Instituto de Estudios Políticos y Derecho Público "Dr. Humberto J. La Roche"
de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas de la Universidad del Zulia
Maracaibo, Venezuela
Esta publicación cientíca en formato digital es continuidad de la revista impresa
ISSN-Versión Impresa 0798-1406 / ISSN-Versión on line 2542-3185Depósito legal pp
197402ZU34
ppi 201502ZU4645
Vol.40 N° 72
Enero
Junio
2022
ISSN 0798- 1406 ~ De pó si to le gal pp 198502ZU132
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas
La re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas, es una pu bli ca ción aus pi cia da por el Ins ti tu to
de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co “Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che” (IEPDP) de la Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas de la Uni ver si dad del Zu lia.
En tre sus ob je ti vos fi gu ran: con tri buir con el pro gre so cien tí fi co de las Cien cias
Hu ma nas y So cia les, a tra vés de la di vul ga ción de los re sul ta dos lo gra dos por sus in ves-
ti ga do res; es ti mu lar la in ves ti ga ción en es tas áreas del sa ber; y pro pi ciar la pre sen ta-
ción, dis cu sión y con fron ta ción de las ideas y avan ces cien tí fi cos con com pro mi so so cial.
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas apa re ce dos ve ces al año y pu bli ca tra ba jos ori gi na les con
avan ces o re sul ta dos de in ves ti ga ción en las áreas de Cien cia Po lí ti ca y De re cho Pú bli-
co, los cua les son so me ti dos a la con si de ra ción de ár bi tros ca li fi ca dos.
ESTA PU BLI CA CIÓN APA RE CE RE SE ÑA DA, EN TRE OTROS ÍN DI CES, EN
:
Re vicyhLUZ, In ter na tio nal Po li ti cal Scien ce Abs tracts, Re vis ta In ter ame ri ca na de
Bi blio gra fía, en el Cen tro La ti no ame ri ca no para el De sa rrol lo (CLAD), en Bi blio-
gra fía So cio Eco nó mi ca de Ve ne zue la de RE DIN SE, In ter na tio nal Bi blio graphy of
Po li ti cal Scien ce, Re vencyt, His pa nic Ame ri can Pe rio di cals In dex/HAPI), Ul ri ch’s
Pe rio di cals Di rec tory, EBS CO. Se en cuen tra acre di ta da al Re gis tro de Pu bli ca cio-
nes Cien tí fi cas y Tec no ló gi cas Ve ne zo la nas del FO NA CIT, La tin dex.
Di rec to ra
L
OIRALITH
M. C
HIRINOS
P
ORTILLO
Co mi té Edi tor
Eduviges Morales Villalobos
Fabiola Tavares Duarte
Ma ría Eu ge nia Soto Hernández
Nila Leal González
Carmen Pérez Baralt
Co mi té Ase sor
Pedro Bracho Grand
J. M. Del ga do Ocan do
José Ce rra da
Ri car do Com bel las
An gel Lom bar di
Die ter Nohlen
Al fre do Ra mos Ji mé nez
Go ran Ther born
Frie drich Welsch
Asis ten tes Ad mi nis tra ti vos
Joan López Urdaneta y Nil da Ma rín
Re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas. Av. Gua ji ra. Uni ver si dad del Zu lia. Nú cleo Hu ma nís ti co. Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas. Ins ti tu to de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co
“Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che”. Ma ra cai bo, Ve ne zue la. E- mail: cues tio nes po li ti cas@gmail.
com ~ loi chi ri nos por til lo@gmail.com. Te le fax: 58- 0261- 4127018.
Vol. 40, Nº 72 (2022), 875-888
IEPDP-Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas - LUZ
Recibido el 14/09/2021 Aprobado el 26/12/2021
Material and intangible values subject to
compensation to a victim of crime in criminal
proceedings of the Russian Federation and
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.4072.53
Vo Kim Dung *
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov **
Igor Alekseevich Antonov ***
Ekaterina Yuryevna Manokhina ****
Alexander Ivanovich Gaevoy *****
Valeriia Valerievna Artemova ******
Abstract
Using the analytical method, the article discusses issues
related to compensation for property damage, moral damage
and damage to business reputation caused by a criminal act.
To understand the essence of property damage, the following signs of
property subject to criminal usurpation are distinguished: physical, legal,
and economic. This classication of the attributes of the property makes it
possible to determine its legal understanding to create the conditions for
compensation for material damage caused by a crime. The hypothesis that
corporate reputation is an integral element of a concept such as «moral
damage caused by a crime» has been demonstrated. This makes it possible
to express the idea of the need to unify the understanding of the essence
of moral damage and the possibility of including in its content the damage
to the business reputation, as well as a unied approach to the procedure
for its compensation in case of a criminal oense. It is concluded that the
damage to the business reputation and the moral damage are the same in
their essence and content, therefore, when compensating for the damage
* Personnel Training Department of the Ministry of Public Security of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam,
Vietnam. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6060-5616
** Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Aairs of the
Russian Federation (MGIMO-University), Moscow, Russia. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-
2023-3771
*** St. Petersburg Academy of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, Saint-Petersburg,
Russia. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5432-1112
**** St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Aairs of the Russian Federation, Saint-Petersburg,
Russia. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8536-8271
***** North Caucasian branch of the Russian Academy of justice, Krasnodar, Russia. ORCID ID: https://
orcid.org/0000-0002-4134-3101
****** Moscow University of the Ministry of Internal Aairs of Russia named by V.Ya. Kikot, Moscow,
Russia. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1666-8406
876
Vo Kim Dung, Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov, Igor Alekseevich Antonov, Ekaterina Yuryevna
Manokhina, Alexander Ivanovich Gaevoy y Valeriia Valerievna Artemova
Material and intangible values subject to compensation to a victim of crime in criminal
proceedings of the Russian Federation and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
caused to the business reputation, the rules on compensation for moral
damage apply.
Keywords: property damage; victim of moral damage; damage to
business reputation; civil plainti; intagible material values.
Valores materiales e intangibles sujetos a
indemnización a una víctima de un delito en los procesos
penales de la Federación de Rusia y la República
Socialista de Vietnam
Resumen
Mediante el método analítico, el artículo analiza cuestiones relacionadas
con la indemnización por daños a la propiedad, el daño moral y el daño a la
reputación empresarial causados por un acto delictivo. Para comprender la esencia
del daño patrimonial, se distinguen los siguientes signos de propiedad objeto de
usurpación delictiva: físicos, jurídicos y económicos. Esta clasicación de los
atributos de la propiedad permite determinar su entendimiento jurídico a n de
crear las condiciones para la indemnización de los daños materiales causados por
un delito. Se ha demostrado la hipotesis de que la reputación empresarial es un
elemento integral de un concepto como «daño moral causado por un delito». Lo
anterior permite expresar la idea de la necesidad de unicar el entendimiento de
la esencia del daño moral y la posibilidad de incluir en su contenido el daño a la
reputación empresarial, así como un enfoque unicado del procedimiento para su
indemnización en caso de un delito penal. Se concluye que el daño a la reputación
empresarial y el daño moral son los mismos en su esencia y contenido, por lo tanto,
al compensar el daño causado a la reputación empresarial, se aplican las reglas
sobre compensación por daño moral.
Palabras clave: daño patrimonial; víctima de daño moral; daño a la
reputación empresarial; demandante civil; valores
materiales intagibles.
Introduction
Currently, Art. 35 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation states
that the right to private property is protected by law, and everyone has
the right to own property, own, use and dispose of it both individually and
jointly with other persons.
877
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 875-888
One of the grounds for recognizing a person as a victim in accordance
with the text of the norms of Part 1 of Art. 42 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure of the Russian Federation is the fact of causing property damage
by a criminal oense.
1. Materials and methods
As the main method in the process of writing this scientic article, the
authors used the general scientic systemic method of cognition, which
made it possible to comprehensively consider the material and intangible
benets that are subject to compensation to a victim of a crime in the
criminal proceedings of the Russian Federation.
The systematic approach method allowed us to consider topical issues
related to ensuring compensation for property, moral damage and damage
to business reputation caused by a criminal oense at the stages of initiating
a criminal and preliminary investigation, as well as to study the interaction
of the investigator with the inquiry authorities at these stages of pre-trial
criminal proceedings.
The use of methods of analysis and synthesis made it possible to identify
existing problems in the law enforcement practice of ensuring compensation
for property damage, moral damage and damage to business reputation in
the course of pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases.
The historical and legal method made it possible to study the genesis and
legal nature of material and intangible benets subject to compensation to
a victim of a crime in the criminal proceedings of the Russian Federation.
The formal-logical method made it possible to analyze the activities of
the investigator and the interrogator to ensure compensation for property,
moral damage and damage to business reputation caused by crimes in the
course of pre-trial criminal proceedings and put forward proposals for
improving legislation in this area.
As a result of the application of this methodology, new knowledge was
obtained of material and intangible benets subject to compensation to a
victim of a crime in the criminal proceedings of the Russian Federation,
as well as on trends in the improvement of legislation in order to optimize
the work of an investigator, an inquiry ocer to ensure compensation for
harm, to persons who are victims of crimes.
878
Vo Kim Dung, Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov, Igor Alekseevich Antonov, Ekaterina Yuryevna
Manokhina, Alexander Ivanovich Gaevoy y Valeriia Valerievna Artemova
Material and intangible values subject to compensation to a victim of crime in criminal
proceedings of the Russian Federation and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
2. Results analysis
Paragraph 131 of Art. 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian
Federation contains a very signicant list of material objects included in the
category of property. In particular, this rule states that property is any thing,
including cash and documentary securities; non-cash funds in accounts and
deposits with banks and other credit institutions; uncerticated securities,
the rights to which are recorded in the register of owners of uncertied
securities or a depository; property rights, including rights of claim and
exclusive rights.
To understand the essence of the phenomenon under consideration, it
seems logical to single out the following attributes of property.
The physical attribute means that property is always material in
its essence, that is, it has a feature of a thing or is intangible, but at the
same time it can be materialized in certain cases (for example, cashing out
funds in accounts and deposits in banks). At the same time, ideas, views,
manifestations of the human mind, information (intellectual property)
cannot be considered property. We can speak of property as intellectual
property only in a gurative sense, meaning, for example, violation of
copyright and related rights, which are now often identied with the term
“plagiarism”.
The economic attribute means that a property always has a certain
economic value. The usual expression of the value of a property is its value,
i.e. a certain value in monetary terms. Therefore, money, currency values
and other securities (stocks, bonds, etc.), which are equivalent to value, are
also considered property that can be infringed upon.
The legal attribute assumes that the property always belongs to certain
entities (the owner or other legal owner). The fact that property belongs to a
certain entity must be documented (ownership, general power of attorney,
donation agreement, inheritance, etc.).
Not only specially protected property should be considered in the
possession of the owner, but also property to which there is free access –
on the territory of the enterprise, in the premises of the institution, on the
construction site or in another place of economic activity, on a vehicle, as
well as anywhere, where it is temporarily unattended, if this property has
not been lost by the owner.
At the same time, the above about the essence and meaning of the
concept of “property” in this article is used in relation to the iniction of
property damage by a crime and the issues of ensuring its compensation in
pre-trial proceedings.
879
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 875-888
Within the framework of the issue under study, taking into account
the current criminal procedural legislation, Y.N. Zvereva argues that loss
of prot should also be included in property damage (Zvereva, 2015). J.V.
Samoilova adds that in order to include lost prot in the amount of property
damage, it is required that it be proven (Samoilova, 2011).
However, the authors cannot agree with these statements, since the lost
prot as an element of damage caused to property can be such within the
framework of other legal relations: civil, labor, etc. It seems illogical to say
that a crime can cause property damage in the form of a certain amount of
lost prot, due to the absence of a direct causal link between the criminal
act and the possible benet that the owner would acquire under a dierent
set of circumstances, which can be conrmed by the following points.
First of all, the civil claim led by the victim presupposes the indication
of a specic amount of money in which the property damage caused is
expressed. Moreover, this amount must be documented: sales receipts,
receipts, consignment notes, the conclusion of a commodity examination or
a protocol of interrogation of the victim, where he indicates the amount of
property damage caused to him, if there are no documents for the property.
Second of all, as indicated in Part 1 of Art. 44 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure of the Russian Federation, one or another harm to a person must
be caused directly by a crime (as well as a socially dangerous act committed
by a person in a state of insanity). In our understanding, this is precisely a
certain amount of property damage, which the person claims after the fact
of the crime has been realized by him and the specic amount of damage
caused is indicated in the materials submitted to the investigator, the
interrogating ocer. It is dicult to imagine that in such documents the
calculation of the amounts of lost prots can be made due to the lack of
prerequisites for this in the current criminal procedure law.
Even earlier (in 1964) P.P. Gureev reasonably believed that property
damage should be understood as a decrease or complete elimination of
property benets, as well as other violations of a person’s rights as a result of
a crime committed against him (Gureev, 1964). Note that both in that time
period and today it is hardly possible to talk about lost prots, allegedly not
received as a result of a committed criminal oense.
It should also be claried that in the course of studying the materials of
the criminal cases, the authors did not nd examples conrming the claim
for compensation along with the real property damage and lost prots.
But even being a supporter of compensation for lost prots in the
framework of criminal proceedings, M.Kh. Abdrakhmanov expresses
absolutely opposite arguments in support of his position, pointing out
that the lost prot can be proved only with a certain degree of probability
(Abdrakhmanov, 2008). Rights in this context E.S. Nikulin, who pointed
880
Vo Kim Dung, Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov, Igor Alekseevich Antonov, Ekaterina Yuryevna
Manokhina, Alexander Ivanovich Gaevoy y Valeriia Valerievna Artemova
Material and intangible values subject to compensation to a victim of crime in criminal
proceedings of the Russian Federation and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
to the existence of many problems, in connection with which the lost prot
can hardly be correctly calculated and fairly recovered, at least in the
framework of criminal proceedings (Nikulin, 1983, p. 94).
In the materials of the studied criminal cases, there were cases when
the victims led claims for compensation for lost prots, as an element of
property damage caused by the crime. At the same time, the court (judge),
when considering a criminal case, dismissed the claim in this part in 32.9%
of cases, or the victims did not le such claims at all – 54.6%. Only in 4.5% of
cases the victims put forward such claims, and the court, when considering
a criminal case, satised the claim in terms of compensation for lost prots
as a component of property damage.
Speaking about the concept of property damage caused by a crime, it is
advisable to draw attention to the decision of the People’s Supreme Court
of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam dated July 08, 2006 No. 03/2006/
NQ-TATC. Clause 3 of this resolution denes that property damage
should be understood as harm that can be expressed in monetary form, in
property law, in damage directly caused by the crime and (or) destruction
of the victim’s property. Thus, we can say that in its position, the Supreme
People’s Court of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam does not maintain the
relationship between property damage and loss of prots.
Speaking about one of the problems of the priority of compensation
for harm to those or other persons who have suered from a crime, L.N.
Maslennikova as a whole reasonably believes that in the presence of both
the owner and the title owner of the property, the owner rst of all has the
right to compensation, since the civil action primarily protects the right of
property (Maslennikova, 2004).
But this position still needs signicant clarication. In particular, it
is necessary to take into account the fact that the right to compensation
for damage caused to property is equally vested in all persons to whom it
legally belonged. With regard to the eld of civil law relations, if we are
talking about a tort that violates property rights, then the interpretation
proposed by L.N. Maslennikova, is quite acceptable. However, in cases
where the sphere of legal relations falling under the regulation of criminal
procedural legislation is meant, all subjects who owned or otherwise legally
owned the property that became the subject of a criminal encroachment
have equal rights to le a civil claim, in connection with which they have
suered certain harm.
In connection with the afore mentioned information, it is necessary to
clarify the forms of compensation for property damage caused by a crime.
In particular, I.S. Barinov and E.Y. Antonova oer the following options for
such activities: return to the victim of property that has become the subject
of a crime (since it acts as material evidence, this is possible only indirectly);
881
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 875-888
monetary compensation for harm to suspects, accused; restoration of
damaged property of the victim (Barinova, Antonova, 2015).
The authors also clarify that compensation may also take place by
transferring other equivalent property to the victim, as well as by providing
other services that have a certain value expression for the person who has
been harmed.
It should be added that these forms are very eective if the suspect or
the accused wants to voluntarily compensate for the harm caused to them.
However, speaking about the legal institution of compensation for harm
caused by a crime, it should be noted such procedural methods as the
seizure of property, a civil claim, and criminal procedural restitution.
Summing up the essence of property damage caused by a crime, it should
be said that the legislator took a well-founded position, having formulated
the concept of property in Paragraph 131 of Art. 5 of the Criminal Procedure
Code of the Russian Federation. However, we believe it necessary to
supplement the content of this article of the Criminal Procedure Code of the
Russian Federation with the concept of “property damage”, in connection
with which it is advisable to supplement article 5 with Paragraph 132 of
the following content: “Property damage is harm caused directly to the
property of a person in the form of its loss, damage or destruction, as well
as property rights, including the right to claim, subject to compensation to
the person who made a claim in accordance with the procedure established
by this Code”.
Further, it seems expedient to dwell on such concepts as moral harm
and harm to business reputation.
Speaking about compensation for moral harm, protection and
restoration of the rights of persons who have become victims of criminal
acts, M.A. Kravtsova believes that these categories have not only legal, but
also moral components (Kravtsova, 2015).
Arguing about moral harm as a negative consequence of criminally
punishable acts, the rights of E.N. Kleshchina, indicating that moral
harm is present in almost every case of a crime, but in dierent situations
it manifests itself in dierent ways (Kleshchina, 2010). Moreover, the
specicity of moral suering lies in the fact that after the commission of
a crime, they do not pass, but continue for a rather long time. According
to E.L. Sidorenko, this situation takes place in the overwhelming majority
of criminal cases (Sidorenko, 2011). Pointing to the consequences of the
crime, K.B. Kalinovsky supports the point of view of the above authors
(Kalinovsky, 2016).
The opposite position is taken by N.V. Krivoshchekov, who asserts that
moral harm arises from damage to property, and therefore does not acquire
an independent signicance (Krivoshchekov, 2004).
882
Vo Kim Dung, Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov, Igor Alekseevich Antonov, Ekaterina Yuryevna
Manokhina, Alexander Ivanovich Gaevoy y Valeriia Valerievna Artemova
Material and intangible values subject to compensation to a victim of crime in criminal
proceedings of the Russian Federation and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
In the presented polar opinions, we tend to the position of E.N.
Kleshchina, E.L. Sidorenko and K.B. Kalinovsky, since, based on the
design of Part 1 of Art. 42 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian
Federation, absolutely any crime inicts one or another type of harm, and a
person suering negative consequences has the right to count on its full and
real compensation (compensation), regardless of its nature.
At the same time, there is also an “external logical framework” for such
moral harm, which cannot be compensated for in cases where a person was
an eyewitness to the committed act, even if the person received serious
psychological trauma. In addition, there are crimes when no moral harm
is inicted at all (as well as other types of harm). An example of such an act
is illegal crossing of the State border of the Russian Federation (Art. 322 of
the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
The study of international experience in understanding moral harm
allows us to conclude that in most countries, this harm is considered as a
separate type of harm, which often expresses in the form of emotional and
moral feelings and suering of a person. As an example, we can cite the
provision of the resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme People’s Court
of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam dated April 28, 2004 No. 01/2004/
NQ-HĐTP “On instructions for the application of certain provisions of
the Civil Code of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam on non-contractual
compensation for harm”, according to which moral harm is dened as
suering experienced a person (or his close persons) in violation of his right
to life, health, honor, dignity, and reputation.
Arguing about the positions of the Russian scientic community in
terms of the relevance of issues of domestic law enforcement experience of
compensation for moral damage caused by a criminal act, one cannot fail
to note the fact that these issues are often the subject of consideration in
the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter the ECHR) (Grinenko,
2008).
In particular, in its judgment in the Kanayev case against the Russian
Federation, the ECHR draws the attention of the law enforcement ocer to
such an important aspect, which is the need to take into account Rule 60
of the Rules of Court, which prescribes that “any claim for just satisfaction
must be examined point by point and presented in written form together
with the relevant supporting documents or written evidence, failure to
provide which may be the reason for the rejection by the European Court of
all or part of the claim”.
Further, examining the essence and content of such very close concepts
as moral harm and harm to business reputation, it can be stated that they
are divided by the legislator into dierent legal categories.
883
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 875-888
First, we should dene the concept of “business reputation”, focusing
on the term “reputation”. In a purely legal sense, “reputation” (from the
Latin “ponder, reect”) is the created public opinion about the merits and
demerits of someone.
At the same time, with a business reputation, many scientists personify
a certain set of qualities and assessments (Mikhno, 1998, p. 122-123; Kopik,
2014, p. 105-106). It can be argued that it is a personal moral right. At the
same time, business reputation is characterized by social relations in which
there is no property component.
Regarding the business reputation inherent in a legal entity, it should be
said that it has a material component and can be determined in a specic
monetary equivalent, and must also be reected in nancial documents.
L.I. Yarovikova, who claims that the business reputation of enterprises
and institutions ensures the successful economic activity of the respective
legal entity (Yarovikova, 2001, p. 64). At the same time, it should be added
that the category “business reputation” can also be applied to legal entities
that do not set themselves the goal of making a prot (for example, various
public associations).
Arguing about such a category of victims of crimes as legal entities, it
should be said that the negative consequences of a criminal act for this
category of victims can be expressed as undermining condence in their
authority, for example, in the credit and banking sector, potentially causing
harm to the entire basic element of the nancial system states (Pushkarev et
al., 2020; Pushkarev et al., 2021), and in the negative dissonance caused by
the loss of leading positions in a certain eld of activity, in causing property
damage, the emergence of unfair competition, as well as in other negative
post-criminal consequences.
The procedure for compensation for damage to the business reputation
of a legal entity caused as a result of a criminal act is similar to the rules for
compensation for moral damage caused to individuals. It is reasonable to
point out that even in the era of the RSFSR Code of Criminal Procedure,
many procedural scientists promoted the idea of compensation for moral
damage to legal entities if it was caused as a result of the dissemination
of information discrediting its business reputation (Brusnitsyn, 1995;
Khatuaeva, 2000).
In cases of causing moral harm to an individual, he has the right to
declare a claim for his property compensation. Similarly, a legal entity that
has suered from a crime has the right to claim a property equivalent in
compensation for damage caused to its business reputation. At the same
time, scientic polemics continued for a long time regarding the possibility
of causing moral harm to a legal entity. A number of scientists, and in
dierent branches of legal sciences, substantiate the position that legal
884
Vo Kim Dung, Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov, Igor Alekseevich Antonov, Ekaterina Yuryevna
Manokhina, Alexander Ivanovich Gaevoy y Valeriia Valerievna Artemova
Material and intangible values subject to compensation to a victim of crime in criminal
proceedings of the Russian Federation and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
entities can also be inicted moral harm (Afanasyeva and Belova, 2002).
Opponents of this tendency substantiate their position with the arguments
that moral harm can be expressed exclusively in physical and mental
suering, which can only be experienced by a person (physical person)
(Bezlepkin, 1998; Zavidov and Kurina, 2002; Ivanov et al., 2021).
A historical excursion denes the emergence of the concept of “moral
harm” in the Russian legal doctrine by the moment of approval in the Code
of Laws of the Russian Empire in 1835 provisions concerning compensation
for harm caused to personal health. But for the rst time, the legislator
provided for the possibility of resolving issues of compensation for moral
harm in criminal proceedings only in Art. 53 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure of the RSFSR 1960, which, together with the facts of causing
physical and property damage, indicates the possibility of recognizing a
person as a victim in cases of causing him moral harm.
The modern interpretation of the term “moral harm”, based on the
provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the
Russian Federation dated December 20, 1994 No. 10, allows us to say that
it “may consist in moral experiences in connection with the loss of relatives,
the inability to continue an active social life, loss of work, disclosure family,
medical secrets, dissemination of untrue information discrediting the
honor, dignity or business reputation of a citizen, temporary restriction
or deprivation of any rights, physical pain associated with injury, other
damage to health or in connection with an illness suered as a result of
moral suering, etc.”. Let us add that moral harm also takes place in cases
where there was an attempt to commit a crime.
Let us note the opinion of V.I. Shvetsov, who very succinctly expressed
the possibility of causing moral harm to a legal entity, pointing out that such
harm can lead to discrediting, undermining the authority of a particular
legal entity (Shvetsov, 1999). Having a similar position, Ch.H. Chang in
his work substantiated the conclusion that moral harm to a legal entity
manifests itself in the form of infringement on the reputation, reduction or
loss of trust of society, clients and other persons to this legal entity (Chang,
2000). At the same time, it should be claried that moral harm is expressed
not only in the consequences, but also in feelings about the possibility of
their occurrence.
Let us also cite the position of V.V. Khatuayeva, who proposes to use
the institution of compensation for moral harm as a criminal procedural
remedy (Khatuaeva, 2000). Justifying the consistency and viability of this
proposal, we note that the draft Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian
Federation contained a provision that was literally stated in the following
edition: “A victim may be a legal entity that has suered moral or material
harm by a crime” (Clause 11, Art. 49 of the Draft Code of Criminal Procedure
of the Russian Federation).
885
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 875-888
In this case, it was assumed that the rights and obligations of the victim
were exercised by a representative of the legal entity. However, when
accepting the nal version of the criminal procedure law, the legislator
preferred another, known to us, formulation – harm to the business
reputation of a legal entity.
In the course of preparing this study, a sociological survey was conducted
in order to obtain data on the issue of dierences in the understanding
of such terms as “moral harm” and “harm to business reputation”. In
particular, 76.8% of the respondents answered positively to the question
that these terms should be considered as equivalent concepts.
It is logical to substantiate these results with arguments, the essence of
which boils down to the fact that an ocial in whose proceedings a criminal
case on the fact of inicting “moral harm” and “harm to business reputation”,
sees as his goal to ensure real compensation, while understanding the legal
nature of these terms.
Speaking about a unied approach to the meaning of the terms under
consideration, the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the
Republic of Uzbekistan can be cited as a positive example, in Art. 54 of
which it is indicated that moral, physical or property harm can be caused to
both an individual and a legal entity.
In this regard, it should be noted and the Criminal Procedure Code of the
Republic of Belarus, where the legal denition of moral harm is set out in
Paragraph 5 of Art. 460, wherein moral harm means causing not only moral
or physical suering to individuals, but also damage to business reputation
(we assume both a legal entity and an individual).
Thus, the above circumstances and their justication allow us to
formulate the author’s vision and proof of the conclusion about business
reputation as an integral element of moral harm. At the same time, these
arguments allow us to express the idea of the need to unify the understanding
of the essence of moral harm, the possibility of including harm to business
reputation in its content, as well as a unied approach to the procedure for
its compensation in the event of a criminal oense.
Speaking about the modern judicial practice of compensation for moral
harm, you can refer to the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court
of the Russian Federation dated February 24, 2005 No. 3 “On judicial
practice in cases of protecting the honor and dignity of citizens, as well
as the business reputation of citizens and legal entities”, which says that
the dissemination of information discrediting the honor and dignity of
citizens or the business reputation of citizens and legal entities should be
understood as the publication of such information in the press, broadcast
on radio and television, demonstration in newsreel programs and other
media, distribution on the Internet.
886
Vo Kim Dung, Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov, Igor Alekseevich Antonov, Ekaterina Yuryevna
Manokhina, Alexander Ivanovich Gaevoy y Valeriia Valerievna Artemova
Material and intangible values subject to compensation to a victim of crime in criminal
proceedings of the Russian Federation and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
The above described legislative constructs and theoretical views allow
us to summarize that business reputation and moral harm are the same
in their essence and content, and when compensating for harm caused to
business reputation, the rules on compensation for moral harm are applied.
Conclusions
In conclusion, we believe it expedient to formulate the following
conclusions regarding the issues of compensation (compensation) of
material and intangible benets that have been negatively aected because
of a committed criminal act and are subject to compensation in the
framework of criminal proceedings.
It is proposed to supplement Art. 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
of the Russian Federation with clause 132 of the following content: “132)
property damage - damage caused directly to the property of a person in the
form of its loss, damage or destruction, as well as property rights, including
the right to claim, subject to compensation to the person who made a claim
about it in the procedure established by this Code”.
Through the analysis of legislative structures and the study of theoretical
views the authors have summarized the conclusion that harm to business
reputation and moral harm are the same in their essence and content, and
when compensating for harm caused to business reputation, the rules on
compensation for moral harm are applied.
Bibliographical References7
ABDRAKHMANOV, Murat Khasenovich. 2008. “Damage to property and
business reputation as a basis for recognizing a legal entity as a victim in
a criminal case” In: Bulletin of Omsk University, Series «Right», Vol. 1,
No. 14, pp. 207-211.
AFANASYEVA, I.V; BELOVA, D.A. 2002. “Compensation for moral damage to
a legal entity”. In: Lawyer. No. 8, pp. 33-37.
BARINOVA, I.S., ANTONOVA, E.YU. 2015. “Victim of a crime in criminal legal
relations” In: Bulletin of the Khabarovsk State Academy of Economics
and Law. Vol. 2, No. 76, pp. 132-136.
7 In some cases, only the initial of the name of the cited authors is included because it appears in the
original source, and it was not possible to locate their full name.
887
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 875-888
BEZLEPKIN, B.T. 1998. The criminal process of Russia. General part and pre-
trial stages (course of lectures). International University of Business and
Management. Moscow, Russia.
BRUSNITSYN, L.V. 1995. “Victim: criminal procedural aspects”. In: State and
Law, No. 9, pp. 70-75.
CHANG, Chan Huu. 2000. Victim in Vietnamese Criminology - Some
Theoretical and Practical Issues: Monograph. Hanoi, Vietnan.
GRINENKO, A.V. 2008. “Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights
and Russian criminal procedure legislation”. In: International criminal
law and international justice. No. 2, pp. 14-16.
GUREEV, P.P. 1964. Protection of personal and property rights. Nauka.
Moscow, Russia.
IVANOV, Dmitriy Aleksandrovich, TRISHKINA, Ekaterina Alekseevna,
SKACHKO, Anna Vladilenovna, BLINOVA, Elena Vladimirovna,
LARINA, Irina Valerievna. 2021. “Compensation for physical damage
caused by a crime in the Russian Federation” In: Laplage em Revista.
Vol. 7, No. Extra-D, pp. 273-278.
KALINOVSKY, Konstantin Borisovich. 2016. “Compensation to the victim of
moral harm caused by a crime against property” In: Criminal Procedure.
Vol. 9, No. 141, pp. 28-29.
KHATUAEVA, V.V. 2000. Problems of compensation for moral damage in the
criminal process of Russia: author’s abstract. Dissertation. Volgograd,
Russia.
KLESHCHINA, E.N. 2010. Criminological doctrine of the victim of a crime and
the problems of its implementation in the legislation and the activities
of the internal aairs bodies: Author’s abstract. disssertatipon. Moscow,
Russia.
KOPIK, Maria Igorevna. 2014. Compensation for moral harm to victims of
terrorism: Dissertation. Volgograd, Russia.
KRAVTSOVA, Marina Aleksandrovna. 2015. “Moral principles of the
investigator’s activity in establishing moral harm caused by a crime” In:
Judicial power and criminal procedure. No. 4, pp. 118-122.
KRIVOSHCHEKOV, Nikolai Vitalievich. 2004. Moral harm established in the
course of criminal proceedings (at the stage of preliminary investigation):
author’s abstract. dissertation. Krasnoyarsk, Russia.
888
Vo Kim Dung, Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov, Igor Alekseevich Antonov, Ekaterina Yuryevna
Manokhina, Alexander Ivanovich Gaevoy y Valeriia Valerievna Artemova
Material and intangible values subject to compensation to a victim of crime in criminal
proceedings of the Russian Federation and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam
MASLENNIKOVA, L.N. 2004. Commentary on the Criminal Procedure Code of
the Russian Federation. Jurist. Moscow, Russia.
MIKHNO, E.D. 1998. Compensation for moral harm in non-contractual
obligations: Dissertation. Saint Petersburg, Russia.
NIKULIN, E.S. 1983. Compensation for damage caused by the oense.
Juridicheskaya literature. Moscow, Russia.
PUSHKAREV, Viktor Victorovich; POSELSKAYA, Lyudmila Nikolaevna;
SKACHKO, Anna Vladilenovna; TARASOV, Anatoly Vyacheslavovich;
MUTALIEVA, Leyla Sasikbekovna. 2021. “Criminal Prosecution of
Persons Who Have Committed Crimes in The Banking Sector” In:
Cuestiones Politicas. Vol. 39, No. 69, pp. 395-406.
PUSHKAREV, Viktor Victorovich; BOZIEV, Taulan Osmanovich; ESINA, Alla
Sergeevna; ZHAMKOVA, Olga Evgenievna; CHASOVNIKOVA, Olga
Georgievna. 2020. “Criminal prosecution for crimes committed in the
banking industry” In: Laplage em Revista. Vol. 6, No. ExtraC, pp. 244-
248.
SAMOILOVA, Zhanna Vlaimirovna. 2011. “Compensation of property damage
to the victim of a crime in Russian criminal proceedings” In: Bulletin of
the Orenburg State University. Vol. 3, No. 122, pp. 125-129.
SHVETSOV, V.I. 1999. Criminal Procedure Law. Jurist. Moscow, Russia.
SIDORENKO, Elina Leonidovna. 2011. “On the status of the victim in criminal
law” In: Journal of Russian law. Vol. 4, No. 172, pp. 82-86.
YAROVIKOVA, L.I. 2001. “Business reputation of a legal entity” In: Lawyer. No.
3, pp. 64-68.
ZAVIDOV, B.D., KURINA, A.V. 2002. “Legal status of the victim under the
Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation” In: Advocate, No.
8, pp. 26-30.
ZVEREVA, YU.N. 2015. Proving the nature and amount of harm caused by the
crime: Disssertation. Nizhny Novgorod, Russia.
www.luz.edu.ve
www.serbi.luz.edu.ve
www.produccioncienticaluz.org
Esta revista fue editada en formato digital y publicada
en enero de 2022, por el Fondo Editorial Serbiluz,
Universidad del Zulia. Maracaibo-Venezuela
Vol.40 Nº 72
