TASK AND TACTIC OF INTERROGATION AS A MEANS OF ESTABLISHING THE REASONS AND CONDITIONS OF CORRUPTION CRIMES

Abstract

The article examines the peculiarities of interrogation in criminal proceedings on corruption crimes in order to establish the circumstances of a criminogenic nature. Attention is drawn to the concepts of reasons and conditions that contribute to criminal offenses. It is substantiated that the specified circumstances operate at several levels: general, specific and individual. Revealing the possibilities of interrogation in establishing the reasons and conditions of corruption crimes, the author concludes that the general reasons of crimes by themselves cannot independently lead to such a social phenomenon as crime. It is noted that during the interrogation, the reasons and conditions of the specific crime under investigation must be established, that is, the peculiarities of the interaction of certain properties of the personality of the corrupt official, including psychological and moral ones, which were formed under the influence of various negative factors in the process of personality formation, as well as the specific situation and environment that in aggregate caused the person's intention and determination to violate the rule of law by committing a corruption criminal offense. First of all, the personal qualities of the corruptor, which influenced the formation of anti-social, individualistic views and habits, as well as the circumstances that led to the transformation of these views and habits into criminal intent, must be established. In addition, the important prophylactic value of establishing during the interrogation the circumstances of the commission of the corruption offense is also emphasized, as well as the circle of relevant circumstances is outlined. For tactical purposes, witnesses of corruption crimes are suggested to be divided according to the corporatism of interests into persons who work with the suspect in the same institution, persons who are subordinate to the suspect, as well as those who are not subordinate to him. The third category is those witnesses who are not related to the suspect by joint work activities and any form of subordination. The article reveals the tactical methods of questioning witnesses of each of the mentioned groups, as well as recommendations for questioning suspects in corruption crimes.