ON IMPROVING THE NOTE 1 TO ARTICLE 285 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION IN REFFERENCE TO CLASSIFICATION OF BRIBERY-RELATED CRIMES COMMITTED BY EMPLOYEES OF NATURAL MONOPOLIES
Back to articles of current journal| PDF: |  |
Author(s): | Fomenko E. V., Zubenko A. Yu., |
| Number of journal: | 2(75) | Date: | June 2026 |
| Annotation: | The article is devoted to the study of the problems of criminal-law classification of bribery-related offences committed by employees of natural monopoly entities. The relevance of the topic stems from the fact that the current wording of Note 1 to Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not eliminate the contradictions that arise when assessing the acts of employees of organizations performing identical publicly significant infrastructural functions while operating in different organizational and legal forms. As a result, the classification of bribery-related conduct depends not so much on the content of the offender’s powers and the nature of the function performed by the organization as on the status of the employer as a joint-stock company, a state unitary enterprise, or a limited liability company. The purpose of the study is to substantiate the need to improve Note 1 to Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation by shifting from a predominantly formal organizational criterion to a functional criterion related to the organization’s activity as a natural monopoly entity. The article analyzes doctrinal approaches to distinguishing bribery from commercial bribery, examines the legal significance of a publicly significant infrastructural function, reveals the specific features of the legal status of natural monopoly entities, and compares the positions of Gazprom Gas Distribution Krasnodar JSC, State Unitary Enterprise of the Republic of Crimea Krymgazseti, and Gazprom Transgaz Nizhny Novgorod LLC, which are included in the register of natural monopoly entities. In addition, cassation case of V. M. Yugai is considered as an illustrative example of the dependence of classification on the organizational and legal status of a legal entity. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the conclusion that the special subject of bribery-related offences in the field under consideration should be determined primarily by whether the organization performs the functions of a natural monopoly entity rather than by its organizational and legal form. The authors substantiate their proposed wording of Note 1 to Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the adoption of which is aimed at eliminating some law-enforcement contradictions, ensuring a more uniform approach to classification, and improving the accuracy of the criminal-law assessment of the offences under study | ||
| Keywords: | criminal-law classification of bribery-related offences, distinction between bribery and commercial bribery, special subject of a bribery-related offence, employees of natural monopoly entities, publicly significant infrastructural functions, organizational and legal form of the employer, functional criterion of classification, Note 1 to Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, improvement of criminal legislation, public officials in the infrastructure sector, managerial functions in a commercial organization, corruption offences in the gas supply sector, classification of acts committed by employees of gas distribution organizations, law-enforcement contradictions in classification, criminal-law counteraction to corruption |
||
| For citation: | Fomenko E. V., Zubenko A. Yu. On improving the Note 1 to Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in refference to classification of bribery-related crimes committed by employees of natural monopolies. Biznes. Obrazovanie. Pravo = Business. Education. Law. 2026;2(75):205—211. DOI: 10.25683/VOLBI.2026.75.1589. |
||