criminal liability for trafficking in illegally cut timber
was established (Art. 191
1
of the CC of the RF was
introduced by Federal Law No. 277-FZ of July 21,
2014).
This rule makes it possible to bring to criminal
liability not only the persons directly involved in
illegal logging (that is done often for mercenary
motives), but also the persons involved in its sale and
making it legal, that is, the entire “chain” persons
illegally “earning” ("profiting") on the destruction of
forests (Simon L. Bager, U. MartinPersson, Tiago
N.P.dos Reis, 2021).
134 crimes were registered in 2015, and 149 - in
2020. At this, 64 persons were identified in 2015, and
77 - in 2020. It can be seen that the practice of
bringing persons to criminal liability under this article
of the CC of the RF is currently developing. It is
supposed that the USAIS can have a positive
influence on the possibility of establishing the sign of
“knowingly illegal” timber.
This circumstance associated with the
introduction of Art. 191
1
of the CC of the RF in the
CC of the RF influences the statistical data of the
registered crimes as provided by Art. 260 of the CC
of the RF. Thus, 20,826 crimes as provided by Art.
260 of the CC of the RF were registered in 2010,
14,192 crimes - in 2015, and 12,260 crimes - in 2020.
It is obvious that there is a steady downward trend of
the number of registered crimes (Art. 260 of the CC
of the RF) (Romanova M.V., 2020), which only
focuses that most of the crimes in illegal logging are
classified according to Art. 191
1
of the CC of the RF.
The common purpose of the above components of
crimes induces difficulties in the issues of
delimitation of these criminal law rules, and
therefore, the law enforcement practice in resolving
this issue is ambiguous.
Thus, in the Nizhny Novgorod region, a citizen
was convicted under P. 3, Art. 260, of the CC of the
RF. The deputy prosecutor of the region did not agree
with the verdict and considered unjustified the court's
conclusion on the excessive imputation of cl. 3, Art.
191
1
of the CC of the RF on the grounds that “other
technological processes associated with illegal
logging are covered by Art. 260 of the CC of the RF”.
The prosecutor noted, and it is difficult to disagree
with, that the aforementioned rules have different
objects and a different objective side, as well as that
the actions on the illegal transportation for sale and
the timber sale, are not covered by the disposition of
Art. 260 of the CC of the RF. The first cassation court
supported the prosecutor and pointed out, that is
noteworthy: “the object of the crime as provided by
Art. 260 of the CC of the RF are public relations in
the field of ecological safety (Dalgaly T.A., Gostkova
D.Zh., 2021). The city court sentence was canceled.
Also, the Seventh General Cassation Court disagreed
with the opinion of the lawyer about the excessive
conviction under P. 3 of Art. 191
1
of the CC of the RF
arguing that the subject of crimes is the same, and the
illegal logging includes the import and disposal of
timber, since illegal logging makes no sense without
a sale. The court reasonably noted that the actions that
constituted the conviction under the two rules of the
Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are
different, and the illegal logging can be committed
with various motives, including those not conditioned
by self-interest, profit. The sentences where the
qualification under Art. 191
1
of the CC of the RF was
excluded were also appealed by the representatives of
the victim. An example is the decision of the Eighth
General Cassation Court dated July 24, 2020. The
convicted person, together with another person who
was not aware of the illegality of his actions and who
assumed that he was acting in the framework of the
law, performed the illegal logging. Subsequently, the
pine was removed from the illegal logging site and
was sold as legal timber in the framework of the
previously concluded purchase and sale agreement.
At the same time, the conducted analysis of the
court decisions evidences that the amount of damage
according to Art. 260 of the CC of the RF and
according to Art. 191
1
of the CC of the RF was
determined in the same way.
4 CONCLUSIONS
It should be taken into account that the illegal logging
causes the ecological harm. In accordance with the
note to Art. 260 of the CC of the RF, this damage is
calculated according to the rates and methods
approved by the Government of the Russian
Federation.
Currently, this is Resolution No. 1730 of the
Government of the Russian Federation dated
29/12/2018. After the tree trunk, bush and liana stems
are separated from the root, as well as other processes
related to logging, the crime ceases to be ecological.
Further activities on sale of illegally cut timber
will be already classified as a crime in the field of
economic activity. For incurrence of criminal liability
under Art. 191
1
of the CC of the RF, a large size of
damage must be established that cannot be calculated
using the same methodology and the same taxes as for
illegal logging, since it transforms into an economic
crime. It is obvious that in this regard, Resolution of
the Government of the Russian Federation No. 273