|
|
|
|
Social Sciences
Vol. 30, No. 4/December 1999
Modern Problems of Fighting Crime in Russia
By Vladimir Kudryavtsev
*
Crime in Russia represents at the moment one of the most sensitive socially significant problems. During several years we witness the unprecedented quantitative growth of crime and deterioration of its qualitative parameters. I shall begin with its general characteristics.
First of all about the dynamics of crime in the USSR and Russia for the whole Soviet and post-Soviet period. One should bear in mind that much information was confidential in that time and was not published. Now there is an opportunity to see the dynamics of crime for a long period of time. In the years of the Civil war, since which the readout is made, the crime rate was high: for example, 2500 thousand crimes were registered in 1921.[1, p. 218] Then two slumps have followed: the first one—between the wars, the next one—after World War II. If in 1939 about 950 thousand persons were condemned by common courts, in 1947-1 million 400 thousand.[2, p. 57] The greatest decrease of crime falls on the 60's (752 thousand crimes were registered in 1965, and some 500 thousand persons were condemned)[3, p. 64, 73].
The reasons of such appreciable fluctuations in the dynamics of crime have a compound, complex nature, including the changes of socio-economic, political, demographic and legal character. Suffice it to say that the introduction of comrades' courts, the release of those guilty on bail and other forms of deliverance from punishment in the beginning of 60's "has drawn" the significant number of offenses from law-enforcement bodies. Then crime has again begun to grow, and this process proceeds till now.
In 1998, 2 million 582 thousand crimes were registered in the Russian Federation (which is 7,7% more than in 1997). If one takes into account the whole territory of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) there were 3 million 500 thousand registered crimes. This is an unprecedented figure. And in Russia itself the rate of crime exceeds the worse parameters of the USSR, though its territory has shrunken in half, and the population was reduced up to 147 million.
How will the situation develop further? In 1996-1998 the level of offenses was stabilized; there may be the so-called "saturation of crime" and it will not already exceed 2,5-3 million crimes per year.
It is clear that absolute figures give little information. The crime coefficient, that is the proportion of offenses to the number of population, allows to get a more precise picture. 1756 crimes were registered per each 100 thousand persons in our country in 1998 [3, p. 35], i.e. much more than in the time of the Soviet Union: in 1978 the coefficient was 503 (per 100 thousand inhabitants), it exceeded 700 by 1985, and since 1990 its constant growth has been observed: 968 in 1990, 1115 in 1991, etc. [2, p. 65].
This is a rather high parameter. In fact, a little bit less than 2% of the population commits crimes annually. Certainly, we are not alone in this area. In the CIS states, especially in Byelorussia and the Ukraine, the crime rate is rather high too. But there are countries where the situation is even worse than that of ours. For example, in 1994 the crime coefficient reached, according to some information, 2351 in Poland, 3789 in Hungary, 5300 in the United States of America, 8000 in Germany, and even 12620 in Sweden [2, p. 21].
However, analyzing these figures one should not forget that the question is about official statistics. And yet there is so-called latent crime, which is not registered officially. It is considered that within the past years the latent crime in our country has been about 4:1, that is four unregistered crimes fall per one registered. It is explained by two reasons. Firstly, for different reasons about 40 % of victims of crimes do not appeal to procurator's office or militia. The majority of them do not believe that the crime will be disclosed [4. p. 24]. Secondly, some bodies of internal affairs do not register all the crimes reported by citizens.
The level of latent crime greatly differs in separate types of offense. The research carried out by criminologists testifies to that, say, it makes 2:1 for murders, 6:1 for rape, and 73:1 for thefts. The highest figure stands for bribery—over 2900 cases per 1 registered. [3. p. 235]. In fact, the question is about the complete impunity for these crimes.
The scientific research is confirmed by the official information. Here are two figures. In 1997 only two cases on an accusation of a bribe were brought in courts in Ingushetiya, and only one case at all‹in Altay Territory. [6. p. 119]. It is difficult to believe that bribery in these regions is practically eliminated.
We shall now address the structure of crime, that is the qualitative characteristic of this phenomenon. Having compared the situation in 1978 and 1998 we will see that there were significant changes in twenty years, a drastic growth of acquisitive crime was observed, there was a strong shift to this motivation [7, p. 310]. I will note that this is the common tendency of the countries with market economy. We have not yet reached the peak of acquisitive crime: for example, it makes about 90% of the total number of crimes in the USA, Great Britain and Germany [7. p. 308].
One may get the impression that against the background of an increase of the number of law infringements for acquisitive motives there have been less violent crimes. True, their share has decreased from 50 to 13%, but in absolute terms their number has increased too. The violent crime was growing just not so fast as the acquisitive one.
Speaking of the qualitative characteristics of modern crime one should note the fact that there is an increase of the share of grave and especially grave crimes. (Crimes for which the law provides the punishment of over five years of imprisonment are referred to grave crimes, more than ten years of imprisonment or stricter punishment is provided for especially grave crimes). In 1993 grave and especially grave crimes made 18% of the total file, in 1994‹37%, then there was the further growth of their share (59%, 55%, 59%), — up to 60% by 1998 [8. p. 32]. Thus, the crime becomes more and more dangerous.
The information on the personality of those who commit crimes is another important parameter. I shall speak briefly about their socio-demographic characteristics. First of all‹age peculiarities. The age of the majority of criminals varies within the limits of 25-35 years, and the maximum falls on 29 years [7, p. 125]. The number of women-criminals is growing: they made 5-6% before and 15% of the total number in 1998 [3, p. 20].
As to the social status, there are representatives practically of all sections of the population among criminals. However, one should pay attention to two circumstances. Firstly, the working class gives a larger share of criminals (27%) than the other social groups (it was not emphasized for ideological reasons before); the workers make 24% of the population. At the same time the share of peasants among the law infringers is only 2,7%, though they make 14% of the population, the share of the employees is 3,4% and 23% respectively. Secondly, the prevailing group among criminals (61%) is represented by the people without constant source of income and the unemployed [3, p. 20], though the share of the unemployed is about 10% of the economically active population. It is quite clear that this contingent is a potential reserve of criminal behavior.
And, finally, the educational level. 60% of criminals have incomplete secondary education (this figure for the population stands at 22%), 1% higher education (for the population over 10 %). Thus, the contingent of criminals is formed mainly by the representatives of the lowest sections of the population—young people of little education without sufficient labor qualification.
The socio-demographic characteristic of criminals does not allow to answer a question about the reasons of a today's difficult situation in the sphere which is being examined, nor about the factors working here. One should take into account the general mechanism of criminal behavior: while committing any deliberate act there comes motivation first, then the crime is planned and is committed. Firstly, the personal properties of the subject of the future crime (they determine all parts of the mechanism) come forward as basic elements forming the system, secondly, the external environment, that is physical and, in particular, social conditions of life, counts. The latter define the personality itself and form it throughout the whole life.
Crime gives a certain result which the subject is striving for, and another result which he is by no means striving for (punishment). These probable (desirable and undesirable) consequences determine behavior with a feedback too. How far, we will specify later.
Let's consider the motivation of a crime in more detail. It comprises three elements: a need; available opportunities of the satisfaction of the need; the system of value orientations of an individual.
One should note that all these components are substantially deformed in modern crisis conditions. The deformation starts already with the needs. They are overestimated both by public, and by individual consciousness. And this concerns not only rich people. The overestimate of the needs influences the sections with low income, as the standard of living of the well-off population, unattainable for the majority, creates a certain public standard supported by mass media. Alongside with this there also exist distorted needs, for example, for drugs and alcohol.
The satisfaction of the needs of a person in any case depends on his opportunities. The opportunities, as is known, can be either legal, or illegal. The legitimate opportunities of a major part of the population today are greatly limited. Suffice it to remind that during the last years not less than 30% of Russians have been living below the poverty level [9. p. 145]. Not satisfying legally even normal needs, many people use illegal means the range of which has appreciably extended. The spreading of private ownership in the absence of the proper financial, customs, tax control opens thousands ways for illegal enrichment, including the direct plunder of national wealth.
The experts have tried to count up how often the direct need becomes the reason of acquisitive crimes. According to sociological research of 1978, the lack of means of living was the direct source of criminal behavior (mainly thefts) only in 3% of cases. In 1997 the situation was quite another one. According to expert estimations, from 21 to 48% of acquisitive crimes (on an average about a third) are committed because of poverty [10. p. 49-50].
The combination of overestimated needs with illegal opportunities opens a way to a crime. True, there is a certain moral and psychological obstacle—the value orientations, or that what before we would call conscience, and what in philosophy is called the world outlook of a person.
It is clear, that the value orientations of a person, depending on their contents, may be an obstacle and, on the contrary, may promote the development of criminal motivation. Unfortunately, value orientations are often deformed now. Sociological research has shown, for example, that 37% of the respondents justify bribery, more than a quarter‹revenge, the same amount‹prostitution. "The desocialization of a person, the loss of life orientation, the formation of antisocial ways of personal motivation is getting more and more important" [11. p. 167-168].
Let us pay attention to the fact that the undesirable consequences of law infringement (criminal liability) should obviously constrain criminal behavior. But it is far from being always the case. Suffice it to say that in 1998 acts of recidivism, that is the commitment of repeated crimes, made 25% [3, p. 20]. I shall remind once again that a proportion between latent and officially registered crime is 4:1. Hence, on an average 4 persons out of 5 committing illegal acts do not consider a threat of punishment, money means for them more than the threat of imprisonment. Besides, many criminals often remain unpunished.
The characteristic of crime in Russia of the recent years allows to single out at least four negative trends having national importance. Firstly, this is a growth of crime as a whole which has swept over the law-enforcement bodies. Secondly, an unprecedented increase of the share of grave and especially grave crimes. Thirdly, the essential change of the motivation of illegal behavior: the wide spread of acquisitive crimes, one can even say, the plunder of the country. Fourthly, the prevalence of persons without constant source of income among criminals which is closely connected with the sharp differentiation of the population on the basis of property status. All this is caused by the socioeconomic process, first of all, the economic crisis.
The criminal code includes more than two hundred cases of corpus delicti. I will deal with four their categories as the struggle against them today is the most urgent and difficult problem.
The first group — acquisitive crimes, which were already mentioned. About 2 million such crimes were committed in 1998. Who commits them? Professionals, mainly thieves and swindlers, make about 15%. Recidivism among them reaches 80%, that is almost all of them regularly commit crimes which are their basic source of means of living. 10% are made by incidental criminals‹people who have once violated the law for these or other reasons, but committing no more crimes. The major part (75%) is formed by the so-called situational criminals who commit crime depending upon the situation: the socio-economic situation in the country is getting worse, their number is being increased; the situation is improving, their number is being reduced. These are citizens who under suitable circumstances steal everything that can be stolen.
The category of acquisitive crimes includes now diverse economic crimes: illegal business, "money laundering", counterfeit, smuggling, tax evasion, official bribery, etc. According to official statistics, there are not yet so many of them‹about 250 thousand per year [3, p. 33], but the number of similar offenses is quickly growing. Besides, one should not forget about their high latency and also that they represent a great threat to the stability of the financial system and economy as a whole. They are actually directed against each of us because the enrichment of criminals, in fact, takes place at the expense of taxpayers.
The second group is represented by violent crimes, aggression: murders, injuries, rape, banditism, terrorism, etc. Nearly 300 thousand such crimes were committed in 1998. These are the most dangerous crimes because they are directed against an individual, his life and health. 29,5 thousand calculated murders were registered last year [3, p. 4]. The figure is, probably, higher than that one in the USA though the population in Russia is less numerous.
Women make 7% of the criminals of this group; persons without constant source of income — 55%; 71% of criminals do not have even incomplete secondary education. 86% of murders and 90% of cases hooliganism are committed by drunk persons. Speaking of violent crime, one has to point out such negative tendencies, as the growth of cruelty, the wide use of firearms, the spread of contract murders, the wide-spread cases of kidnapping of hostages and, finally, the display of aggression as the end in itself. I will explain the last circumstance.
Aggression can be of two types: as an instrumental one when it is used as an instrument to achieve a certain purpose (say, murder with the intention of getting inheritance or compulsion of a businessman to payment of a debt), and as end in itself (the so-called unmotivated aggression). What is now observed is the growth of unmotivated violence‹vandalism (property destruction), and assault of the people unknown to a criminal. Certainly, there is some motivation here too, but it is often hidden in the subconsciousness of a culprit and it cannot be revealed in the course of investigation and proceedings.
A question on the nature of such aggression arises. In one's opinion, these characteristics are inherent in a certain category of people. According to another point of view, aggressiveness is socially stipulated, it is the result of the defective socialization of an individual. It seems to be premature to draw final conclusions, however, the majority of domestic researchers do attach importance to social factors [12. p. 219]. The reasons of aggressive behavior come to the estrangement of an individual, a deep internal (psychological) conflict, incapability or inability to find one's place in society.
The estrangement from social environment often arises already in early children's age. Aggressive criminals were asked such a question: "How did your parents treat you in childhood?". 10% of respondents think that their mothers did not love them. Only 0,73% of respondents in a control group (sample of the normal population) have pointed out bad treatment on the part of their parents in childhood. Moreover, the systematic growth of conflicts in the society contributes to the estrangement, the rise of unmotivated aggression. The transfer of these conflicts takes place, negative emotions connected with unsettled life are vented on inanimate objects, animals, incidental passers-by... When a person is not capable of rationally realizing and solving the internal conflict he expresses it in aggression.
Juvenile delinquency is the third group which has become a serious national problem. About 190 thousand underage delinquents were registered in 1998 (that make 10% of the total number of law infringers) [3, p. 20]. One may think that the figure is not very high. However, the question is not in quantity but rather in the essence of committed crimes. The new forms of juvenile delinquency which did not exist earlier arouse alarm. Earlier, we faced with thefts and hooliganism among boys, thefts and prostitution among girls earlier. Today minors are more often involved in drugs and weapons traffic, racket, procuration, assaults on businessmen and foreigners, swindling, kidnapping.
Teenagers who thereupon become offenders at first usually get in a so-called group of risk characterized by the living in an incomplete family, bad environment, early addiction to alcohol and drugs, prostitution and the refusal to go to school. One should note with regret that 38% of teenagers live only with one of the parents, and 18% are orphans.
"The criminal career" of teenagers, as a rule, starts with bad studies. The alienation from school, which is perceived as something undesirable and even hostile, is the direct consequence of this. Then there comes the estrangement from a family because its elder members try "to set a teenager right" frequently using rather unpedagogic methods. The next step is joining a criminal group and committing a crime. According to statistics, it takes on an average two years to make this "career". 60% of professional criminals, thieves and swindlers took this path at the age of 16. Juvenile delinquency, even if it is quantitatively not so great, is in fact a reserve of adult crime.
Finally, the fourth of the mentioned categories is organized crime. K. Marx wrote in his time that a crime is the struggle of an isolated individual against the conditions of existing domination. When applied to organized crime the given statement seems to be erroneous. A member of a criminal group is by no means an isolated individual and he does not struggle against the existing conditions but parasitizes on them. Organized crime is the most dangerous type of unlawful behavior and consequently today it is an extremely serious problem. It corrodes the society threatening its very existence.
Professionalism is one of the main features of organized groups. About 20% of their members have higher education: economic, legal, technical, etc. These are formally rather cultural, rather enterprising people. Such groups are characterized by a hierarchical structure, division of functions, good material maintenance, existence of a system of protection and cover (the so-called "roof"), division of spheres of influence.
The public danger of organized crime is very great. Firstly, it inflicts vast material damage to the state and its citizens. It is considered that nearly 30% of revenues derived by businessmen go to Mafia. For the past seven years the criminals have taken abroad over 130 billion US Dollars. The foreign experts quote sums even twice as much.
Secondly, the merging of crime and legal business takes place. Mafia groups get the "roof" as officially operating companies, casino, restaurants, joint-stock companies, etc. It is often difficult to draw a border-line between legitimate and illegal business. It is considered that more than 500 Russian commercial banks are by and large connected with organized crime and 40 thousand firms are under its control.
Thirdly, organized crime merges with the State machinery which is especially dangerous. Many criminals are trying by all means to get into the organs of power: to become a deputy of the State Duma, a governor, a high-ranking official or, at the worst, a deputy of a local legislative assembly.
Fourthly, a large number of people is involved in unlawful activities due to organized crime. In 1997 the Ministry of Interior of the Russian Federation registered over 12 thousand organized groups. To sum up its strength it comes to nearly 300 thousand persons [7, p. 351], though larger figures are also quoted. Last year the US Congress published a report on organized crime in Russia which quotes millions of participants. I think that this is an exaggeration; probably, the question is about the total contingent of the personnel of dubious companies controlled by Mafia. It is clear that not all these people are criminals.
Fifthly, a tendency towards globalization of organized crime is observed. Each tenth group is an international one or has international connections.
Sixthly, there are new forms of criminal activities‹drug business, weapons trade, theft of cars, white-slave trade abroad, human organs and radioactive materials trade, contract murders.
What are the ways of joining organized crime? First of all, it is personal connections. A high post in the State machinery is often a starting point platform from which a subject joins an illegal firm and becomes a member of a criminal group. Advantageous positions in criminal business are bought for big money which is shortly paid for itself repeatedly (if, certainly, a smart dealer is not put in the dock).
The review of the most dangerous forms of modern crime naturally brings in a question: what to do? How, with what means and methods one should struggle against crime?
It should be stressed that the struggle against crime should have a complex character. One should not think that it concerns only militia, procurator's office or judicial bodies, only lawyers. The crime rate first of all depends upon a general socio-economic, political and moral situation in the country. Therefore, to reduce crime first of all it is necessary to carry out the measures of radical rehabilitation of economy.
As a matter of fact, on what is based organized crime, well, or any other crime? On the absence of normal business activity. The economy is in considerable disorder, and organized crime gradually takes over those branches of economy which are lost by the state and are not mastered by private business. Members of Mafia take under their control the most profitable spheres of banking, financial, commercial, mediatory and, eventually, production activities. If we return economy to the nominal owner of the country—the people (whether it be private, municipal, state or other form of ownership) the sphere of activities of thieves and swindlers will be substantially narrowed.
Further, the gap in the income of different sections of the population should be reduced. In 1998 this gap in our country was twelvefold, while in Western countries it was fivefold at maximum. After the devaluation of ruble on August 17, 1998 the income differentiation has increased even more. The poor part of the population makes now not 30%, but 40-60%. To effectively overcome crime, especially among the low income sections, one should start with the uplifting of living standards. It is no coincidence that scientific public at large insists on the necessity of developing the social program by the government.
The following direction is political measures. They come to the strengthening of state power which has been substantially weakened for the recent years. It is necessary to put in order, to bring the relations between the center and the regions into the constitutional framework, to stop the "war of laws". The situation in Chechnya where they do not reckon with the Russian laws is completely abnormal for a modern state.
The realization of a whole number of legal measures is of great importance. There are still no tax, no new penal-procedural, land codes in the country. The financial and bank legislation is obsolete. Criminals widely use all this, while the law-enforcement bodies in the absence of legal instruments are powerless.
The corruption in the State machinery which corrodes not only administration, officials, but also public at large is completely inadmissible. When a bribe becomes a habitual way of the solution of everyday issues one can hardly speak of the struggle against crime.
The provision of inevitability of punishment is one of the main directions of struggle against crime. Some things in this relation have been made for the recent years. Under the new Criminal Code "the top plank" of imprisonment is set at 20 years (it was 15 years before), and on aggregate of sentences, when several crimes are committed, one can get 30 years. Life imprisonment has been introduced. However, the problem of the inevitability of responsibility remains to be a rather urgent one. While the rate of latent crime is high, and the exposure of crimes, on the contrary, is low, punitive measures provided by criminal law, whether they are severe and strict, will give no result. It is common knowledge that the main thing in the struggle against crime is inevitability rather than cruelty of punishment. But the former is not present.
It is especially necessary to emphasize the necessity to restore the system of prevention of crime. What was wrong about the commissions on minors? They kept an eye on difficult teenagers, studied their fates, adopted necessary measures. Attempts to restore this practice are being made now. One may mention both comrades' courts, and voluntary people's brigades. Though they were not so effective, but still played a certain positive role. In the struggle against crime it is necessary to lean on the support of the widest sections of the population.
One should not forget about spiritual and moral sphere. As was mentioned above, value orientations of the people are strongly deformed. It should be necessary to restore the system of legal and moral education of youth. At one time there were people's universities of legal knowledge, free-of-charge, operating on a volutary basis, they were of certain benefit, but were senselessly eliminated. The propagation of violence in mass media should be certainly stopped. When the TV demonstrates bloody scenes daily, no wonder that not only teenagers, but also many adults often start to reproduce in life what they have seen. Moral education in educational institutions requires essential improvement too.
The last thing that should be mentioned is the interaction of law-enforcement institutions with science. Unfortunately, not all those upon whom the legal situation in our country depends realize to a considerable degree the role of science. And the understanding of such complex social phenomena as crime is impossible without the support of science. A set of factors operates here and any measure and even a whole campaign cannot bring serious result. Sociological research is necessary, psychologists, scientific criminologists, economists, demographs and other experts should be involved in this work.
Translated by Sergey Kamensky
Endnotes
*: V. Kudryavtsev, Academician, Vice-President of RAS, Chairman of the Editorial Coucil of our journal. The Russian text of the report made by the author at one of the meetings of the Presidium of RAS was published in the journal Vestnik RAN, No. 8, 1998. Back.
Note 1. Two Years of the Work of the RSFSR Government. M., 1927. (in Russian)
Note 2. V. Luneev. 20th Century Crime. World Criminologist Analysis. M. 1997. (in Russian).
Note 3. The State of Crime in Russia in January-December 1998. M., 1999. (in Russian).
Note 4. K. Goryainov. Latent Crime: the Results of the Research and the Ways of Struggle. Latent Crime: Knowledge, Politics, Strategy. M., 1993. (in Russian).
Note 5. A. Konev. Crime in Russia and Its Real State. N. Novgorod, 1993. (in Russian).
Note 6. Crime and Offenses (1993-1997). Statistical collection. M., 1998. (in Russian).
Note 7. Criminology. A textbook ed. by N. Kuznetsova and G. Minkovsky. M., 1998. (in Russian).
Note 8. The State of Crime in Russia in January-December 1998. M., 1999. (in Russian).
Note 9. Russia at the Critical Point: Revival or Catastrophe. Social and Political Situation in Russia in 1996. M., 1997. (in Russian).
Note 10. V. Kudryavtsev. Genesis of Crime. Experience of Criminologist Modeling. M., Nauka, 1998. (in Russian).
Note 11. Dynamics of Values of Reformed Russia. M., 1995. (in Russian).
Note 12. N. Dubinin, I. Karpets, V. Kudryavtsev. Genetics, Behavior, Responsibility. M., 1989. (in Russian).