Russian BriberyEssay Preview: Russian BriberyReport this essayAccording to the article found in the Russian newspaper Pravda, Average Bribe in Russia Grows up to $135,000 vs. $23,000 in 2001, deputy chairman of the Credit Organization Administration with the Russian Federal Fiscal Service, Oleg Alekseyev, received a bribe amounting to a million dollar cash. Police found three cases in his office with another million dollars of bribes. According to the authorities, Alekseyev was asking bribes even if he did not promise to solve the problems of a credit organization completely. The sum of the claims estimated to the amount of $50-60 million.
According to Anton Belyakov, the chairman of the Russian Anti-Corruption Committee, bribes in Russia may vary. A police officer, for example, can get a $100 and a governor can receive a bribe of approximately $20 million. It can be received in cash or bank transfers. Officials are bribed with an apartment, a car, expensive furniture, or a trip abroad. However, cash is most secure form of bribe because it can not be traced. The article explains that the average amount of bribes on the business market of Russia now is about $243,700 a year, and in 2001 it was only $23,000. The Russian market of bribes is estimated at approximately $316 billion a year.
Also, according to this article, Iceland, Finland, New Zealand and Denmark were listed at the states with the minimum of corruption in official circles. Russia took the 126th place among 159 countries on the list sharing the place with Albania, Niger and Sierra-Leone. Finally, “Corruption is like an insurance technique, which businessmen have to pay for their security.”
Through the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended in 1988, payment of bribes abroad by U.S. businesspersons has become a crime subject to imprisonment, fines, or both. Under the influence of the Act, corruption in world markets has become an important legal issue for U.S. companies doing business abroad. Crime has become one of the most frequently cited concerns of foreign (and Russian) businesses, particularly those involved with large amounts of cash and goods. Organized crime is not new to Russia, and the past decade has seen an increase in the range and frequency of criminal activity. Furthermore, according to the article, the amount of bribery has increased drastically in the past years. When U.S. firms enter the Russian market, they identify corruption as a persistent problem, both in number of instances and in the
The Trafficking in Persons Act
A number of bills with the added intent of bringing penalties for bribery and human trafficking in 2012 and 2013, as well as similar provisions in law and in practice to ensure that the penalties and punishments are not imposed against individuals (from the “Treatment for Trafficking in Persons of Persons of the United States” Act of 2002 to the Trafficking in Persons of Persons Tax Relief Act of 2003, the Human Trafficking in Persons Tax Relief and Human Trafficking Victims’ Compensation Act of 2003, and the Trafficking Victims’ Compensation Statute of 2002) continue to come into force.
U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross recently announced his intention to close the existing Silk Road International trade blockade on December 5, 2013.
Bribery as a Crime
A number of statutes, regulations, and regulations that protect, defend, or prosecute financial crime or bribery (including section 8(1) of the Federal Reserve Act), in addition to various civil and criminal statutes for a variety of other crimes has been implemented since the late 19th century. However, there have been several significant changes that may make the provision less effective and has more to do with the legal system, rather than with legal priorities.
The first major alteration concerns foreign investment income that is directed to criminal conduct (defined as acts that result in the arrest of an alien and, for example, a person with criminal records), and is more likely to result in imprisonment during the first three quarters of each year, and later may also lead to deportation under current policy.
The second major change focused on the definition of conduct that includes:
The conduct that is unlawful in general public purpose and in the public interest. The terms “criminal activity” and “facility of conduct,” as well as “crime that is committed in the course of the transaction,” which apply in some circumstances to the activities in question, when dealing with the use, or solicitation of, an alien for the commission of any violation of the U.S. embargo on drugs and/or arms of any country. These three criteria often form part of common concepts with international customary law.
The regulations under the Federal Reserve Act (under Part I, section 26) provide a framework for the interpretation of “conduct” for purposes of the act and for criminal convictions. They include the definition of “facilitated financial transactions,” which states that the activities are “prohibited by the law or regulation.” The first major change concerned illegal conduct. Under the Federal Reserve Act, a foreign corporation may not be prosecuted for the failure to comply with the applicable U.S. statute, regulation, or regulation. Instead, it may be prosecuted for facilitating or facilitating the provision of money and securities to or through a local government entity.
Section 11 and the Dodd-Frank legislation provide for the enforcement of the U.S. national financial system by governments that have violated the regulations by providing loans to foreign banks. Section 7 of the Dodd-Frank Act also provides that “the amount or amounts paid or permitted under that Act, its regulations and policies or practices,” as well as any payments paid to individual taxpayers pursuant to the financial-system regulations, “shall be in full or in part the sum of funds, any contribution to or receipt by the government of any foreign capital