Judicial interpretation of the liability rule for illegal trafficking of special technical means intended for secret obtaining of information (art. 138-1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

This article examines issues related to the judicial interpretation of objective and subjective signs of the corpus delicti under Art. 138¹ of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. This criminal law rule protects public relations that ensure the legal procedure for the production and circulation of special technical means intended for secretly obtaining information. The subject of the crime under consideration is special technical means designed to secretly obtain information. The use of technical means designed to secretly obtain information is not only likely to violate the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens. The acquisition or production of special equipment may serve as a preparatory stage for the commission of crimes that do not infringe on the constitutional rights of citizens. When examining the objective side of the crime in question, the author considers it superfluous to indicate in the sentences the possible consequences of illegal trafficking in special equipment. The author pays special attention to the study of the issues of establishing guilt and the purpose of the crime. Based on an analysis of the jurisprudence of the courts of general jurisdiction, the author investigates the problems of establishing guilt during the trial. The scientific justification for the need to establish the purpose of the crime in the disposition of the criminal law norm is novelty. The author examines various views on the desirability of clarifying the purpose of the attack and the prospect of introducing the “purpose” attribute into the disposition as a constitutional sign of the crime in question. Prior to the inclusion of the objective of the criminal law norm, the author considers it necessary to discuss such a project with representatives of the scientific community. In the conclusion of the article, the author concludes that the current version of the criminal law norm complies with the principles of criminal law.