CC BY
58
2. Ущерб экономике России от киберпреступности превысил 200 млрд. рублей [Электронный ресурс] - URL: http://ria.ru/economy/20160413/1409855094.html#ixzz45jCApNtn (09.11. 2016).
3. Уголовный кодекс Российской Федерации: федеральный закон от 13 июня - 1996 г. - № 63. -ФЗ//Собрание законодательства Российской Федерации. - 1996. - № 25. - Ст. 2954.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20534/EJLPS-16-4-13-15
Makushev Dmitry Ivanovich, law studentof the Irkutsk Law Institute Affiliated with the Academy of the General Prosecutor's Office
of the Russian Federation E-mail: kons-evdokimov@yandex.ru
Problematic aspects of international cooperation of the Russian Federation on the fight against cybercrime
Abstract: The article is devoted to topical issues of international cooperation of the Russian Federation and foreign countries in combating cybercrime. The author offers measures in international law on the improvement of cooperation between law enforcement agencies of foreign countries in the fight against computer crimes.
Keywords: European Convention on cybercrime, the United Nations, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Commonwealth of Independent States, computer crime.
The realities of modern world are that the rapid clear, wording is the contradiction with the Russian
development and introduction of information technologies have become an integral part of human life. The high speed of this process does not allow thorough approach to understanding and resolving all the changes in social relations, including in the sphere of legal regulation of combating computer crime. In relation to this phenomenon, it should be noted that computer crime is outside of one particular state, that is, adopts a transnational character. This problem causes concern of the world community and is a good reason to unite efforts of States and their cooperation in this direction.
Starting the consideration of this matter, we believe it is necessary to start with the indication that the first international instrument aimed at protecting society from computer crime and seeks to develop a unified policy in the sphere of criminal and criminal procedural law was the Council of Europe Convention on cybercrime [4], adopted on 23 November 2001 in Budapest. Currently, the mentioned Convention has been ratified by 49 States, but that is of interest, the Russian Federation is not included into their number. The reasons for this are un-
legislation and the violation of state sovereignty by the provisions of paragraph "b" of article 32 of the Convention, which provide the Commission the necessary actions without the consent of the country in which these actions are performed.
So, M. A. Prostoserdov, K. N. Evdokimov believes that many provisions of the Convention contradicts national legislation of Russia and violate its interests. For example, articles 29 and 32 give the opportunity to intervene in the computer system of another state and to take prompt action, regardless of social danger of acts without the permission of that state [1, 27; 6, 44].
Other authors believe that "the principal point of non-aligned Russia to the Convention is our acceptance of article 32b. Its vague wording allows for penetration into information networks of another state without notice, based on someone's personal permission. It is impossible to speak about a fruitful and mutually beneficial cooperation, if one of the parties doesn't even know about the holding on its territory, in this case in information and communication networks, the operational or investigative
Section 3. Criminal science
activities of any other party. And this is what allows article 32b" [2; 3; 5, 47].
In turn, O. A. Stepanov notes the absence in the Convention address a number of problems of organization of interaction oflaw enforcement bodies in prevention, revealing, disclosing and investigation of crimes committed using information and communication technologies (ICT). In particular, it left open the questions of the legitimacy of the work of foreign intelligence and production of the investigation against citizens of other States; of notifying interested citizens about the conducted procedure; the procedure for appealing the decision on the collection of computer data; protect privacy of information; judicial and institutional control over the legality of actions of foreign organs [8, 51].
According to T. L. Tropina, the Council of Europe Convention on cybercrime is no effective legal mechanism of implementation and lack of monitoring of implementation of the participating countries; the Convention is regional, for the protection of the interests of primarily developed countries; also in the Convention there is no comprehensive approach and there are legal gaps and collisions [9, 94].
Some authors to indicate "the absence in the Criminal code of the Russian Federation rules that would provide for criminal liability of legal persons for offences in the sphere of computer information" [1, 27; 7; 13].
But the fact that the Russian Federation has not signed the Council of Europe Convention on cybercrime, not to mention its intention to abandon international cooperation in combating computer crime, as it is implemented in the framework of such international organizations as the United Nations (UN), the Group of eight (G-8), the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), Shanghai cooperation organization (SCO), the BRICS.
In confirmation of the above, you can specify that between the governments of the member States of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization on June 16, 2009 signed an Agreement in the field of ensuring international information security, which identifies specific areas of collaboration and clearly defines the conceptual and terminological apparatus: list the basic concepts to be used in the legislation of countries participating in the agreement and list the main
types of threats in the field of international information security, their sources and characteristics.
BRICS cooperation to combat computer crime, and geographically outside of the Eurasian continent and provides more opportunities for interaction between law enforcement bodies in this sphere. So, 16-18 June 2015 in Moscow was held the meeting of the working group of experts of BRICS on issues of safety in the use of information and communication technologies. During the meeting there were discussed safety problems in the use of ICT and the effective interaction in combating crime and terrorism in the information space.
Consider true the assertion that a regional approach, for all its success in harmonizing criminal law within the group of countries would lead to further fragmentation in the fight against computer crime, overshadows the issue of procedural cooperation, which in the transboundary cyberspace we need a global rather than a regional approach [8; 9; 10; 11; 12]. Therefore, the problematic aspect of international cooperation in this area is its regional character. This is primarily due to the lack of the UN Convention, which defines a common direction of combating computer crime and the system of international cooperation, as well as containing provisions on liability for committing such crimes.
Way out of this situation is the adoption at the site of the United Nations, two conventions, correlated with each other as General and special. The first Convention should be political. To the subject of its regulation is necessary to include the principles and rules of ensuring international information security, a list of prohibited and criminal acts, such as the outbreak and conduct of cyber warfare; the creation, use and dissemination of cyber weapons; cyber-espio-nage; cyber-terrorism; cybersabotage. Second, the Convention having the character of law, should include a conceptual-categorical apparatus; General legal principles; the list of criminal acts subject to criminalization; criminal law and criminal procedure norms, regulating punishment for computer crimes and a common attraction guilty to criminal liability; complex criminological, forensic and organizational and technical measures to combat computer crime; the system and mechanism of international cooperation between law enforcement agencies in this area.
References:
1. Евдокимов К. Н. Актуальные вопросы предупреждения преступлений в сфере компьютерной информации в Российской Федерации//Академический юридический журнал. - 2015. - № 1 (59). -С. 21-31.
2. Евдокимов К. Н. К вопросу о совершенствовании уголовной ответственности за создание, использование и распространение вредоносных компьютерных программ (ст. 273 УК РФ)//Деятельность правоохранительных органов в современных условиях: материалы Международной научно-практической конференции. - 2012. - С. 227-230.
3. Евдокимов К. Н., Таскаев Н. Н. Актуальные вопросы обеспечения информационной безопасности Российской Федерации: уголовно-правовые и криминологические аспекты//В сборнике: Обеспечение национальной безопасности России в современном мире материалы международной научно-практической конференции. Министерство образования и науки РФ; Байкальский государственный университет. - Иркутск, - 2016. - С. 66-74.
4. Конвенция о преступности в сфере компьютерной информации: заключена в Будапеште - 23 нояб. -2001 г. (ETS № 185) [Электронный ресурс]//Сопуепйопоп Cybercrime. Режим доступа: URL: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/185.htm - 02.10.2016.
5. Мирошников Б. Н. Перспективы международного сотрудничества в рамках Конвенции о киберпреступности//Информационная безопасность. - 2007. - № 6 (15). - С. 46-48.
6. Простосердов М. А. Экономические преступления, совершаемые в киберпространстве, и меры противодействия им: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук: - 12.00.08. - Москва, - 2016. - 232 с.
7. Скляров С. В., Евдокимов К. Н. Современные подходы к определению понятия, структуры и сущности компьютерной преступности в Российской Федерации//Криминологический журнал Байкальского государственного университета экономики и права. - 2016. - Т. 10. - № 2. - С. 322-330.
8. Степанов О. А. Актуальные проблемы противодействия кибертерроризму: монография. - М., -2014. - 100 с.
9. Тропина Т. Л. Борьба с киберпреступностью: возможна ли разработка универсального механизма?//Международное правосудие. - 2012. - № 3. - С. 86-95.
10. Теоретические основы предупреждения преступности на современном этапе развития российского общества [Агапов П. В., Антонов-Романовский Г. В., Артеменков В. К., Бажанов С. В., Боголюбова Т. А., Борисов С. В., Васькина И. А., Винокуров С. И., Воеводина Т. Г., Воронцов А. А., Диканова Т. А., Евдокимов К. Н., Евланова О. А., Ережипалиев Д. И., Жидких А. А., Жубрин Р. В., Илий С. К., Капинус О. С., Коимшиди Г. Ф., Красникова Е. В. и др.]. - Москва, - 2016. - 656 с.
11. Юрковский А. В., Сараев А. В., Кузьмин И. А. Борьба с терроризмом в России и Республике Корея: сравнительный анализ особенностей организации и деятельности сил специального назначения//Противодействие терроризму. Проблемы XXI века - COUNTER-TERRORISM. -2016. - № 1. - С. 50-56.
12. Evdokimov K. N. On the issue of criminal responsibility for the creation, use and distribution of "bot-nets"//European science review. - 2015. - № 11-12. - P. 229-230.
13. Evdokimov K. N. Personality traits of computer criminals in modern Russia//European Journal of Law and Political Sciences. - 2016. - № 2. - P. 42-45.
