Receiving a Bribe for Illegal Actions (Omission) and Abuse of Office Motivated by Self-Interest: The Problem of Collision of Norms
https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2025.179.10.126-132
Abstract
Modern criminal legislation contains a number of norms that regulate similar social relations and can be in a relationship of competition with each other. This occurs when a criminal act simultaneously falls under the provisions of several articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The paper is devoted to the study of the relationship between abuse of office and bribery for committing illegal actions (omission), taking into account the clarifications of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to resolve the issue of the presence or absence of collision of the specified norms of criminal law. Their conflicting nature can lead to the potential incorrect qualification of an act: the social danger of a specific crime will be either underestimated or overestimated, which in any case will prevent the fulfillment of the requirements of the principle of justice. Proper understanding of the internal content of the criminal law norm, its relationship with other norms of criminal legislation and their joint internal hierarchy allows for a better understanding of the system of prohibitions provided for by criminal law.
About the Authors
V. V. DubrovinRussian Federation
Vladimir V. Dubrovin, Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, Department of Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Forensic Science, International Law School
Moscow
E. G. Dubrovina
Russian Federation
Ekaterina G. Dubrovina, Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, Department of Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Forensic Science, International Law School
Moscow
References
1. Malkov V. P. Sovokupnost prestupleniy (voprosy kvalifikatsii i naznacheniya nakazaniya) // Izbrannye trudy: v 3 t. T. 2. — Kazan, 2011. — S. 279–521.
2. Matuzov N. I. Kollizii v prave: prichiny, vidy i sposoby razresheniya // Pravovedenie. — 2000. — № 5. — S. 225–244.
3. Pravovaya ekspertiza: ucheb. posobie / V. V. Dubrovin, A. G. Volevodz, E. G. Dubrovina [i dr.]; pod red. A. G. Volevodza. — M.: MGIMO-Universitet, 2024. — 364 s.
4. Romanova V. V. Korystnaya zainteresovannost kak motiv soversheniya zloupotrebleniya dolzhnostnymi polnomochiyami // Kriminalist. — 2012. — № 1 (10). — S. 26–30.
5. Tikhomirov Yu. A. Yuridicheskaya kolliziya, vlast i pravoporyadok // Gosudarstvo i pravo. — 1994. — № 1. — S. 3–11.
6. Ugolovnoe pravo. Obshchaya chast. Prestuplenie. Akademicheskiy kurs: v 10 t. T. 8: Mnozhestvennost prestupleniy. Stadii prestupleniya. Kn. I: Mnozhestvennost prestupleniy / pod red. d-ra yurid. nauk, prof. N. A. Lopashenko. — M.: Yurlitinform, 2016. — 528 s.
7. Yani P. S. Voprosy kvalifikatsii dolzhnostnykh prestupleniy v postanovleniyakh Plenuma i sudebnoy praktike // Zakonnost. — 2014. — № 4 (954). — S. 28–33.
Review
For citations:
Dubrovin V.V., Dubrovina E.G. Receiving a Bribe for Illegal Actions (Omission) and Abuse of Office Motivated by Self-Interest: The Problem of Collision of Norms. Actual Problems of Russian Law. 2025;20(10):126-132. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2025.179.10.126-132
JATS XML




















