Crime as a social phenomenon is largely transnational in nature and equally causes damage to various states and societies, regardless of their socio-political structure.

The fight against national crime is currently becoming significantly more complicated due to the growth of such crimes that pose a danger not only to individual states, but also to all humanity. Therefore, joint efforts and daily cooperation of states are required.

The greater the mutual understanding between states and the awareness of the existence of crimes affecting the interests of the international community, the more efforts should be made by all states together and each individually to protect international law and order. Consequently, coordinating the efforts of various states to combat ordinary crimes and crimes that harm the peaceful existence of various states promotes mutual understanding, strengthening peaceful relations and cooperation between countries and peoples.

The need to expand and deepen international cooperation in the fight against crime is also due to qualitative and quantitative changes in crime itself, and the growth of “foreign investments” in the total mass of crimes of individual states.

The international cooperation in the fight against crime is a unification of the efforts of states and other participants international relations in order to increase the effectiveness of crime prevention, combating them and correcting offenders.

However, the international fight against crime cannot be taken in a literal sense, since crimes are committed on the territory of a certain state and fall under its jurisdiction. Taking this into account, in relation to a crime committed or being prepared, the principle (jurisdiction) of a certain state applies and, therefore, international struggle should be understood as cooperation between states in the fight against certain types of crime or crimes committed by individuals.

The concepts of certain types of crime or crimes classified as international, in fact, do not have an unambiguous definition. There are many definitions of international crime: “international crimes are attacks on the freedom of the peoples of the world or as attacks on the interests of all progressive humanity”, “international crimes are attacks on the fundamental foundations of international communication, on the rights and interests of all states”, “international crimes are crimes encroaching on the independence of each people and peaceful relations between peoples”, “international crimes are an attack on the very existence of the state and nation”, etc., etc.

This reveals the diversity of international crime, which is primarily a reflection of the contradictory nature of social relations in a particular state.

In theory, there is a generally accepted distinction between crimes affecting the interests of states and the entire international community into several groups.

The first group is international crimes proper: crimes against peace, including the planning, preparation, initiation or waging of war in violation of international treaties and agreements, and crimes against humanity (including murder) committed against the civilian population before or during the war:

• genocide (destruction of a clan) - the extermination of certain groups of the population on racial, national or regional grounds;
• apartheid is an extreme form of racial discrimination and segregation (the policy of separating the “colored” population from the white population), carried out in relation to certain national and racial groups of the population, expressed in the deprivation or significant limitation of political, socio-economic and civil rights, territorial isolation, etc. .;
• ecocide - destruction of the natural environment surrounding humans, disruption of ecological balance;
• biocide (destruction of life);
• slavery;
• terrorism - a policy of intimidation, suppression of political opponents by violent measures;
• Mercenary

The second group of crimes are crimes of an international nature. Some can be defined in international agreements, others cannot, but are considered by states as crimes that harm international communication. Of course, these crimes are ambiguous both in nature and in degree of danger. They can be divided into the following subgroups:

Crimes that are detrimental to peaceful cooperation and the normal implementation of interstate relations. Terrorism and elements close to this crime can be counted among them (but this has not yet been done): airplane hijacking, hostage-taking, theft nuclear weapons, attacks on diplomatic representatives, as well as illegal radio broadcasting.

Crimes that harm economic and socio-cultural development of states and peoples. These are criminal attacks on environment, crimes against the national and cultural heritage of peoples (theft of works of art, destruction and looting of excavations, etc.), smuggling itself, illegal transactions with narcotic and psychotropic substances, counterfeiting, illegal immigration.

Crimes that damage the individual, personal (private), state property and moral values. These include: human trafficking, piracy, distribution of pornography, torture.

Other crimes of an international nature. These include: crimes committed on board an aircraft, rupture and damage to a submarine cable, collision of sea vessels, failure to provide assistance at sea, pollution of the sea with harmful substances, crimes on the sea shelf, violation of maritime regulations.

International crime is a specific type of general crime of a particular state. In general, there is reason to talk about its increased danger. First of all, we are talking about the so-called index (most dangerous, serious) crimes, which include terrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering, aircraft hijacking, etc.

The most common international criminal offense is illegal drug trafficking. All attempts by states to fight this type of crime alone have ended in failure. In this regard, in 1909, the first international organization to combat drug addiction was created - the Shanghai Commission. This organization was designed to coordinate cooperation between states in the fight against drug trafficking, recognizing this type of crime as an international criminal offense.

It should be noted that the drug business brings huge profits to international criminals. In the US, it accounts for 275% of net profit. In addition, drug dealers are increasingly interfering in the internal politics of states. Judicial and investigative practice in such cases indicates a high degree of organization of criminal communities, discipline, and the strength of international ties in this area. Strict discipline is ensured by the cruelty of leaders, intimidation, torture, executions of representatives of competing groups and “their own troublemakers.”

The Hague International Opium Convention of 1912 is the first multilateral drug control agreement. It introduced three main categories of narcotic substances as a subject of regulation: raw opium; prepared opium; medical opium.

Over the next twenty years, within the framework of the League of Nations, a number of international legal acts were developed and adopted to complement the provisions of the Hague Conference: the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, as amended by the 1972 Protocol on Amendments to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961; Convention on Psychotropic Substances 1971; Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988.

The overall purpose of these conventions is to ensure access to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances for medical and scientific purposes, limit their use for these purposes and combat their illicit trafficking, demand and consumption.

The main purpose of the 1961 Single Convention, which came into force in 1964, was to confirm, codify, simplify, update and supplement previously concluded treaties on this issue. It limits the production, manufacture, trade, import, export, distribution and use of narcotic drugs exclusively for medical and scientific purposes and is aimed at combating drug addiction.

The 1971 Convention imposes obligations on States Parties to exercise national and international control over psychotropic substances that are being abused or are likely to be abused in the future. This convention provides for four different categories of psychotropic substances depending on the risk and likelihood of abuse, and sets different requirements for production volumes, record keeping, distribution restrictions and export notifications.

Key provisions of the 1988 Drug Trafficking Convention:

• creating a relatively uniform classification of offenses and sanctions for actions related to drug trafficking, as well as establishing jurisdiction over them;
• taking measures to identify, identify, freeze, seize or confiscate proceeds derived from drug trafficking;
• providing mutual legal assistance in the investigation, trial and legal proceedings in relation to certain types of offenses related to drug trafficking;
• international law enforcement cooperation;
• measures to eradicate the illegal cultivation of narcotic plants and drug production.

This convention includes the following offenses: distribution of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances; conversion or transfer of property, if it is known that such property was obtained as a result of trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances; participation, involvement or entry into criminal conspiracy for the purpose of committing any offense, etc.

It should be noted that Russia, as the legal successor of the former USSR, is a party to the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, the 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances, and the 1988 Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances.

Work is actively underway to establish bilateral and multilateral cooperation in the fight against illicit drug trafficking and abuse.

International cooperation of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs in this area is carried out in three areas:

• within the framework of concluding intergovernmental agreements;
• participation of our representatives in the work of international organizations;
• direct establishment of interdepartmental contacts with special units of other countries.

It should be said about that part of international crime that in Russia is now commonly called transnational or international, that is, going beyond national borders. The most difficult situation is on the borders with the CIS and Baltic countries. No operational data is needed to state the expansion of Russian territories, especially in the Far East, the illegal export abroad of fish and seafood, timber and lumber, and the large-scale export of raw materials and supplies from Russia.

Comparative crime trends in states formed on the territory of the former USSR are of particular criminological significance.

The level of crime in the former Soviet republics has always varied significantly, despite the fact that they were in a single state with the same type of economic, social and political system, strictly unified criminal and criminal procedural legislation, a single centralized recording of crimes, a centralized criminal justice system, etc. d.

The intensive growth of crime in most post-Soviet countries is mainly due to an increase in mercenary and mercenary-violent crimes, thefts, robberies, and robberies. The proportion of thefts in countries with high crime rates reaches 80% or more, and in countries with low crime rates - up to 40-45%. And the difference between theft rates calculated for the population reaches 18 times.

Residents of Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Moldova and Chechnya are characterized by high criminal activity. According to the structure of nonresident crime, they account for every second robbery, extortion, crime related to drug trafficking, a third of robberies, and a fifth of intentional murders and rapes. As a rule, crimes are committed with the use of weapons and are characterized by insolence and cruelty.

Criminal activity is characterized by so-called shuttle flights to commit contract killings, fraud, and racketeering in other countries.

Smuggling of weapons, ammunition and explosives is especially typical for the northwestern borders of the Russian Federation (Pskov, Leningrad regions). Weapons of foreign brands then “pop up” throughout the country.

According to Interpol, illegal operations in Russia are arranged in the following sequence: drug and weapons business, and then illegal trade in antiques. IN Western Europe There are more than 40 registered criminal groups involved in this business. During the period from 1996 to 2000, these crimes increased 30 times!

It is worth mentioning the criminogenicity of migration processes, especially illegal ones. Here the representatives of the countries of Transcaucasia, China, Vietnam and Mongolia are “different” (in three years the increase in crime has increased by 3-5 times). “Guests” from Vietnam, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia, Sri Lanka, who have experience in combat operations, including guerrilla-sabotage activities, unite on our territory into ethnic and religious groups. The actions of such entities greatly concern both law enforcement agencies and law-abiding citizens.

Economic, political and social processes of rapprochement between highly developed countries in the 90s did not lead to a significant equalization of crime levels in these countries. The contribution of each of the G7 countries to the so-called global crime rate is not the same. Thus, the number of crimes committed annually in the United States is greater than in Germany, England, France, and Japan combined.

The annual growth or decline rate of crime in highly developed countries, as a rule, does not exceed 2-4%. Western criminologists assess this indicator positively, since minor fluctuations in the crime rate make it possible to systematically implement long-term and ongoing preventive programs without taking various kinds of emergency measures.

In each country, crime varies in level, structure, dynamics and other criminological characteristics. For example, the crime rate in Japan per 100 thousand population is almost an order of magnitude lower than in the USA (if we take all crime) or in Sweden. And the registered crime in prosperous Sweden, where there have been no wars or revolutions for two hundred years, per population is 7-8 times higher than the recorded crime in crisis Russia.

From the last comparison one cannot conclude that law and order in Russia, where actual crime has reached alarming levels, is much higher than in Sweden. In this Scandinavian country, recorded crime is indeed high, but the scope of criminal law is wider, latent crime is less, the recording of acts is more objective, the police work more efficiently, and recorded crime is structurally shifted towards less dangerous crimes, whereas in Russia it is towards serious ones.

In Sweden, for example, in recent years, 8 intentional murders per 100 thousand population have been registered, and in Russia - about 22, i.e. almost 3 times more. The share of these acts in the structure of recorded crime in Sweden is 0.06%, and in Russia - 1.2, i.e. 20 times higher. Many illegal acts in our country are considered administrative offenses, and in Sweden - crimes.

A similar incomparability is observed between most countries. In France, all criminal acts are divided into crimes, misdemeanors and violations. In other countries - for crimes and offenses.

Thirdly, as, for example, in Russia, crimes and administrative offenses are different categories of illegal activities. There is also incomparability in the number of index (publicly tracked) types of crimes. In the USA there are 8 of them, in France - 22, in Germany - 24, in England and Wales - 70, etc. Therefore, comparative studies should be based not only on quantitative, but also on qualitative characteristics, legislative, organizational and other.

General criminological characteristics of crime in different countries and the world as a whole:

• crime exists in all states;
• her dominant motivation is the same everywhere;
• its level in the world and in the vast majority of countries is steadily increasing;
• its growth rate is, as a rule, several times higher than the population growth rate;
• its structure is dominated by encroachments on property, the growth of which is more intense than encroachments on cash;
• the main subjects of crime are men, especially young men (at the same time, the process of feminization of crime has long been observed);
• economic development of countries is not accompanied, as expected, by a decrease in crime;
• the criminal legal fight against crime is experiencing a deep crisis;
• prison practically does not rehabilitate;
• the death penalty does not curb the growth of crime, etc.

If, on the basis of these common problems for all, we return again to the criminological comparison of Sweden and Russia, we see that over the past 40 years, crime in these countries, differing in level by almost an order of magnitude, has increased almost equally - 6 times.

Currently, there is a process of unification, transnationalization and internationalization of crime. This is facilitated by both positive processes of expanding international connections, improving international relations, intensifying population migration, growth of international trade and financial transactions, unhindered dissemination of information, increased exchange of cultural values, and negative processes of exchange of “anti-values” (drugs, alcohol, weapons, pornography, prostitution, etc.).

For all the significant differences in crime rates in, different countries The first and defining trend in the world is its absolute and relative growth compared to population growth, economic and cultural development, etc. This does not mean that crime in any country is always increasing.

There are countries where it decreases or stabilizes during some periods. For example, in the USA a slight decrease in crime was observed in 1982-1984, in France - in 1985-1988, in Germany - in 1984-1988, in the USSR - in 1986-1987. Each decline has its own reasons.

The crime rate per 100 thousand inhabitants in 1995 exceeded 8,000 in developed countries, and 1,500 in developing countries. This ratio seems illogical. But this fact is determined by many reasons, including legal, statistical, organizational, socio-economic, etc.

Economic, social, and democratic development of countries not only does not lead to an automatic reduction in crime, but is usually accompanied by opposite processes, associated, in particular, with the loss of age-old traditional forms of social control. At the same time, there is a slow process of specific “humanization” of crime, that is, a shift from serious crimes against the person to attacks on property.

In this regard, the American criminologist G. Newman believes that developed and rich countries, despite the clearly higher number of property crimes, in practice can feel the impact of these acts much weaker than poor countries, where the struggle for limited means of subsistence comes to the extermination of people .

He makes an original comparison: if you drop a brick (low crime) into a small puddle (weak economy), then it will all splash out, but if you throw a few bricks into a large pond (developed economy) (high property crime), then the impact of such throws is unlikely to be noticeable.

The highest crime rates and relatively high rates of growth are recorded in the most developed democratic countries. In the 60-90s, crime in the USA increased by more than 7 times, in England and Wales - by 6, in France - by 5, in the USSR - by 3.7, in Germany - by 3, and only in Japan - by 1.5 times. The number of crimes per 100 thousand population in the USA for eight types of index crime was 6 thousand acts, and throughout the whole - about 15 thousand, in the UK, France, Germany - 8-10 thousand and in Japan 1.5 thousand.

The Japanese criminological phenomenon is exceptional. Japan not only managed to transition to democracy and intensive industrial development without destroying traditional culture, reliable family, community and industrial social control, but also improved and modernized it.

Relatively low crime is recorded in countries with strict social control.

American criminologist F. Adler, based on data from the First UN Review, selected 10 countries with different levels of economic and democratic development, but with a relatively low crime rate (Algeria, Bulgaria, East Germany, Ireland, Costa Rica, Nepal, Peru, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland , Japan). They had only one thing in common - strict social control over illegal behavior: party, police, religious, clan, community, industrial, family.

The lowest crime rate is observed in countries with totalitarian (fascist, religious fundamentalist, communist and other authoritarian) regimes, where the fight against crime is often carried out using its own methods. But such “effective” control is nothing more than a violation of human rights or non-criminalized abuse of power against its people. According to international documents, victims of such abuses are equated to victims of crimes.

Their presence greatly compensates for the low level of criminality.

Optimal is strict legal democratic control of crime, implemented with strict respect for human rights.

The overall unfavorable dynamics of crime in the world are traditionally affected by different trends in the main groups of crimes - violent and mercenary.

The share of violent crimes in the structure of all crime in the world and in individual countries is small. In different countries it ranges from 5-10% or more. At the same time, it is necessary to keep in mind the great incomparability of data on violent acts. In the United States, there are four types of violent crimes: murder, rape, assault, and robbery. The latter is not a purely violent act, but a selfishly violent act. In Russia, about 50 types of violent crimes are taken into account.

But even such an “ancient” act as intentional murder is statistically understood differently: in the USA it is counted by victims, and in Russia and in some other countries - by events. In Russia, murders are counted with attempted murders, while in the United States, attempted murders are classified as a common assault. Both in these countries and in others there are many other features that should be taken into account in comparative studies. But despite all the differences, violent, as well as other types of criminal behavior, have common patterns.

The dynamics of violent crime are, as a rule, “conservative.” It reacts slowly and weakly to situational changes in life, its growth rate is small, and in some countries, especially developed ones, there are tendencies towards stabilization and even decline.

The highest homicide rates in both developed and developing countries are found in large cities.

In developed countries, acquisitive or property crimes dominate. Their share in the structure of crime reaches 95% or more. It is these acts that determine the main trend of intensive growth of crime in general, and especially in developed countries. The growth rate of acquisitive crime is, as a rule, 2-3 times higher than violent crime.

In addition to mercenary acts, the components of the overall increase in crime in the world also include crime of minors and youth; increasing social danger of the acts committed and the damage caused; intellectualization of criminal activity, increasing its organization, technical equipment, armament and self-defense of criminals from detention and exposure.

Another major trend in crime is the gradual decline in social control of crime. The reasons can be negative (weakening of the fight against crime) and positive (humanization, democratization and legitimation of this fight).

In the “crime - fight against it” system, crime is primary. The fight against it is just the response of society and the state to its challenge. The response is not always timely, adequate, targeted and effective.

Crime is active, proactive, and has a market “character.” She instantly fills all emerging and accessible niches that are uncontrolled or poorly controlled by society, continuously invents new sophisticated ways of committing crimes and does not bind herself to any rules.

Law enforcement activities are developed collectively, within the framework of democratic and humanistic institutions and principles, formalized in notarial, managerial, operational and procedural decisions, and only then put into practice.

Individual prevention is permissible only within the framework of social, material, psychological and pedagogical assistance to the subject who needs it. But it is unacceptable in terms of any responsibility. Responsibility can be a legalized response of the state to specific unlawful behavior of the subject. But because of this, society’s control over crime objectively lags behind the pace and scale of its growth.

A comparative assessment of the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of crime, its causes and means of prevention in different countries shows that there is a lot in common. All this allows us to consider that crime prevention, elimination of the causes and conditions that give rise to it, is becoming a general, international problem.

In such a situation, it is advisable in all respects, including economics, to unite the efforts of criminological specialists, to more widely practice the international division of labor in preventive activities, in the study of criminological problems that are equally significant within the international community.

The solution to joint prevention programs is being implemented in stages. Among the factors that are taken into account when determining the priority of development of certain aspects of this complex problem, quantitative and qualitative indicators should be mentioned. They characterize the state, structure, dynamics of certain types of crimes in cooperating countries; circumstances contributing to these crimes; signs of similarities and differences between national prevention systems; economic feasibility and the possibility of carrying out joint preventive measures.

Of interest is the mechanism of international cooperation in the fight against crime (its directions and forms), which is reflected in the comprehensive strategy for combating international crime created in America. Although this is the first time such a strategy has been formulated, it builds on existing documents such as the National Anti-Drug Strategy and Presidential Directives to combat alien smuggling, combat terrorism, and improve the safety and security of nuclear materials storage.

The new strategy is an important initiative, including from the point of view of increasing the ability of US law enforcement officials to effectively cooperate with their foreign colleagues, in particular in investigating crimes of an international nature and bringing their organizers and perpetrators to justice.

It is expected that new international agreements will be concluded to create an effective system for the rapid detection, arrest and extradition of wanted international criminals and the adoption of stricter immigration laws.

The American leadership promises to reconsider its attitude to the fight against international financial crimes. Namely: to prevent the legalization of illegally obtained funds; increase the level of bilateral and multilateral cooperation in the fight against all types of financial crimes; identify offshore centers of international fraud, counterfeiting, hacking of computer networks and other financial crimes.

What will be new in the activities of law enforcement agencies will be the prevention of exploitation by criminal elements of the international trade system. Particular attention will be paid to the interception of illegally exported technologies, the protection of intellectual property rights, the fight against economic espionage, and the establishment of restrictions on the import of certain harmful substances, dangerous organisms, as well as plants and animals protected by the Red Book.

The flexibility of the system for combating international syndicates will be ensured through active responses to new, unforeseen threats from them. This will require: strengthening intelligence activities against criminal enterprises and organizations; intensifying measures against crimes related to high technology and computers; Continued analytical work to identify and eliminate vulnerabilities in critical infrastructure and new high-level technologies.

In addition to direct cooperation with representatives of law enforcement agencies abroad, the American program aims to intensify the joint activities of various states in confronting international criminals. It is necessary to establish generally accepted norms, goals and objectives to combat them and actively work to ensure their compliance and implementation.

The positive aspects of the crime prevention system in economically developed countries are, firstly, their active participation in international anti-criminal cooperation, secondly, the development of national (state) and local crime prevention programs, thirdly, effective forms of involving the population in the fight against crime .

A generalization of the experience of cooperation between law enforcement agencies and scientific institutions of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the USA, and Japan in the fight against crime allows us to name them as the most effective and practically implementable in the fight against crime. modern conditions the following forms of cooperation: mutual consultations with the aim of developing national and international strategies in the field of crime prevention in each of the cooperating countries; planning joint programs to combat the most dangerous species crimes of an international nature; development of current and long-term cooperation programs in the field of crime prevention; exchange of experience in organizing and conducting preventive measures.

Here, as practice shows, the most achievable forms of exchange can be: exchange of specialized literature; exchange of information on methods of committing, concealing and identifying offenses; exchange of information on means of neutralizing circumstances conducive to crime; exchange of results scientific research; exchange of delegations of practical and scientific workers, holding international congresses, seminars, symposia, colloquiums, etc.

The exchange of experience is also facilitated by such measures as: expansion of international specialization and cooperation in the development of measures aimed at eliminating the causes and conditions conducive to crime; development of direct ties between law enforcement agencies, scientific organizations; development of existing and creation of new international legal, economic and other organizations that solve problems of general and special crime prevention; exchange of specialists; joint preparation of textbooks, monographs, methodological manuals, collections scientific works and so on.; joint preparation of information, proposals, draft legislative acts; mutual assistance in personnel training; coordination of current and future plans to combat crime; joint conduct of scientific research and its implementation in practice.

International cooperation in the fight against crime and law enforcement, ensuring the protection of human rights and freedoms currently occurs at three levels.

Cooperation at the bilateral level. This allows us to more fully take into account the nature of relations between the two states and their interests on each issue. At this level, the most widespread is the provision of legal assistance in criminal cases, the extradition of criminals, the transfer of convicted persons to serve their sentences in the state of which they are citizens.

Cooperation between states at the regional level. This is due to the interests and nature of relations between these countries (for example, among member countries of the Council of Europe, the CIS).

Cooperation between states within the framework of multilateral agreements (treaties). The main content of multilateral agreements (treaties) on the joint fight against certain crimes is the recognition by the parties of these acts on their territory as criminal and ensuring the inevitability of their punishment.

The main directions of international cooperation in the fight against crime:

• conclusion and implementation of treaties on combating crimes posing an international danger;
• providing legal assistance in criminal cases, including extradition;
• development of international norms and standards to ensure the protection of human rights in the field of law enforcement;
• regulation of issues of national and international jurisdiction
• recognition and use of decisions of foreign authorities in administrative and criminal cases;
• interaction in preventing, identifying, suppressing and solving crimes.

Here we are primarily talking about:

• violent crimes against life, health, freedom and dignity of the person, as well as against property;
• terrorist acts;
• corruption and organized crime activities;
• illegal trafficking in weapons, ammunition, explosives and toxic substances, as well as radioactive materials;
• illegal production and trafficking of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, as well as substances used in the process of their manufacture;
• crimes in the economic sphere, including legalization of proceeds from criminal activities;
• production and sale of counterfeit banknotes, documents, securities and non-cash payment instruments;
• criminal attacks on cultural and historical values;
• transport crimes;
• protection of public order;
• logistical support for the activities of the parties;
• training and advanced training of personnel.

Implementation of the main provisions of international cooperation

in the fight against crime occurs in the following forms:

• exchange of information about crimes being prepared or committed and the persons involved in them;
• execution of requests for operational search activities and investigative actions;
• search for persons hiding from criminal prosecution or execution of a sentence, as well as missing persons;
• exchange of information on new types of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances that have appeared in illicit trafficking, on the technologies for their production and the substances used in this process, as well as on new methods of research and identification of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances;
• exchange of work experience, including internships, consultations and seminars;
• exchange of legislative and other normative legal acts;
• exchange on a mutually beneficial basis of scientific and technical literature and information on the activities of the parties.

The same Council coordinates cooperation between states in crime prevention. The problems of combating crime have been discussed many times at sessions of the UN General Assembly, at meetings of the UN Economic and Social Council, and in the Committee on Crime Prevention and Control. UN member states annually submit reports to the Secretary General on the state of crime in their countries and on the system for combating certain types of crimes.

In turn, the UN publishes special statistical collections on the state, structure, dynamics of crime in the world, criminal policy, and the peculiarities of national legislation. The UN General Assembly initiates the development of international and national programs to combat the most dangerous and widespread types of crimes.

In her field of vision, in particular, there were issues of combating juvenile and youth crime, economic crime, problems of drug trafficking, money laundering, etc.

The commission (committee) presents recommendations and proposals to ECOSOC aimed at more effectively combating crime and humane treatment of offenders. The General Assembly, in addition, entrusted this body with the functions of preparing UN congresses on the prevention of crime and the treatment of offenders once every 5 years.

UN Congresses play a major role in developing international rules, standards and recommendations on crime prevention and criminal justice. To date, 9 congresses have been held, the decisions of which have significantly advanced issues of international cooperation on a reliable scientific and legal basis.

In 1971, a Committee (comprising 27 experts) for crime prevention and control was created and is still operating.

He is a member of the UN Economic and Social Council. The functions of the Committee include: developing UN policies in the field of Crime control, developing targeted programs, providing advisory assistance to the Secretary General and UN bodies, preparing international congresses and regional meetings, developing information materials and draft resolutions on crime prevention.

The Committee interacts with voluntary societies, a non-governmental crime prevention organization of the United Nations, periodically publishes reviews of crime trends and crime prevention efforts. To avoid the distorting effects of differences in national criminal laws on the statistics, the following types of crimes are distinguished: premeditated murder, reckless homicide, assault, kidnapping, drug crimes, bribery and corruption.

Among the subjects of cooperation in the fight against crime are non-governmental organizations that have consultative status with the UN: the International Association of Criminal Law (IALP), the International Society of Criminology (ISC), the International Society for Social Protection (ISPS) and the International Criminal and Penitentiary Foundation (ICPF). ).

Their work is coordinated by the International Coordination Committee (ICC). It is usually called the "Committee of Four" and synthesizes all major research and works in contact with the UN Vienna Centre. In fact, it has been in force since 1960, and legally since 1982.

The joint actions of four international organizations seriously influence the international policy of the UN in the fight against crime. The activities of the Committee of Four are primarily related to the functioning of the international community in preparation for UN congresses. It has consultative status with ECOSOC, and also prepares colloquia, coordinates the work of associations, together with UN centers invites other international organizations to cooperate, advises the UN Fund against Drug Abuse, cooperates with the World Society of Victimology and the World Federation of Mental Health.

One of the most influential international organizations involved in ensuring cooperation in the fight against crime is the ICE. This is an association of national institutions and specialists. The main goal of the MCO, according to the organization's Charter, is to promote the study of crime at the international level, uniting for this purpose the efforts of scientists and practitioners in the field of criminology, criminology, psychology, sociology and other disciplines.

As part of its activities, the ICO organizes international congresses, seminars, colloquiums, and publishes their materials; assists in scientific exchange between national scientific and training centers; organizes international criminological advanced training courses for scientific personnel; organizes, together with other international organizations and national scientific institutions, regional international criminological centers; establishes and awards scholarships and prizes to stimulate the development of criminological science.

The International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol) occupies a special place in international cooperation. It was created in 1923 in Vienna, initially as an international criminal police commission. It was revived after the Second World War, in 1946, in Paris, and since 1989 its seat has been Lyon.

From a non-governmental organization, Interpol has turned into an intergovernmental one and currently unites more than 170 states (including Russia), second in representativeness only to the UN, whose members are about 180 states.

Unlike other international organizations, Interpol has national central bureaus (NCBs) in each country. According to the charter, Interpol ensures and develops mutual cooperation between criminal police authorities within the framework of the laws in force in their countries, creates and develops institutions that can contribute to the prevention of criminal crime. His main work is organizing cooperation in specific criminal cases, i.e. receiving, analyzing and transmitting information from and for the NCB.

The main activity of Interpol is the fight against:

• organized crime;
• international terrorism;
• theft of property;
• serious crimes against the person;
• counterfeiting and forgery;
• drug business.

The exchange of information, experience, assistance in searching and apprehending criminals, the development and implementation of Interpol preventive programs are becoming increasingly relevant as crime internationalizes. Creation united Europe, opening borders and visa-free travel within the European community will require additional efforts by international crime-fighting units. Within Interpol, the Europol department has been created to combat hostage-taking, counterfeiting, buying stolen goods, sending gold, selling weapons and bank checks.

The UN and other international intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations are making great efforts to organize and implement effective international cooperation to prevent and combat crime.

They own colossal data banks, regulatory materials, data from criminological and criminal law, criminal political research, which can be used by each country for the purpose of more effective fight with national and transnational crime.

The international fight against crime is one of many areas of cooperation between states. Like all cooperation, it develops on a unified basis of the basic or general principles of their communication historically established in international law. These principles discipline cooperation, subordinate the rules and procedures for interaction between states in all areas, since they are endowed with the property of imperativeness.

As the highest criterion of legality, they serve as the normative basis for the law-making and law-enforcement process in all areas of cooperation between states, including in their joint fight against criminality. The basic principles form the foundation of the international legal order, which is created and maintained by the state. The very level of legal order depends on the degree to which they recognize these principles and follow their instructions.

The most authoritative international legal documents, where they were first collected, were the Charter of the United Nations, adopted in 1945, as well as a special document with the lengthy title “Declaration of Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.” ", adopted in 1970. The Declaration called on states to “be guided by them in international activities and develop their relationships based on their strict adherence.

Both documents contain 7 principles. Now there are more of them. The Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, signed in 1975 in Helsinki by all countries of the continent of those years, as well as the USA and Canada (a total of 35 states), names ten principles. The first five: non-use of force and threat of force, inviolability of state borders, territorial integrity of states, peaceful resolution of conflicts, equality and the right of peoples to control their own destinies - are united into a common group of principles that ensure peace and security on Earth.

In the above list, each of the ten principles is strong because of its interconnectedness with all the others: “the weakening of the unity of the basic principles undermines their effectiveness as a whole. Only in unity, in close interaction, can they function properly.

References to general principles - all together or two or three of them - are found in many such agreements. For example, the preamble to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, signed in Rome on 10 March 1988, calls on its parties to strictly adhere to the general principles of international law. The UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, adopted the same year, states that “... the parties shall implement their obligations under this Convention in accordance with the principles of sovereign equality and territorial integrity states and the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other states" (Article 2, Part 2).

Three of the general principles, namely cooperation, non-interference in each other's internal affairs and respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms, must be considered, since they operate in the field of international cooperation in the fight against crime not only as general, but also as special.

General principles of international law in cooperation between states in the fight against crime.

The principle of cooperation between states is codified in the above-mentioned Declaration of 1970, where its normative content is revealed as follows: “States are obliged to cooperate with each other, regardless of the differences in their political, economic and social systems, in various fields of international relations with a view to maintaining international peace and security and promoting economic stability and progress, the general welfare of peoples..."

This equally applies to cooperation between states in the fight against crime. Although criminality does not pose a fatal threat to the security of states and the world as a whole, nevertheless, for each of them it is a huge evil. Let us recall, for example, that American presidents, starting with Lyndon Johnson, who was the first to name crime as the No. 1 problem for America in his 1967 message to Congress, annually repeat the same assessment.

According to the results of public opinion polls, crime is now turning into a similar problem in Russia. Crime has reached alarming proportions in many other countries. Each of them spends a lot of effort and money to contain it. But it cannot be otherwise. Otherwise, crime, especially transnational crime, can crush or subjugate all state institutions, take on universal proportions and forms, and establish its own power and its own laws in the world.

According to Interpol estimates, currently political regimes in 11 countries around the world may fall under the pressure of the drug mafia.

States try to combat crime together through constant and constructive cooperation. There is no other alternative. Therefore, cooperation between states in the fight against crime, even without the requirements of the principle in question, has long acquired the character of an immutable imperative. This is confirmed by the large number of bilateral and multilateral treaties on combating crime concluded by states, total number which today can no longer be calculated.

Some crime researchers deny the obligation of international cooperation in the fight against it. Indeed, with the exception of an insignificant number of types of crimes, such as maritime piracy, pirate broadcasting from the high seas and some others, committed, as they say, in “no man's” (neutral) territory - in international waters, all other crimes are committed within the boundaries of territorial jurisdiction any particular state. Each of them itself, without the help of other states, is able to find, expose and punish the culprit (if, of course, it wants to do this and if it manages to “get” him), that is, if he has not fled abroad. If the act he committed does not pose a great danger, the state may generally refuse to prosecute and punish the perpetrator.

To follow or not to follow in such cases the principle of “inevitability of responsibility for a crime committed” is the internal matter of each state. However, states always strive not to leave those who have committed a serious crime unpunished, even if this means turning to other countries for help.

The increase in the number of such cases in the world practice of fighting crime has turned such cooperation from optional into an “urgent necessity” Sielaff W. Interpol - Europole - "Kriminalistik" (Hamburg). 1974. N 7. S. 304.

A similar conviction was expressed in the preamble of the European Convention on the International Validity of Criminal Sentences, signed in 1970 in The Hague by the member states of the European Council, in which they noted that “... the fight against crime is beginning to grow into an international problem.”

Principles of non-interference of states in each other's internal affairs.

Cooperation between states in the fight against crime is steadily expanding to include new problems that require their joint regulation. The object of such regulation also becomes individual issues that are traditionally classified as the “internal affairs” of states, but in the solution of which all of them (or the majority of them) turned out to be extremely interested.

Based on their own sovereignty, states themselves determine what exactly from the sphere of their “internal affairs” their own competence and to what extent can and should be transferred to international regulation. At the same time, “states shall refrain from making the object of the treaty issues that are exclusively within the internal competence of states.”

1. Each state determines for itself the problems and areas of cooperation with other countries, the legal and organizational forms in which it is ready to support it, and the scope of its participation in each of the forms.

2. States also themselves determine the scope of obligations assumed under each concluded agreement, fixing this by introducing reservations into it.

For example, the USSR, when signing the 1970 Hague Convention against the Hijacking of Aircraft, made a clause on non-recognition of binding jurisdiction International Court of Justice UN on possible disputes between two or more states concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention (Article 12) Gazette of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. 1971. N 327. Art. 12, paragraphs 1 and 2.

3. Even decisions taken in the fight against crime within the framework of international organizations - for example: the UN, ICAO, the World Health Organization (WHO) or Interpol - do not have the nature of interference in their internal affairs for states, since they have only advisory legal force character.

Let us now turn to the treaties that shape the policies and practices of states in their joint fight against crime.

Above we divided these agreements into two groups:

a) treaties, or more correctly, multilateral conventions on combating certain types of crimes;

b) agreements, mainly bilateral (there are only a few multilateral agreements of this type), regulating procedural institutions of cooperation - legal assistance in criminal cases, extradition, departmental (administrative) assistance (see below for details).

Each of the treaties of the first or second group in its own way refrains from interfering with the internal competence of the participating countries.

The principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of states, as the main provision of this policy, is formulated in the treaties of the first group. Thus, Article 18 of the International Convention against Counterfeiting of Currency states that “... this Convention leaves unaffected the principle that the actions provided for in Article 3 (acts that fall within the scope of the Convention are defined. - Author’s note), shall in each country be prosecuted, prosecuted and tried according to the general rules of its domestic law."

Each of the conventions of the first group has a mandatory article containing variants of the same norm. Let us present it as it is presented, for example, in paragraph 4 of Article 36 of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961: “Nothing contained in this article affects the principle that the crimes to which it relates are defined, prosecuted and punished by the Party in accordance with internal law of that Party."

A norm similar in content and almost identical in wording is in the UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Vienna, 1988) - Article 3, paragraph 11: “Nothing in this article affects the principle that the description of the offenses referred to therein is within the scope of the national law of each Party and that such offenses will be prosecuted and punished in accordance with that law.”

In a different way, but the same norm is formulated in Article 7 of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft (The Hague, 1970), which states that criminal prosecution of persons who have committed a crime provided for in the Convention is carried out “in accordance with the legislation of the given state.” . The same rule is in the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation (Montreal, 1971). In both Conventions, the norm in question is contained in Article 7.

Article 10 of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (Rome, 1988) states that criminal prosecution of persons who have committed any of the crimes named therein is carried out “in accordance with the legislation of the given state.”

The same norm is in the European Convention for the Suppression of Terrorism (Strasbourg, 1977) (Article 7), as well as in the International Convention against the Taking of Hostages (Article 8, paragraph 1).

So, in the international fight against crime, the principle of non-interference in internal affairs is manifested primarily in the fact that: a) each of the states participating in cooperation, in maintaining it, relies on its own legislation; b) significantly limits the ability of treaty norms to interfere with national legislation.

This is also expressed in the fact that the norms of the agreements of the first group, which form the criminal legal basis for cooperation in the fight against crime, by their design (structure) are incomplete and not ready for their use for practical purposes. For this they do not even have a sanction, without which not a single norm of a repressive nature can be considered complete. States parties must first finalize and finalize the convention rules and only then introduce them into their domestic criminal legislation. Only after such a legislative procedure can the norms of international law be implemented “within the territorial supremacy of states where national law operates.” As a result of this procedure, they are transformed from international norms into norms of internal state law - criminal or criminal procedural.

Thus, the introduction on the territory of a state of norms that are incomplete in their design requires additional rule-making on the part of each of them and the adoption of a special legal act that turns an unaddressed international norm into a norm of domestic criminal law addressed to the subjects of the relevant domestic relations. This result is achieved by issuing a legal act by the state, which introduces a corresponding change or addition to its criminal legislation.

As for the treaties of the second group, in them states go even further in protecting their sovereignty from outside interference.

The treaties of this group regulate only the procedures, the procedure for maintaining contacts between countries in specific cases of providing legal assistance in criminal cases, extradition, and providing departmental assistance. The terms of cooperation, the procedure and channels for sending requests, the language in which the request sent abroad and the response to it are written are determined, possible reasons for refusal to provide legal assistance in criminal cases, the extradition of accused and criminals, and the provision of departmental (administrative) assistance are specified.

The norms of the treaties of this group (with rare exceptions) practically do not require additional rule-making from the states that have signed them. They are self-executing and in their self-execution do not affect the internal interests of states and do not interfere with the sphere of their internal competence and internal affairs.

The principle of respect for human rights and freedoms is “the obligation of states to respect and observe these rights without any discrimination in relation to all persons who are within the sphere of their jurisdiction, that is, to whom their power extends”

The first place of legal acts is occupied by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 Text of the Covenant. See: Collection of the most important documents on international law. Part 1., General. M., 1996. S. 143 - 163 (or Gazette of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. 1976. N 17. Art. 291). It was proclaimed "as an objective to which all peoples and all States should strive to... promote respect for these rights and freedoms and to ensure... universal and effective recognition and implementation (from the Preamble of the Declaration)."

Collection of the most important documents on international law. Part 1., General. M., pp. 96 - 102, as well as: Collection of United Nations standards and norms in the field of crime prevention and criminal justice. Ed. UN. New York, 1992. pp. 275 - 279.

According to Article 5, paragraph 2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966<*>"no restriction or derogation of any fundamental human rights... is permitted." This norm forms the foundation on which all other norms must function. All others must be based on the requirements of this norm. Therefore, it is not surprising that many norms of both the Covenant itself and other international legal documents echo it.

Both cited documents contain a norm directly addressed to the police, militia and criminal justice authorities. This is Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or expulsion.” Article 9 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is similar in content, but more detailed: “Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one may be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention.

No one shall be deprived of his liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as are established by law."

Further, paragraph 2 of this article states that “every person arrested must be informed of the reasons for his arrest and the essence of the charge. Anyone arrested or detained on a criminal charge must be urgently brought before a judge or other official exercising local judicial power.”

In criminal proceedings, many Western countries Preliminary investigation bodies are vested with broad powers to apply preventive measures. The police also enjoy greater powers of arrest. The length of police detention in many countries is not regulated. However, the final decision on pretrial detention rests with the judges.

Article 9 of the Covenant introduces the concept of a “reasonable period” during which an arrested (or detained) person has the right to have his case resolved or to be released. Moreover, as follows from the text of the same article, the detention of persons awaiting such proceedings “should not be a general rule.” But release can also be made conditional on the provision of guarantees of appearance before the investigating authorities, the court, or for the execution of the court sentence.

In accordance with paragraph 4 of the same article 9, everyone “who is deprived of liberty as a result of arrest or detention” has the right to demand a trial of his case, so that the court can immediately decide the issue of the legality of his detention and order his release if detention is illegal.

And finally, the last provision of Article 9 of the Covenant, which is practically unknown to Russian justice: “everyone who has been a victim of unlawful arrest or detention has the right to enforceable compensation.” Such a norm, introduced into the legislation of a number of countries, is, of course, unable to stop law enforcement officials from illegal arrests or detention, since compensation is made not at the expense of officials, but from state budget funds. And yet, the presence of such a norm in the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as in the legislation of countries, allows victims of illegal arrests or detentions to at least hope for compensation for the moral and physical suffering caused to them.

A prominent place in the international legal acts under consideration is also given to the protection of the rights of persons appearing before the court.

According to Article 14 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, all people are equal before courts and tribunals. Everyone has the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal.

Everyone accused of a criminal offense has the right to be considered innocent until his guilt is proven by law in court (presumption of innocence - Article 14, paragraph 2). When considering a charge brought against him, every person has the right to be informed in detail, in a language which he understands, of the nature and grounds of the charge brought against him; have the time and opportunity to defend himself and meet with a lawyer of his own choosing; to be tried in his presence, without undue delay, to have the assistance of a defense lawyer even in the absence of funds to pay for his work; have the right to call his own witnesses, as well as witnesses against him; use the help of an interpreter if you do not know the language in which the process is being conducted; not be forced to testify against oneself or to admit guilt.

The UN General Assembly in 1975 adopted a special Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Compendium of United Nations Standards and Norms in the Field of Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. Ed. UN. New York, 1992. pp. 259 - 260. But with the adoption of this Declaration as a non-binding document, inhumane and criminal practices were not stopped. On December 10, 1984, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment.

The drafters of the Convention took into account the diversity of actions that in practice often mask torture and harsh treatment of detainees, suspects and prisoners. And therefore, in the very first article of the Convention, the concept of “torture” was defined: this is “any act by which severe pain or suffering, physical or moral, is deliberately inflicted on a person in order to obtain information or a confession from him or a third person, to punish him.” for an act which he or a third party has committed or is suspected of having committed, or to intimidate or coerce him or a third party, or for any reason based on discrimination of any nature when such pain or suffering is caused by a public official or other person acting in an official capacity, or at their instigation, or with their knowledge or acquiescence."

The Convention obliged the signatory states to take effective legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures to prevent each of them. And at the same time, firmly adhere to the position that “no exceptional circumstances, no matter how serious, can serve as a justification for torture” (Article 2 of the Convention).

In Article 4, the Convention required states to consider all acts of torture as a crime. Attempts to use torture, complicity or participation in it are also subject to punishment. Courts should not use evidence obtained under torture unless it is necessary to do so against a person accused of torture.

According to Article 16 of the Convention, states must prevent on their territory any other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment that do not fall within the definition of torture given in Article 1 of the Convention, when such acts are committed by a public official acting in an official capacity. capacity, or at their instigation, or with their knowledge or acquiescence.

Among the documents aimed at protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners deserve due attention. They were adopted at the 1st UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders in 1955 in Geneva and approved by the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) ECOSOC Resolutions 663 (XXIV) of July 31, 1957, 2076 (XII) of May 13, 1977 and 1984/47 dated 25 May 1984..

The problem of punishment and resocialization of convicts, including those sentenced to imprisonment, is beyond the scope of our study. However, it is necessary here not only to name these Rules, but also to consider a number of their norms. And that's why. Contrary to their name, the Rules concern the detention of two categories of persons in places of isolation from society:

persons under arrest, investigation or awaiting trial, held either in police stations (pretrial detention centers) or in prison institutions, but not as convicted persons. This category of persons is called in the Rules “prisoners under investigation” (Articles 84 - 93);

persons sentenced to imprisonment by a court. They are called "convicted prisoners" in the Rules.

The rules emphasize their different legal status: “prisoners under investigation”, whose guilt has either not yet been established by the investigation or not recognized by the court, must be kept in conditions and conditions different from those of “convicted prisoners”. This difference is clearly emphasized by the Rules: until a court verdict, they are “considered innocent” (Article 84, paragraph 2) and a special regime should be applied to them:

young (namely young, and not just minors. - Our note, G. N) prisoners should be kept separately from adults “and, in principle, in separate institutions.”

The rules define other conditions that make the detention of “prisoners under investigation” different from the maintenance of convicted prisoners. In particular, they are allowed to receive food from relatives or purchase it at their own expense, wear their own clothes, and also purchase newspapers, books, writing instruments and other items with their own money that allow them to usefully occupy their time. But at the same time, the Rules contain a warning “not to forget about the safety and normal course of life in the establishment” (Article 90).

Untried prisoners must be given the opportunity to work, and their work must be paid (Article 89). They are also allowed “within reasonable limits” to enjoy the opportunity to communicate with relatives and friends “enjoying an unblemished reputation” (Article 37), to receive them in prison, subject only to those restrictions and supervision that are necessary for the official administration of justice, compliance with the requirements security and ensuring the normal operation of the establishment (Article 92).

Every untried prisoner has the right to seek free legal assistance, meet with a lawyer, and transfer to him confidential documents prepared by him. His meetings with his lawyer must take place in the presence, but out of hearing, of police or prison officials (Article 93).

All countries must implement the Standard Minimum Rules in their national legislation and, once implemented, they must be communicated to every detainee whenever he is placed in an appropriate pre-trial detention facility.

In our opinion, four special principles can currently be named:

1. Limiting cooperation to cases of ordinary crimes only.

2. The inevitability of responsibility for the crime committed.

3. Humanity.

4. Carrying out actions requested by foreign law enforcement agencies - procedural or operational - investigative - only in accordance with their national legislation.

International treaties on combating crime also name other special principles. But at the same time we are always talking about principles, the scope of which is limited by some institution of cooperation. For example, in extradition practice such principles as non-extradition of one’s own citizens are known, which are not applicable to persons who have gone through the procedure of issuing capital punishment, etc. Regarding these principles, and these are really special principles, it should be noted that, firstly, how We have already indicated above that they only apply to one or two international legal institutions, and secondly, even here each of them is not generally recognized: some states follow them, others do not.

The principle of limiting cooperation only to cases of ordinary crimes. Cooperation in the fight against criminal crime is carried out only for crimes that are called ordinary crimes abroad. This name covers the most significant part of the crimes found in the criminal legislation of countries. But their number does not include a number of specific groups of crimes, primarily political ones or crimes based on a political motive for their commission. Therefore, political crimes, as well as the persons who committed them, are not subject to international agreements of states on the joint fight against criminal crime.

Cooperation is also not supported on military crimes. And in Article 3 of the Interpol Charter, in addition to the two named groups of crimes for which members of this organization should not assist each other, cases of a racial and religious nature are also indicated. Such crimes create very delicate situations in relations between countries. Therefore, practice makes its own reasonable adjustments to their resolution: assistance in cases of a racial or religious nature is refused only if their perpetrators were guided exclusively by political motives, the crimes were of an overtly expressed or hidden political nature.

The principle of the inevitability of responsibility for an offense committed is accepted in the criminal justice of all countries as a necessary condition for maintaining a spirit of intolerance towards crimes and criminals in society, as an expression of the primordial faith of mankind that all evil must be punished. And a person who has violated the laws of society must answer for it. Punishment of persons convicted of committing a crime is the implementation of this principle.

The threat of punishing the guilty does not exhaust the role of this principle in society and the state. This principle also has a great preventive effect on unstable people. The famous Italian criminologist Cesare Beccaria noted that one of the most effective means, deterring crimes, lies not in the cruelty of punishments, but in their inevitability... Confidence in the inevitability of even a moderate punishment will always make a greater impression than the fear of another, more cruel, but accompanied by the hope of impunity. In the area of ​​international cooperation under consideration, the principle of inevitability responsibility for the crime committed bears a significantly greater burden. More than a hundred years ago, the famous Russian author V.P. Danevsky expressed this idea this way: every crime, where and no matter who it is committed, is an encroachment on the general legal order that embraces all states, therefore no crime should be left unpunished, and every state that holds a criminal in power must punish him." Therefore, it is this principle that has become the foundation on which cooperation develops, the cement that holds it together, and the engine that pushes states to new joint actions, the search for effective means and methods of fighting crime. And most importantly, it forces states to conclude international agreements that create legal the basis of their constant cooperation, to establish international organizations.

At the II International Police Congress in 1923 in Vienna, where the creation of the future Interpol took place, one of the speakers (Austrian police representative Bruno Schulz) said that “international cooperation in the fight against crime has a dual goal - ideal and real. The first is to achieve recognition of the idea that a criminal is a criminal everywhere and as an enemy of society should not deserve leniency anywhere, he should be denied the right of asylum everywhere and should be subject to criminal prosecution regardless of what country he came from or where he committed the crime.

This idea should receive universal recognition.

The real goal is the practical implementation of this idea, the unification of states into a united international front in the fight against crime. Schultz Bruno. Nachrichtendienst uber internationale Verbrecher. Archiv fuer Kriminologie. Leipzig. Band 76. 1924. S. 33.

At the international level, today the principle of inevitability of responsibility for a crime is realized in the very fact of cooperation between states in the fight against crime. It seems that this is precisely why this principle is not mentioned in the preambles of concluded agreements.

Only rarely can such a reference to the principle in question be found in individual treaties, for example in the preamble to the European Convention for the Suppression of Terrorism of 1977 (Strasbourg). Its signing by the participating countries was motivated by the desire to “take effective measures to ensure that persons committing such acts do not escape prosecution and punishment.” This principle is specifically highlighted in the Convention, since not all countries and not always have the same sharply negative attitude toward every case of terrorism.

The absence of a reference to this principle in a treaty does not mean that states ignore it. This can be seen in the example of two related conventions - the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft (1970, The Hague) and the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation (Montreal, 1971). Under both Conventions, states party to them are entitled to exercise jurisdiction over an offender apprehended on their territory, regardless of the place where the crime was committed and his nationality. The jurisdiction of the state is that, in accordance with each of the Conventions, it can take the offender into custody or take other necessary measures and conduct an investigation. When another state requests the extradition of an offender, it either extradites him to the requesting state or, “without any exception and regardless of whether the crime was committed on its territory” or not, it must “refer the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of criminal prosecution.” " (Articles 6 and 7 of the 1970 Convention and also Articles 6 and 7 of the 1971 Convention).

Without any indication of this principle of inevitability of responsibility, it is embodied in the institution of extradition, which is widely used in international cooperation in the fight against crime. The treaties of states that deal with extradition provide that in the event that a criminal cannot be extradited to the requesting state, the country refusing extradition is obliged to initiate criminal proceedings against him under its own legislation. In this case we are talking about a requirement widely known in the West and included in contracts - “aut dedere, aut punire” (either extradite or punish yourself).

In conclusion, we note that the significance of the principle under consideration goes beyond the outlined framework. It not only drives cooperation between states in the fight against crime when it operates on a prepared legal basis. This principle imperatively influences the behavior of interested states even in the absence of contractual ties between them. In particular, it prevents them from groundlessly refusing to extradite the required criminal or provide legal assistance in a criminal case. States, guided by the principle in question, most often fulfill a request on the terms of reciprocity or so-called international courtesy.

The principle of humanity. Encyclopedic dictionaries give a broad meaning of the term “humanity”: humanity, philanthropy, respect for people and their human dignity.

For centuries, humanity was in principle alien to the goals of criminal justice - to punish the guilty. This in itself excluded the manifestation of humanity towards them, respect for their human dignity. And even now, when the ideas of humanism have taken shape in the principle of the same name in the criminal policy of many states, their criminal prosecution bodies find themselves in a very contradictory situation: on the one hand, they must ensure the protection of all members of society from the criminal attacks of individual members of the same society, and apply fair justice to the latter penalties.

On the other hand, they must apply the same principle of humanity to them.

Despite the seeming unnecessaryness of mentioning the requirement of a humane attitude towards perpetrators in the fight against crime, the principle of humanity is enshrined in the modern criminal legislation of many countries as a complete denial of the use of unjustifiably cruel and painful punishments. Humanity is manifested primarily in the presence in the criminal laws of countries of several sanctions for the same act, which makes it possible to choose in each specific case a measure of punishment that is necessary and sufficient, and at the same time the least of those that are permissible in this case. When a new law adopted after the commission of a crime establishes a more lenient punishment for such an act, the effect of this law extends to the offender in question, if he has not yet been convicted.

Further, in countries there is a wide practice of mitigating punishment and even releasing minors (under certain circumstances), elderly people, pregnant women, and terminally ill prisoners. Amnesty and pardon are widely used, and attitudes towards the death penalty are changing, which has already been abolished in approximately half of the countries in the world. Death penalty. Analysis of global trends. International Review of Criminal Policy. Ed. UN. New York, 1990. N 38..

L.N. Galenskaya rightly noted the connection between the principle of humanity operating in the fight against crime and the principle of the inevitability of punishment for a crime committed: the perpetrator of a crime should not go unpunished. But the punishment itself should not only be a punishment for what he has done, but also include “the goals of resocializing the criminal”, so that “upon returning to normal life in society, the offender is not only ready, but also able to obey the laws and ensure his existence.”

Back in 1950, the UN General Assembly, by Resolution 415, decided to lead all efforts of the world community to combat crime and assumed responsibility for its prevention, including the resocialization of offenders in order to prevent relapse on their part. This work has become a permanent part of the programs of the UN and its Economic and Social Council. In order to periodically monitor the state of affairs in countries, familiarize themselves with the dynamics of crime and the measures taken by countries to combat it, the UN began to regularly, once every five years, hold International Congresses on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders.

In the light of the principle of humanity, it is necessary to address Special attention to the final part of the name of these congresses - "treatment of offenders". The English phrase "treatment of offenders", used in the original source, means the treatment regime, treatment of criminals, non-punitive influence on them with the aim of correcting them. And this best conveys the content of the principle of humanity in the UN policy of resocialization of offenders, especially those sentenced to imprisonment, with the aim of returning them to life in society as law-abiding members.

Therefore, the principle of humanity cannot be discarded by states in their joint criminal prosecution of persons guilty of committing a crime and the implementation of the principle of the inevitability of responsibility for the evil they have committed.

It is directly or indirectly present in many international legal documents that require or recommend that states adhere to agreed rules in the treatment of persons who are subject to criminal prosecution as a suspect or accused, detained or arrested, convicted or imprisoned, or simply a witness in the case .

a) The first block of international documents with a humanistic focus concerns specifically the treatment of persons arrested or taken into custody as a preventive measure, as well as persons sentenced to imprisonment. This:

Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, adopted by the First UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders on August 30, 1955 and approved by ECOSOC as a recommendation for their application by practical bodies;

Procedures for the effective implementation of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, adopted and recommended by the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations in 1984;

Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, adopted by UN General Assembly Resolution 43/173 in 1988

United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures (Tokyo Rules), adopted by UN General Assembly Resolution 45/110 in 1990.

b) The second block is documents aimed at ensuring that in the practice of law enforcement agencies in combating crime, torture and facts of cruel, inhumane treatment and punishment of persons with whom employees of these bodies have to deal, especially persons deprived of liberty, are forever eliminated. All persons deprived of their liberty have the right to humane treatment and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person (Article 10, paragraph 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; principle 1 of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons... 1988).

The adoption of special international documents on this issue was preceded by the requirement to prohibit torture and cruel methods of treatment of people, formulated for the first time in Article 5 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The reasons for the appearance of such articles in the named documents, as well as the adoption after them of two special international acts, speak for themselves, but the speed of their following one after another at short intervals indicates that each previous one did not have the effect for which it was intended . Particular concern was expressed by the international community when such a fate actually befell the first special document, which was the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1975 as a recommendation to countries. Nine years later, in 1984, the UN adopted a more effective document dedicated to this problem - the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. It differed from the Declaration not only in volume (33 articles, 12 in the Declaration), but also, mainly, in the fact that all its provisions were binding for the countries that signed it. In particular, the Convention obliges all its parties, within the limits of their national jurisdiction, to take effective measures to prevent the use of torture and similar forms of treatment or punishment. To do this, they had to criminalize all acts of torture mentioned in Article 1 and acts constituting participation, complicity, instigation or an attempt to commit torture.

A new advisory body has been established - the Meeting of Ministers of Internal Affairs of Independent States, in which the heads of internal affairs bodies of almost all the republics that were part of the USSR. It was at such Meetings that multilateral, fundamentally important documents were adopted: agreements on interaction between the ministries of internal affairs of independent states in the fight against crime, on cooperation in the field of providing material and technical means and special equipment, information exchange, cooperation in the fight against illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.

The most important step towards the creation of a common legal space was the signing on January 22, 1993 in Minsk by the heads of the CIS member states of the Convention on Legal Assistance and Legal Relations in Civil, Family and Criminal Cases. Today, signed documents need to be filled with specific practical content, to ensure the smooth operation of the created legal mechanisms.

Some problems require solutions at the intergovernmental level. Thus, a joint program to combat organized crime is currently being developed. It will be approved by the Council of Heads of Government of the Commonwealth countries. The meeting of ministers of internal affairs will consider the procedure for transporting firearms, convoying and transporting detainees and convicts, etc.

International cooperation between Russian internal affairs bodies and partners from far abroad is developing in the main areas. These include:

• contractual and legal sphere;
• the fight against organized, including economic, crime, drug trafficking, smuggling and counterfeiting;
• training and cooperation in the scientific and technical field.

Particular attention is paid to expanding the legal framework to provide opportunities for real cooperation with police authorities of foreign countries on specific issues. New ones have been added to the already existing and, it must be said, “working” agreements on cooperation with the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Germany, Hungary, Austria, France, and Cyprus. The Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs signed agreements with the relevant departments of Poland, Romania, Turkey, China, and Mongolia. In general, the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs currently has 12 bilateral agreements on cooperation with police authorities of foreign countries. Agreements with India and the northern countries are also in the process of development.

Currently, a lot has already been done to integrate Russia into the global process of fighting crime. The Interpol National Bureau is actively working, which promptly exchanges information with more than 80 states. There are many examples of the high effectiveness of international cooperation in conducting operational investigative and other activities.

At the same time, today there are many gaps in the activities of both Russian law enforcement agencies and our partners abroad. In particular, there is a lack of promptness in providing the necessary information, which often prevents the commission of crimes.

Intensifying international cooperation between Russia in the law enforcement sphere will require in the future the adoption of some new laws (for example, on the provision of legal assistance, extradition, transfer of convicted persons, continuation of an investigation begun on the territory of another state).

FEDERAL EDUCATION AGENCY

STATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION

HIGHER PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION

FACULTY OF LAW

TEST

by discipline:

"Criminology"

"INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN THE FIGHT AGAINST CRIME"

Bibliography

1. General provisions of international cooperation in the fight against crime

A comparative assessment of the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of crime, its causes and means of prevention in different countries shows that there is a lot in common. All this allows us to consider that crime prevention, elimination of the causes and conditions that give rise to it, is becoming a general problem.

The solution to joint prevention programs is carried out in stages. Among the factors that are taken into account when determining the priority for the development of certain aspects of this complex problem, one should name quantitative and qualitative indicators characterizing the state, structure, dynamics of certain types of crimes in cooperating countries, circumstances contributing to these crimes, signs of similarities and differences in national prevention systems , economic feasibility and the possibility of implementing joint preventive measures.

The following forms of cooperation exist as the most effective and practically feasible in modern conditions: mutual consultations, development of current and long-term cooperation programs in the field of crime prevention, exchange of experience in organizing and carrying out preventive measures.

Here, as practice shows, the most achievable forms of exchange can be:

exchange of specialized literature;

exchange of information on methods of committing, concealing and identifying offenses;

exchange of information on means of neutralizing circumstances conducive to crime;

exchange of scientific research results;

exchange of delegations of practical and scientific workers; holding international congresses, seminars, symposia, colloquiums, etc.

The exchange of experience is also facilitated by such practiced measures as:

expansion of international specialization and cooperation in the development of measures aimed at eliminating the causes and conditions conducive to crime;

development of direct ties between law enforcement agencies, scientific organizations, development of existing and creation of new international legal, economic and other organizations that solve problems in general and special crime prevention, exchange of specialists, joint preparation of textbooks, monographs, teaching aids, collections of scientific works, etc. etc., joint preparation of information, proposals, draft legislative acts;

mutual assistance in personnel training, coordination of current and future plans to combat crime, joint conduct of scientific research and their implementation in practice.

2. International cooperation in the fight against crime through the UN

Many years of experience in developing international contacts in the fight against crime contributed to the formation of a rather complex and diverse institutional mechanism of cooperation in the development and implementation of general and special preventive measures.

This cooperation mechanism includes several groups of organizations.

The most significant of them is the United Nations and international non-governmental organizations for crime prevention.

The United Nations was created in October 1945. According to the Charter, it is responsible for international cooperation between states on all current issues.

One of the UN bodies - the Economic and Social Council(ECOSOC), within which the Committee of Experts on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders was established in 1950.

In 1971 it was transformed into the Committee on Crime Prevention and Control, and in 1993 into the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice.

The UN General Assembly entrusted this body with the function of preparing UN congresses on the prevention of crime and the treatment of offenders once every 5 years.

UN Congresses play a major role in developing international rules, standards and recommendations on crime prevention and criminal justice.

The UN publishes special statistical collections on the state, structure, dynamics of crime in the world, criminal policy, and the peculiarities of national legislation.

The UN General Assembly initiates the development of international and national programs to combat the most dangerous and widespread types of crimes.

In her field of vision, in particular, the issues of combating juvenile and youth crime, economic crime, problems of drug trafficking, money laundering, and others arise.

Crime prevention strategy should be understood as the development of a theoretical framework for rational crime prevention planning.

Crime prevention planning should be carried out not only by law enforcement agencies, but also by health, education, Agriculture, urban planning.

The basis of a crime prevention strategy should be the elimination of the causes and conditions that give rise to it.

All UN member states must take all measures within their power to eliminate living conditions that degrade human dignity and lead to crimes, including unemployment, poverty, illiteracy, racial and national discrimination and various forms of social inequality, and accompany economic development with the simultaneous implementation of adequate social and cultural measures.

3. International cooperation in the fight against crime through non-governmental organizations

Among the subjects of international cooperation in the fight against crime, it is necessary to highlight non-governmental organizations:

International Association of Criminal Law (IALP),

International Society of Criminology (ICS),

International Society for Social Protection (ISSS),

International Criminal and Penitentiary Foundation (ICPF).

The International Association of Criminal Law was founded in 1924. The main objectives of the IAPM, as follows from the Charter of this organization, are: cooperation between theorists and practitioners of criminal law; study of crime, its causes and means of combating it; studying reforms of criminal law, the penitentiary system and criminal procedure; studying the problems of international criminal law.

She studies crime, its causes and means of combating it, engages in comparative criminal law research, organizes international congresses on issues of criminal law, and consults with the UN, UNESCO and other international organizations.

The main international event of the IAPM is congresses.

The range of issues discussed at the congresses is quite wide and includes both problems of criminal law in the narrow sense of the word, and problems of criminal procedure, prosecutorial supervision, penitentiaries, and criminology.

One of the most influential international organizations involved in ensuring cooperation in the fight against crime is the ICE.

It is an association of national institutions and specialists. The society was founded in Rome in 1934. on the initiative of the Italian professor of criminal anthropology Benigno di Tullio.

The main goal of the MKO, as follows from the organization’s Charter, is to promote the study of crime at the international level, uniting for this purpose the efforts of scientists and practitioners in the field of criminology, criminology, psychology, sociology and other disciplines interested in the study of crime.

It is directly involved in ensuring cooperation in the fight against crime, uniting national institutions and criminology specialists.

The ICE has consultative status with ECOSOC, the UN and UNESCO. The ICE studies the causes of crime at the international level, organizes criminological congresses, seminars, colloquiums, publishes their materials, assists national criminological institutes, establishes and awards scholarships and prizes to stimulate criminological science.

Great importance is attached to the organization and conduct of international criminological courses in the activities of the MCO.

The purpose of these courses, aimed at deepening knowledge in the field of criminology, is to encourage the development of criminology in various regions of the world, during the periods between congresses, to quickly exchange new knowledge about crime and methods of combating it. Similar work in their field is carried out by the Ministry of Health and Social Protection and the MUPF.

4. International cooperation in the fight against crime through Interpol

A special place in international cooperation is occupied by the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol), which was created in 1923 in Vienna, initially as the International Criminal Police Commission.

International cooperation in crime prevention.

Transnational (international) crime is a set of crimes committed that harm the development of human society. Transnational crimes: crimes against peace, including planning, preparation, initiation or waging war in violation of international treaties, agreements (genocide, ecocide); crimes against humanity, including murder and other atrocities committed against civilians before or during war (biocide, mercenary activities); war crimes involving violations of the laws or customs of war.

Major crimes of an international (transnational) nature. Crimes detrimental to peaceful cooperation and normal interstate relations (terrorism, aircraft hijacking, hostage-taking, theft of nuclear weapons, illegal radio broadcasting); crimes harmful to the economic and socio-cultural development of states and peoples (illicit trafficking in drugs and psychotropic substances; counterfeiting, smuggling, illegal immigration, criminal attacks on the environment, criminal attacks on national and cultural heritage)

Activities of the United Nations Committee on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders. UN International Congresses on the Prevention and Treatment of Offenders. International organizations with consultative status at the UN. International Criminal Law Association; International Society of Criminology; International Society for Social Welfare; International Penitentiary Society.

International criminal police organization Interpol. Goals, objectives, functions, structure of Interpol. Interpol in the international search and extradition of criminals. Interpol in social and legal control over: organized and economic crime; terrorist activities; drug trafficking; theft of items of cultural value; counterfeiting and forgery of documents; high technology crime; motor vehicle crimes, etc.

Forms of international cooperation in the fight against crime. International crime control refers to the cooperation of states in the fight against certain types of crimes committed by individuals. This cooperation has gone through a long evolution. The first form of such cooperation was cooperation in the extradition of criminals. At a certain stage, the need arises to exchange experiences. As scientific and technological progress develops, cooperation in this area is also changing and playing an increasingly significant role in relations between states. The same thing happens with the provision of legal assistance in criminal cases, including searching for criminals, serving documents, questioning witnesses, collecting material evidence and other investigative actions.

Recently, the issue of providing vocational and technical assistance has occupied a prominent place in relations between states. Many states are in dire need of equipping their law enforcement agencies with the latest technical means necessary to combat crime. For example, detecting explosives in the luggage of air passengers requires very complex and expensive equipment, which not all states are able to acquire.

Cooperation between states is developing at three levels.

1. Bilateral cooperation. Here, bilateral agreements are most widespread on issues such as the provision of legal assistance in criminal cases, the extradition of criminals, and the transfer of convicted persons to serve their sentences in the country of which they are citizens. Interstate and intergovernmental agreements, as a rule, are accompanied by interdepartmental agreements, which specify the cooperation of individual departments.

2. Cooperation at the regional level is determined by the coincidence of interests and the nature of relations between countries in a certain region. For example, in 1971, 14 OAS member states signed the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Acts of Terrorism in Washington. Within the CIS, such cooperation is developing very quickly: in January 1993, in Minsk, the Commonwealth countries (except Azerbaijan) signed the Convention on Legal Assistance in Civil/Family and Criminal Matters.

3. Cooperation at the universal level began within the framework of the League of Nations and continued at the UN. Currently, a whole system of multilateral universal treaties in the field of international criminal law has been created.

International cooperation in the fight against crime involves states solving several interrelated tasks:

a) harmonization of the classification of crimes that pose a danger to several or all states;

b) coordination of measures to prevent and suppress such crimes;

c) establishing jurisdiction over crimes and criminals;

d) ensuring the inevitability of punishment;

e) providing legal assistance in criminal cases, including the extradition of criminals.

Forms of international cooperation in social and legal control over crime: international consultations; development of cooperation programs in the field of crime prevention; exchange of law enforcement experience; transfer of persons sentenced to imprisonment to serve their sentence in the state of their citizenship or permanent residence. Transfer of supervision over conditionally convicted or conditionally released offenders to the authorities of another state, extradition of criminals to another state or an international body for criminal prosecution, training, provision of expert services, supply of special scientific and technical equipment and provision of logistical assistance to other states.

Related information.