Judge’s Responsibility for Violations of Anti-Corruption Legislation: Problems of Legal Regulation and Law Enforcement

 Corruption in the judicial environment creates serious threats to the rule of law, justice and the rule of law, diminishes the authority of the judiciary, causing distrust of the court and the judicial system as a whole. Therefore, violation of anti-corruption requirements (duties, prohibitions and restrictions established by the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Status of Judges in the Russian Federation” and the Federal Law “On Combating Corruption”) should imply increased responsibility of the judge. At the same time, the principles of independence, irremovability and inviolability of judges require that legislation on their responsibility meets the criteria of legal certainty and consistency, and the application of sanctions is carried out within the framework of a fair public independent trial and is based on the principles of individualization of punishment, proportionality of liability measures to the severity and consequences of the offense committed. According to the author of the article, the legislation on the responsibility of judges for corruption offenses, as well as the practice of its application, do not fully meet these requirements.

The analysis of the legal nature of judges’ liability for violation of anti-corruption legislation was carried out by the author in order to substantiate the need to establish appropriate procedures in legislation for its application for various types of corruption violations, as well as to consolidate the guarantees provided to judges held accountable. Research objectives: to identify the problems of legislative regulation of judges’ liability for corruption offenses that are not crimes; based on the practice of the qualification boards of judges, demonstrate the problems of applying anti-corruption legislation; formulate proposals aimed at solving these problems.

The main research method was the general scientific dialectical method of cognition, in which universal scientific methods were used: analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, formal logical and systemic. Comparative legal, formal legal methods, the method of legal modeling, etc. are used as private scientific methods.

The result of the research is the proposals made by the author, the implementation of which will improve the effectiveness of procedures for holding judges accountable for violations of anti-corruption legislation, ensure fairness and predictability of decisions made against judges and, ultimately, will guarantee judicial independence.