Problems of the Criminal Law Protection of Critical Information Infrastructure of the Russian Federation

Abstract

The article discusses the problems of improving criminal law norms regulating liability for unlawful impact on critical information infrastructure of the Russian Federation. The urgency of the research topic is connected with a growing number of such crimes and the recent adoption of Art. 274.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. According to statistics, the number of attacks against critical information infrastructure is extremely high, however, a considerably smaller number of incidents are registered as crimes. One of the reasons behind this situation is the inadequacy of Art. 274.1 of the CC of the RF. The author draws attention to the fact that Part 1 of Art. 274.1 of the CC of the RF does not meet the criteria for criminalization, and its legal construction hinders the effective work of investigation and court bodies’ employees. As a result, this widespread publicly dangerous act is not duly reflected in judicial and investigation practice. At the same time, the current Art. 273 of the CC of the RF has considerable potential for including unlawful creation, dissemination and (or) use of any computer software in relation to critical information infrastructure or information contained in it. The author notes that the concept used in the current edition of Art. 274.1 of the CC of the RF «harm to the critical information infrastructure of the Russian Federation» is non-specific, and leads to delays, mistakes and confusion in legal practice. The article proves that Parts 2 and 3 of Art. 274.1 of the CC of the RF could ensure better liaison with other legal acts if their dispositions included the categories «computer attack» and «computer incident». The introduction of the above-mentioned attributes could also contribute to the consistency of court practice and the elimination of ambiguous interpretations. The analysis of the subjective side of crimes under Art. 274.1 of the CC of the RF allowed the author to conclude that mercenary motivation and the goal of concealing or aiding another crime should be viewed as qualifying features. To prove this position, the author points out that these features are wide-spread and used for the construction of corpus delicti of other crimes, and also cites the opinions of legal scholars.