Registries Supporting Self-Regulation in the Construction Industry as an Object of Crime
The authors follow the traditional «general-particular» structure and present a systemic study of the problem of considering registers that support self-regulation in construction to be objects of crime (primarily, from the viewpoint of subjective and functional factors). They analyze the concept of a «unified state register» used in criminal legislation, single out and critically assess the «literal» and the «meaning-based» interpretative approaches. Besides, they prove the necessity of the immediate inclusion of a specific register as an object of crime in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and (or) in a special law; they also claim that the legal value of this register should be viewed as the most important criterion during such regulation. The object of a detailed study (its subject and maintenance procedure, contents and legal role, transparency and public authenticity, and others) is every register that supports self-regulation in construction. The authors also draw attention to the fact that only the state register of self-regulatory organizations is subject to the rules of Art. 285.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. As for other — «conditionally public» — registers (register of self-regulatory organization’s members and national registers of specialists), the authors present arguments in favor of criminalizing most dangerous actions connected with the distortion of their data. They conclude that it is necessary to eliminate the ambiguity of interpreting the concept of a register as an object of crime. It is proven that the development of legislation in this area should be connected with the unification of terminology (and its agreement with the cate-gories of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and the inclusion of a specific register in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and (or) a special law as an object of crime.