For many centuries, theft of state property has been considered one of the most common illegal acts committed in society.
The subjective side of state theft is always characterized by selfish goals and direct intent. The person who committed this offense can be both a sane person who has reached the age of 14, and official representatives of legal entities.
The subject of this theft is state property. The objectivity of state theft consists in the secret theft of any state property.
Are government thefts committed secretly or openly?
Theft of state property is considered secret if:
- the theft was committed during the absence of the owner;
- the theft was committed at the time of the presence of the owner (in this case, an official representative of the state), but it was carried out in a manner imperceptible to him.
According to statistics, most often government thefts are committed in an imperceptible way for government officials.
In judicial practice, the resolution of the issue of determining the moment of completion of state theft often raises a large number of unclear points. It depends on a number of very different circumstances, such as: the place and specific situation in which state theft was committed, the nature and value of the stolen state property, and the perpetrator's motives regarding the further fate of the illegal seized state property. Often, there are situations when state theft only begins in secret.
When deciding the question of whether the theft was secret or overt, one should proceed from two main criteria: subjective and objective.
Objective and subjective criterion of state theft
An objective criterion indicates whether the official representatives of the state are aware of this theft. The subjective criterion characterizes the mental attitude of the perpetrator of a given theft to the chosen method of committing the theft, the understanding of whether he acts openly or secretly.
When is a government theft complete?
A government theft is considered complete when it can be considered complete. In this case, it becomes quite obvious that the perpetrator seized state property and illegally got the opportunity to dispose of it at his own discretion.
Who suffers from government thefts?
The consequences of the theft of the state become absolutely obvious both for official representatives of the state and for all citizens living in this state. This is not surprising, because in most cases, it is state thefts that hurt not only the state budget, but also the welfare of every citizen of the country in respect of which such a theft was committed.
