Features of criminal liability for the illegal access to credit (article 176 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation) and its compliance with the constitutional principle of equal protection of all forms of property

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to conduct a detailed comparative criminal law analysis of parts one and two of article 176 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for their compliance with the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Methodology: Dialectical, comparative and legalistic methods are used. Results: The study revealed significant differences in the design of the two parts of the Article 176 of the Criminal Code. Thus, in both parts of the article analyzed, the following features are different: the range of protected interests (the object of the crime); the target of the crime; the circle of persons who may fall under criminal responsibility (the subject of the crime); the circle of persons recognized as victims; the method of committing the crime (the objective side), etc. In addition, the author reveals differency between approach of the legislator to the definition of types and penalties for the illegal access to the ordinary credit and to the state targeted credit. According to the author, many revealed conflicts between the parts of the article violate the constitutional provision on equal protection of all forms of property. Novelty/originality/value: Based on the analysis, the author comes to the conclusion that the current design of article 176 of the criminal code needs either significant processing or decriminalisation.