Legislative Shift: Proposed Transfer of Investigatory Powers Over Debt Collection Crimes to the FSSP

A new legislative initiative introduced to the State Duma proposes a significant shift in the procedural framework for investigating illegal debt collection practices. The bill seeks to amend Article 151 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, effectively transferring the authority to conduct inquiries into crimes defined under Article 172.4 of the Criminal Code (Illegal Debt Collection Activity) from the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD) to the Federal Bailiff Service (FSSP).

Procedural Logic and Jurisdictional Alignment

Currently, a fragmented jurisdictional split exists: while the MVD holds sole authority for criminal inquiries under Article 172.4 CC RF, the FSSP is tasked with administrative proceedings under Article 14.57 of the Administrative Offenses Code (KoAP). From a legal-operational perspective, this creates an inefficient duality. In many instances, the FSSP’s administrative investigations provide the foundational evidence and establish the essential elements of the crime, which are then handed over to the MVD to initiate formal criminal proceedings.

By consolidating both administrative and preliminary criminal investigative powers within the FSSP, the government aims to streamline the evidentiary chain. The logic is clear: the entity that identifies the violation and gathers the initial evidence should be the same entity empowered to bring the case to a criminal prosecution stage.

Empirical Justification

The empirical data supporting this transfer underscores the FSSP's capacity to handle such caseloads. Between 2024 and 2025, the Service conducted 16,237 investigations, issued 7,364 protocols, and imposed fines totaling nearly 590 million rubles. Furthermore, the agency performed 714 oversight audits and 22,108 preventative measures. This extensive operational record suggests that the FSSP possesses the necessary institutional expertise to manage the transition to criminal inquiry without a degradation in the quality of investigations.

Resource Allocation and Systemic Impact

From a fiscal and administrative standpoint, the government asserts that this transition will not require an increase in the FSSP's personnel headcount. Costs associated with court-appointed defense counsel are expected to be absorbed by the existing "Justice" state program, necessitating no additional budgetary appropriations.

For the Ministry of Internal Affairs, this divestment of specific investigatory duties is framed as a strategic optimization. By removing the burden of debt collection inquiries, MVD personnel can redirect resources toward more complex criminal cases, potentially increasing the overall efficiency of the national law enforcement apparatus.

Conclusion

Should Bill № 1327108-8 be enacted, it will represent a pragmatic shift toward specialized enforcement. By aligning administrative oversight with criminal investigative powers, the state is moving toward a more integrated model of regulation for the debt collection industry, likely resulting in a more seamless transition from detection to prosecution.