Legality and Validity of Property Seizure in the Investigation of a Criminal Case

The importance of the measure of procedural coercion in the form of seizure of property increases against the background of the high amount of damage caused by crimes, namely about 550 billion rubles annually. This measure of procedural coercion has a high security potential in order not only to satisfy claims in civil lawsuits, but also to recover a fine and other property claims provided for in Part 1 of Article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Investigators (interrogators) annually initiate the seizure of property about 40 thousand times. 90% of cases are a success. The application of this measure is accompanied by the restriction of the property rights of both natural and legal persons, including those who are not recognized as a civil defendant in a criminal case, in the first case, and the accused (suspect).

The seizure of property in criminal procedure practice is accompanied by the need for the investigator to overcome a number of difficulties, which are caused, firstly, by the intersectoral nature of the regulation of this legal institution; secondly, by the presence of gaps in the regulation of relations arising in connection with the imposition of this arrest; thirdly, by the inconsistency of the objectives of proof to establish the nature and amount of damage caused by a crime and the implementation of security activities in a criminal case. This gives rise to numerous violations of the legality and validity of the seizure of property on the part of not only the investigator, but also the court, despite the expression of a number of positions of the ECHR on this issue, despite the explanations of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

The author concludes that without the release of the investigator as a subject of proof in a criminal case from performing an unusual function — providing compensation for property penalties in a criminal case — it is impossible to achieve the full legality and validity of the seizure of property.

1. Aristarkhov IL. O primenenii polozheniy UPK RF v kontekste nalozheniya aresta na imushchestvo drugikh lits [On the application of the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the context of the seizure of the property of other persons]. Rossiyskaya yustitsiya [Russian Justitia]. 2019;10:36-38. (In Russ.).

2. Bulatov BB. Gosudarstvennoe prinuzhdenie v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [State coercion in criminal proceedings]. Omsk; 2003. (In Russ.).

3. Bulatov BB, Dezhnev AS. Mezhotraslevye osobennosti pravovogo regulirovaniya nalozheniya aresta na imushchestvo v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [Intersectoral features of the legal regulation of the seizure of property in criminal proceedings]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Pravo [Tomsk State University Journal. Law]. 2019;34:53-61. (In Russ.).

4. Zyablina MV, Velikaya EV. Izyatie imushchestva, ne prinadlezhashchego na prave sobstvennosti litsam, v otnoshenii kotorykh osushchestvlyaetsya ugolovnoe presledovanie [Seizure of property that does not belong to the right of ownership of persons against whom criminal prosecution is being carried out]. Zakonnost. 2021;1:48-51. (In Russ.).

5. Kashtanova NS. K voprosu o dopustimosti ogranicheniya neimushchestvennykh prav vladeltsev tsennykh bumag pri nalozhenii aresta na imushchestvo v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve Rossiyskoy Federatsii: teoriya, zakonodatelstvo, praktika [On the question of the permissibility of restricting the non-property rights of securities owners when seizing property in criminal proceedings of the Russian Federation: theory, legislation, practice]. Rossiyskiy sledovatel [Russian Investigator]. 2017;5:26-30. (In Russ.).

6. Nikiforova EYu, Mezhenina EV. O srokakh i predelakh nalozheniya aresta na imushchestvo pri proizvodstve po ugolovnomu delu [About the Terms and Limits of Performing Arrest in the Property in the Criminal Proceedings]. Sibirskoe yuridicheskoe obozrenie [Siberian Law Review]. 2020;17(2):237-242. (In Russ.).

7. Sumin AE. Dosudebnoe proizvodstvo po ugolovnym delam o prestupleniyakh na rynke tsennykh bumag : avtoref. dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk [Pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases on crimes on the securities market. Author’s abstract of Cand. Sci. (Law) Thesis]. N. Novgorod; 2011. (In Russ.).