The use of the results of investigative activities in prisons of the Russian Federation: features and current problems

Serenko Roman Sergeevich ORCID: 0000-0002-7667-6918 Lecturer; Department of Criminal Law; Southwestern State University 305040, Russia, Kursk region, Kursk, ul. 50 let Oktyabrya, 94, room 710 romanserenko@bk.ru Other publications by this author

Tarikin Vladimir Konstantinovich Associate Professor; Department of Criminal Law; Southwest State University Office 710, 50 let Oktyabrya str., 94, Kursk, Russia, 305040 tarykin.vladimir@yandex.ru

Introduction. In accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, operational investigative activities in the correctional institution system are a type of activity that is carried out publicly and secretly by relevant operational apparatuses and authorized bodies in places of deprivation of liberty, implemented within their powers through operational investigative measures in correctional institutions ^[1].

Operational search activity as a specific type of state law enforcement activity in correctional institutions is carried out not only in order to protect the life, health, rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of a person and citizen, but also ensures the personal safety of both the convicts themselves and the personnel operating in places of deprivation of liberty, and is also aimed at identifying, preventing and the disclosure of crimes being prepared and committed and violations of the order of serving sentences, which, first of all, makes it possible to implement the principle of legality in institutions of the Federal Penitentiary Service of the Russian Federation ^[2]. In addition, this type of activity in correctional institutions allows for effective work related to the search for convicts who have escaped, and helps to identify and solve those crimes that are committed by convicts before they arrive at places of detention to serve their sentences ^[3].

When investigating crimes in places of detention, law enforcement officers have to face numerous difficulties that cannot be resolved without the help of the correctional administration, as a result of which operational investigative activities and routine investigation support are of particular importance in such cases, which together directly allow not only comprehensive and complete, but also objective investigation of all circumstances. in the criminal case under consideration ^[4]. That is why today there is an urgent issue related to the use of the results obtained in the process of conducting operational search activities within the correctional institution, as well as the possibility of their use in proving criminal cases ^[5]. In addition, the relevance of the research topic is confirmed by the role played by operational investigative activities in the process of ensuring legality and security in institutions of the penal system.

In general, many issues related to the use of the results of operational investigative activities in the penal enforcement system of the Russian Federation have been well studied in the scientific literature, but there are still controversial aspects. Thus, issues related to certain issues of using the results of operational investigative activities in the penal system of the Russian Federation are often the subject of research conducted by Russian researchers in the field of penal science, such as A.A. Krymov, N.D. Moiseev, N.S. Vechkaev, A.S. Vechkaev, A.V. Orlov, S.D. Kovalev, E.V. Poluyanov and others.

The methodological basis of this work is the use of general scientific methods: analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, comparison and generalization, to identify problems and formulate conclusions.

The analysis of normative legal acts regulating operational investigative activities in the system of correctional institutions of the Russian Federation was also applied; statistical analysis was applied; the method of analyzing scientific publications in the field of application of the results of the ARD in the activities of the penal system.

Discussion. The results of the ARD are understood as such factual data on phenomena or events of social reality that are not only obtained as a result of operational search activities in places of detention, but also have a certain legal status, on the basis of which specially authorized persons can make appropriate decisions in the framework of criminal proceedings concerning the organizational direction of the investigation conducted in correctional institution ^[6].

In general, it is important to understand that in modern conditions, operational investigative activities are important in the activities of institutions and bodies of the penal enforcement system of the Russian Federation due to the possibility of using its results in the process of law enforcement in correctional institutions, to identify and prevent the commission of crimes at an early stage, both by convicts and prison staff..

In the process of conducting searches, inspections and other operational measures on the territory of a correctional institution, objects that are important for the investigation of a crime may be found, while the entire procedure related to the detection of signs indicating a crime being committed, being prepared or committed must be carried out in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, the implementation of which within the framework of the Criminal Procedure Code It is not possible to enter correctional institutions ^[7]. This is primarily due to the fact that registration of security measures in places of deprivation of liberty is often carried out without the issuance of an appropriate resolution, the participation of witnesses, as well as compliance with the criminal law requirements of the law, as a result of which the results of the ORDO within the correctional institution should be considered unacceptable and cannot be used in the criminal proceedings. Such ARD results have only an orienting value and make it possible to solve organizational and tactical tasks, which leads to the fact that an operative needs funds and resources to search for new information, which may later serve as a basis for proof ^{[8, 9]}.

In this case, in order for the results obtained to be evidence in a criminal case, it is necessary that the operational investigative activities carried out by operatives in correctional institutions comply with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure governing the collection, verification and evaluation of such information. As a result, it is necessary to develop conditions on the basis of which both operational investigative and penal enforcement activities will be carried out.

One of the problems with the use of evidence is that the issue of further use of the results of the ARD obtained in correctional institutions is entirely within the competence of the person who conducted the investigation ^[10]. So if, in the course of operational search measures, the source of information has the characteristics specified in Article 81 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, then it can be attached to the case as material evidence, and if there are signs specified in Article 84 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, they can be attached as another document. At the same time, despite the fact that other documents are allowed as evidence in a criminal case, if they contain information relevant to establishing the circumstances, they cannot in themselves act as evidence. As a result, they can be implemented in court proceedings only in the course of certain procedural actions related to the inclusion of this information as material evidence ^[11].

The results of the ARD, obtained in the process of conducting operational search activities within the correctional institution, can be applied at the stage of preliminary investigation and judicial proceedings. Today, the issue is often raised related to improving the procedure for entering the information obtained into criminal evidence, which is due to the validity and effectiveness of operational units that extract information in places of detention in conditions of secrecy and secrecy ^[12]. At the same time, the solution to this problem is possible only through legislative intervention, when the norms recognizing the results of operational investigative activities as unacceptable are reformed, as evidenced by the ruling of the Constitutional Court. According to this definition, the results of operational investigative activities represent only information about the source of interest, which can become evidence only after they are fixed by proper procedural means, that is, on the basis of the norms of the current Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation ^[13].

It should be noted that the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation currently fixes the narrow criminal procedural meaning and content of the results of the operational apparatus in correctional institutions, since only those information that can be submitted to the body of inquiry, investigation or court is consolidated ^{[14, 15]}. As a result, it is impractical to consider the results of the ARD as factual data, which, first of all, is due to the fact that they represent information with which it is necessary to establish the specific circumstances of a criminal act being prepared, committed or committed.

The problems that arise in the process of investigating crimes in correctional institutions allow us to focus on how relevant it is to use the results of operational investigative activities and routine measures in evidence ^{[16, 17, 18]}. Thus, the role of operational investigative activities is reduced not only to the search for evidentiary information, traces of a crime, but also contributes to the orientation of the operative in organizational matters arising in the process of preventing and investigating crimes occurring within correctional institutions.

The main problem is that information obtained as a result of operational search activities may be incomplete, unreliable, and may contain a certain amount of subjectivity, which is noted when receiving information from persons who provide confidential assistance in places of detention. As a result, in our opinion, such information should be subject to careful verification, since the source of such information may specifically misinform operational personnel. As a result, such information not only cannot be recognized as the results of the ORDO, but it also leads to a significant complication of the work of the operational units themselves, which search for information necessary to prevent, solve crimes, search for convicts who have escaped from places of detention, etc.

One of the key problems in the framework of the analyzed topic is the fact that information obtained as a result of operational investigative activities in the penitentiary system often has a low level of reliability, especially in the case of their receipt from confidential sources, which is quite common in the process of working with convicts due to the need to preserve the secret of the fact of their assistance to the staff of the correctional institution administration. In addition, it is common for people who assist operatives to transmit distorted and sometimes completely unreliable information in order to benefit themselves or third parties, as well as, on the contrary, with the intention of harming other convicts with whom the facilitator has personal accounts. All of this can lead to situations where, in the absence of a proper level of data verification, false information will be used in the investigation of crimes, which can lead to a dead end or, more dangerously, to an erroneous decision.

In addition, in accordance with current legislation, the results of operational investigative activities in general, and those carried out in institutions of the penal correction system in particular, cannot act as an independent type of evidence and can only be used in the evidentiary process in conjunction with other evidence. It is not uncommon for courts, when considering cases, to recognize information obtained in the course of operational investigative activities in the penal enforcement system as unacceptable evidence, which negatively affects the effectiveness of anti-crime work in correctional institutions.

According to official data posted on the official website of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia, despite the fact that there are certain problems in the application of the results of the ARD obtained in the course of operational work in correctional institutions, only in 2011-2021 it can be argued that due to timely information received in places of detention, escapes from correctional institutions by convicts were prevented. ^{[19, 20]}. So, in 2011, 11 escapes were committed, but the improvement of the operational apparatus and the progressive development and application of the results of the ORDO led to the fact that in 2021 the number of escapes decreased by 2 times, and in 2018-2023 these figures range from 0-1 convicts.

Due to the decrease in escapes from places of detention, the number of attempts on prison staff is also decreasing, which is why there are 0 crimes in the period from 2018 to 2023, which directly reflects the positive dynamics and efficiency of the operational apparatus in the correctional system.

In addition, statistics show that in 2009, 2,263 crimes committed by minors were prevented in educational colonies alone, thanks to timely operational information received. At the same time, since 2009, we have seen an active decrease in convicts in places of detention who take measures to commit illegal acts in correctional facilities. Thus, since 2010, the number of crimes prevented has decreased by more than 2 times, and already in 2016 it amounted to 665 crimes, and in 2020-2023 they were completely absent and equal to 0, which directly reflects the effectiveness of the work of operational staff within correctional institutions operating in the territory of the Russian Federation.

Conclusion. Thus, it can be concluded that considering the results of the ARD obtained on the territory of correctional institutions, we can only talk about factual data that not only must correspond to objective reality, but also cannot be in doubt from the point of view of their reliability. To solve the problems under consideration, it is necessary, first of all, to make appropriate changes to the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, which will complement the existing evidence system, as a result of which the results of operational investigative activities obtained in correctional institutions can be used in criminal proceedings.

The essence of such changes may consist in recognizing the results of operational investigative activities carried out in institutions of the penal correction system as acceptable evidence, for example, by supplementing Article 74 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the following part: "Information obtained as a result of operational investigative activities in correctional institutions may be considered as evidence in a criminal case. subject to their substantiation, due process and comprehensive verification during the preliminary investigation."

These changes will lead not only to the improvement of the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, but also minimize the cases when the results of operational investigative activities will be recognized as unacceptable in the course of judicial proceedings. In addition, the effectiveness of the prevention, suppression and investigation of crimes committed within correctional institutions will increase, as a result of which it will be possible to significantly reduce escapes from places of detention and violations of the regime of serving sentences by convicts.