presented, and not from the moment of their filing in the criminal case materials by the person who examines it. This position radically changes the view that existed in doctrine and in law enforcement practice at the time of the end of the crime in question. Falsification of evidence in two different criminal cases cannot be considered as a single crime, even if the acts of falsification of evidence were committed with a single intent. Currently, the range of subjects of evidence falsification is defined in a too narrow way. The subjects of this crime should include all participants in criminal proceedings who have an independent procedural interest. Conclusions. The dispositions of the norms stipulated in Parts 2 and 4 of art. 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, de lege feranda need to be improved. Along with falsification of evidence, it is advisable to include alternative acts in Part 2 of Article 303 of this Code in the form of their destruction, seizure or concealment. It would be advisable to provide for similar changes in Part 4 of Article 303. As an alternative socially dangerous act, it is recommended to provide in Part 2 of Article 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for deliberate concealment by the investigator (inquirer) of information relevant to the criminal case. The list of subjects of the crime provided for in Part 2 of Article 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is proposed to be supplemented by the suspect (accused, defendant) and the judge. It is worth providing in Article 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation qualifying signs of falsifying the results of operational investigative activities, similar to those stipulated in Part 3 of Article 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Introduction of these changes will make it possible to improve the mechanism of criminal law support for the goals and objectives of criminal proceedings.
References
- Arkhipova K.A., Fabrika T.A. K voprosu o problemakh ob”ektivnoi storony, voznikayushchikh v reglamentatsii norm ob otvetstvennosti za fal’sifikatsiyu dokazatel’stv po ugolovnomu delu [On the issue of the problems of the objective side arising in the regulation of the norms on liability for falsification of evidence in a criminal case]. Yuridicheskii fakt,2021, no. 153, pp.14–16.
- Blagodar’ I.S. Fal’sifikatsiya dokazatel’stv: otvetstvennost’ i voprosy kvalifikatsii: avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk [Falsification of evidence: responsibility and qualification Abstract of Cand. Diss.]. Moscow, 2008, 22 p.
- Borkov V.N. Kvalifikatsiya fal’sifikatsii rezul’tatov operativno-razysknoi deyatel’nosti, sopryazhennoi s drugimi prestupleniyami [Qualification of falsification of the results of operational investigative activities related to other crimes]. Ugolovnoe pravo, 2023, no. 8,3–8.
- Bykova E.G., Kazakov A.A. Osobennosti kvalifikatsii prestuplenii, predusmotrennykh stat’ei 303 Ugolovnogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Features of the qualification of crimes provided for in Article 303 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation]. Moscow, Norma Publ., 2022, 152 p.
- Dvoryanskov I.V. Prestupleniya, narushayushchie protsessual’nyi poryadok dokazatel’stv [Crimes violating the procedural order of evidence]. Chernye dyry v rossiiskom zakonodatel’stve, 2003, no. 3, pp. 226–
- Kibal’nik A., Maiboroda V. Fal’sifikatsiya dokazatel’stv: ugolovnaya otvetstvennost’ [Falsification of evidence: criminal liability]. Zakonnost’, 2009. no 1, pp. 14–17.
- Klimova Yu.N. Fal’sifikatsiya dokazatel’stv po ugolovnomu delu: osobennosti ob”ektivnykh i sub”ektivnykh priznakov [Falsification of evidence in a criminal case: features of objective and subjective signs]. Vestnik Vladimirskogo yuridicheskogo institute, 2020, no. 2, pp. 58–
- Lobanova L., Rozhnov A., Sinel’nikov A. Fal’sifikatsiya dokazatel’stv po ugolovnomu delu: voprosy kvalifikatsii i nedostatki pravovoi reglamentatsii [Falsification of evidence in a criminal case: qualification issues and shortcomings of legal regulation]. Ugolovnoe pravo, 2012, no. 6, pp. 28–34.
- Lopatin K.G. Ugolovnaya otvetstvennost’ za fal’sifikatsiyu dokazatel’stv po ugolovnomu delu. Avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk [Criminal liability for falsification of evidence in a criminal Abstract of Cand. Diss.]. Krasnoyarsk, 2006, 24 p.
- Makarov A.V., Stramilova T.P., Firsov O.V. Osobennosti kvalifikatsii fal’sifikatsii rezul’tatov operativno-rozysknoi deyatel’nosti [The specifics of the qualification of falsification of the results of operational investigative activities]. Rossiiskii sledovatel’, 2023, no. 1, pp. 57–
- Makarenko I.A. Nekotorye sposoby fal’sifikatsii dokazatel’stv na predvaritel’nom sledstvii [Some ways of falsifying evidence during the preliminary investigation]. Rossiiskii sledovatel’, 2018, no. 2, pp. 17–20.
- Metel’skii P.S. Fal’sifikatsiya dokazatel’stv po ugolovnomu delu: trudnosti kvalifikatsii [Falsification of evidence in a criminal case: qualification difficulties]. Ugolovnyi protsess, 2012, no. 9, pp. 42–
- Sverchkov V. Fal’sifikatsiya dokazatel’stv [Falsification of evidence]. Zakonnost’, 2001, no. 11, pp. 11–
- Ugolovnaya otvetstvennost’ za fal’sifikatsiyu dokazatel’stv rasprostranena na operativnikov [Criminal liability for falsification of evidence extended to operatives]. Available at: https://www.klerk.ru/law/news/300670/?srsltid=AfmBOoqdGlk2XkFNUw7QPCo-pfY8woNoXiZ6xhjAOt_eqWDA-8you_YQF (Accessed Date: 2025, July 11).
- Shepel’ N.V. Teoreticheskie aspekty protsessa dokazyvaniya v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [Theoretical aspects of evidence processes in criminal proceedings]. Vestnik Kaliningradskogo filiala Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta MVD Rossii, 2023, no. 2, pp. 33–36.
- Yashin A.V. Ugolovnaya otvetstvennost’ za fal’sifikatsiyu dokazatel’stv po ugolovnomu delu kak sredstvo zashchity uchastnikov ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva [Criminal liability for falsification of evidence in a criminal case as a means of protecting participants in criminal proceedings]. Zakon i pravo, 2011, no. 6, pp. 64–66.
About authors
- Melnikov Eugeniy A.
- Candidate of Law Sciences, Associate Professor, Department of Economic and Financial Investigations of the Higher School of Public Audit, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia, Moscow (evgmelnikov.1985@mail.ru; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0792-5667)
Article link
Melnikov E.A. Falsification of the results of operational investigative activities and evidence in criminal proceedings: controversial issues of characterizing the objective aspect and the subject [Electronic resource] // Oeconomia et Jus. – 2025. – №3. P. 96-109. – URL: https://oecomia-et-jus.ru/en/single/2025/3/9/. DOI: 10.47026/2499-9636-2025-3-96-109.
