Cryptoassets Seizure in Criminal Procedure in the Russian Federation: Possible Ways of Development

The paper analyzes the existing practice of seizing cryptocurrencies in the domestic legal order. It is noted that the law enforcer needs that the legislator create criminal procedural novels aimed to seize cryptocurrencies. The paper provides domestic practice cases, recognizing cryptoassets as property in the understanding of civil law. The mechanism of using an investigative experiment to convert cryptoassets into cash is criticized. The author analyzes the possibility of applying the concept of privilege against self-disclosure during an investigative experiment to convert cryptoassets into cash. The paper proposes models that can be chosen by the legislator when implementing the seizure of cryptocurrencies. The types of crypto-carriers are analyzed. The author concludes that due to the wide variety of types of cryptocurrencies a single model will not be enough for law enforcement agencies when seizing such assets. The author suggests the legislator to choose a mixed model of criminal procedure regulation of seizure of cryptoassets as well as to introduce a new coercive measure in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation in the form of converting digital assets into cash.

1. Arotsker L. E. Sledstvennyy eksperiment v sovetskoy kriminalistike: dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. — M., 1951. — 24 s.

2. Bykhovskiy I. E. Razvitie protsessualnoy reglamentatsii predvaritelnogo sledstviya // Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo. — 1972. — № 4. — S. 107–110.

3. Vilkova T. Yu. Privilegiya protiv samoizoblicheniya (nemo tenetur se ibsem accusare) v sisteme printsipov ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva // Zakony Rossii: opyt, analiz, praktika. — 2016. — № 4. — S. 15–20.

4. Vlasenko V. G. Voprosy teorii i praktiki vozmeshcheniya materialnogo ushcherba pri rassledovanii khishcheniy gosudarstvennogo i obshchestvennogo imushchestva / red. D. P. Rasseykin. — Saratov: Izdatelstvo SGU, 1972.

5. Gultyaev D. O., Litvinov A. S. Poymay menya, esli smozhesh // Zakon i pravo. — 2019. — № 3. — S. 154–157.

6. Efremova S. V. Obosnovannost sledstvennykh deystviy kak garantiya prav i svobod uchastnikov protsessa: avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. — Samara, 2004.

7. Iskandirov V. B. Nalozhenie aresta na imushchestvo v ugolovnom protsesse: dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. — Chelyabinsk, 2012. — 109 s.

8. Nasonov S. A., Maksimova T. Yu. Ugolovno-protsessualnye garantii prava obvinyaemogo ne svidetelstvovat protiv sebya samogo: analiz problem sudebnoy praktiki pri rassmotrenii del v obshchem poryadke i v sude prisyazhnykh // Pravo i politika. — 2015. — № 11. — S. 1618–1622. — DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2015.11.16648.

9. Petrukhin I. L. Neprikosnovennost lichnosti i prinuzhdenie v ugolovnom protsesse. — M., 1989. — 245 s.

10. Ryzhakov A. P. Sledstvennye deystviya i inye sposoby sobiraniya dokazatelstv: uchebnoe posobie. — Tula, 1996. — 320 s.

11. Solovev A. B. Sistema sledstvennykh deystviy kak sredstvo ugolovno-protsessualnogo dokazyvaniya (problemy ugolovnogo protsessa i kriminalistiki): nauch.-metod. posobie. — M., 2006. — 559 s.

12. Strogovich M. S. Kurs sovetskogo ugolovnogo protsessa / otv. red. N. N. Polyanskiy. — M.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1958.

13. Tisen O. N. Osobennosti dokazyvaniya legalizatsii dokhodov, poluchennykh v rezultate nezakonnogo oborota narkoticheskikh sredstv i psikhotropnykh veshchestv, s ispolzovaniem kriptovalyut // Ugolovnoe pravo. — 2022. — № 5.

14. Tutynin I. B. K voprosu o poyavlenii ugolovno-protsessualnogo prinuzhdeniya informatsionno-tsifrovogo kharaktera // Rossiyskiy sledovatel. — 2021. — № 8. — S. 40–42.

15. Tutynin I. B., Khimicheva O. V. Primenenie mer ugolovno-protsessualnogo prinuzhdeniya pri rassledovanii prestupleniy, sovershennykh s ispolzovaniem kriptovalyuty: monografiya. — M.: Yurlitinform, 2022.

16. Sheyfer S. A. Sledstvennye deystviya. Osnovaniya, protsessualnyy poryadok i dokazatelstvennoe znachenie. — Samara, 2004.

17. Sheyfer S. A. Sledstvennye deystviya. Sistema i protsessualnaya forma. — M., 2001.