The State Duma proposed to confiscate the property of officials only by court order

The bill, according to which the confiscation of corrupt property requires a court decision that it was obtained illegally, was submitted to the State Duma on November 28. Its authors were a group of deputies representing four of the five parliamentary parties – United Russia, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the Liberal Democratic Party and the New People. The document amends Art. 235 of the Civil Code (CC) of the Russian Federation.

According to the current procedure, corrupt property is subject to seizure if evidence of its acquisition with legally obtained funds is not presented. “We must first prove that the property was acquired illegally, and then seize it. And sometimes we do the opposite. First withdraw [имущество], and then a person must prove that he is not a fool. Let people work and figure it out, please, ”one of the co-authors of the bill, deputy chairman of the commission on regulations and ensuring the activities of the State Duma Raisa Karmazina (United Russia) told Vedomosti.

The Law “On Control over the Correspondence of the Expenditures of Persons Holding Public Positions and Other Persons with Their Income” presumes the illegality of the income used to acquire the property of a corrupt official (Articles 4 and 17).

“The main purpose of this law is to combat corruption. Corruption is an act, the responsibility for which is provided for by criminal law and legislation on administrative offenses. In this regard, it should be noted that the presumption of illegality of income is in conflict with the presumption of innocence established by the criminal and administrative legislation of the Russian Federation, in accordance with which the involvement of a person in the commission of an act of corruption is established and the corresponding responsibility is established, ”the explanatory note to the bill says.

In practice, there are cases when the appeal to the income of the Russian Federation “takes place in relation to the property of a bona fide purchaser,” the authors of the document note.

Such a change in the law would be “expedient and positive,” says lawyer Ruslan Zafesov. “Currently, the owner must confirm the legality of the acquisition of assets, which causes obvious excesses on the ground, and is also often associated with an exclusively formal approach of law enforcement agencies to establishing the criminal nature of the origin of assets, when, for example, the investigator is not at all obliged to prove the illegality of obtaining income,” he says. Often, according to corruption and economic crimes, investigators seize and seize all property “indiscriminately”, guided by the “presumption of illegality of income,” explains Zafesov.

In his practice, there were also cases of unlawful seizure of property, Zafesov claims. “For example, in one criminal case, where for taking a bribe of 400,000 rubles. the head of the middle link of the federal executive body was involved, the investigation discovered and seized from him funds in the amount of more than 35 million rubles, including the personal savings of all members of the family of the accused,” he said.

Andrey Grivtsov, senior partner of the ZKS law office, considers the deputies’ initiative “absolutely correct, because the mass seizure of property from officials, violating the principle of the presumption of innocence, has resulted in a very bad practice.”

At the same time, he doubts that the bill will be supported by the prosecutor’s office and the State Duma. “[Изъятие имущества] – this is a way to replenish the budget, all the security forces are constantly looking for how to account for the fact that they replenish the budget. such cases [об изъятии имущества у чиновников] it became very, very much,” the lawyer told Vedomosti. According to Grivtsov, the illegality of obtaining income will have to be proved in relation to each unit of the seized property. “If the amendments are adopted, they will work as follows: first [вступает в силу] court verdict on the fact of illegal acquisition of property, that is, it will be necessary to prove [нелегальность доходов] in a criminal process, and then, if there is a verdict, then the property is confiscated,” he explained.