Intersectoral Assessment of Criminal Law Harm in the

Implementation of Law Enforcement Intelligence Operations

Alexey Alekseyevich Chistyakov

1,2,3 a

, Liudmila Aleksandrovna Bukalerova

, Alexandra

Sergeevna Vasilenko

and Oksana Vladimirovna Kurlaeva

Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), Moscow, Russian Federation

The State University of Management, Moscow, Russian Federation

Ryazan Branch of Moscow University Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia named after V. Ya. Kikot, Ryazan, Russian

Federation

Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), Moscow, Russian Federation

Enterprise Law group, Chicago, USA

Keywords: Criminal law, law enforcement intelligence operations, problems of law, science and practice, harm caused

in the course of law enforcement intelligence operations, criminal responsibility, criminal and legal

assessment of the harm caused in the course of socially useful activities, intersectoral regulation of institutions

of criminal law, criminal procedure and law enforcement intelligence operations, circumstances precluding

criminality of the act, law enforcement intelligence operations, criminal procedural possibilities of

intersectoral institutions.

Abstract: The article considers the problems of revealing the relationships that exist between criminal law and law

enforcement intelligence operations. These relationships are analyzed and established at both sectoral-legal

and sectoral-legislative levels. A key aspect of the study is the hypothesis on the possibility of consideration

of these relationships in terms of unity of assessment of the harm caused by illegal actions of persons engaged

in the law enforcement intelligence operations. The relevance of the selected topic of the study lies in the

active use of means of legislative codification in the implementation of evaluation processes aimed at

establishing the specifics of manifestation of assessment of those consequences that are a direct consequence

of the actions of officers and assistants, carrying out their activities under operational cover. Legislative

regulation does not bring the expected results, and therefore the article analyzes the possible causes of the

current condition. The analysis of basic scientific and legislative concepts reveals the main obstacles of

general theoretical, methodological and practical aspect, which affect the effectiveness of the circumstances

precluding criminality of the act, when assessing the harm in the implementation of law enforcement

intelligence operations. The aim of the study is to identify and demonstrate the presence of functional

relationships between two branches of law and legislation – criminal law and law enforcement intelligence

operations in relation to the criminal law assessment of the harm caused in the course of law enforcement

intelligence operations. The objectives of the study are to analyze the main elements of the mechanism of

interrelation of law enforcement legislation with criminal law, determine the main aspects of intersectoral

order between law enforcement legislation and criminal legislation, and establish the possibilities of

methodological aspect in determining intersectoral order between the categories in question.

1 INTRODUCTION

Considering the legislative possibilities of implemen

ting the principle "each branch needs its own sanction

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4266-2515

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2794-5074

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4029-8502

provision" invariably faces obstacles in the Russian

legislation created by long-standing legal traditions.

It seems that the simplest solution to this situation

would be legal structures that allow each branch using

its own levers of responsibility and sanction

294

Chistyakov, A., Bukalerova, L., Vasilenko, A. and Kurlaeva, O.

Intersectoral Assessment of Criminal Law Harm in the Implementation of Law Enforcement Intelligence Operations.

DOI: 10.5220/0010635700003152

In Proceedings of the VII International Scientiﬁc-Practical Conference “Criminal Law and Operative Search Activities: Problems of Legislation, Science and Practice” (CLOSA 2021), pages

294-299

ISBN: 978-989-758-532-6; ISSN: 2184-9854

 2021 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reser ved

mechanism based on the example of such branches of

law as civil, labor, criminal and administrative law.

Regarding the responsibility and sanction procedure

for implementing the effectiveness of any legal

branch, it would be useful to consider the mechanism

of criminal law regulation. It is the so-called second

type mechanism, the main distinguishing feature of

which is a certain step-by-step transition and

influence of one element, stage, on another. In this

case, the previous stage exerts the kind of impact, at

which the subsequent element appears, having new,

previously non-existent qualities. These deterministic

relationships can be observed in the development,

formation and legal regulation (Olga G. Tavstukha,

Alla A. Korzhanova, Alexey A. Chistyakov, Kirill A.

Chistyakov, Irina I. Shatskaya, Alexandra S.

Vasilenko, Lyudmila D. Starikova, Elena V. Maleko.

2018). Talking about such determinants and

mechanisms, both in social and jurisprudence aspects,

it is necessary to point out that these terms

(mechanism of criminal law regulation, mechanism

of perception of criminalistic reality, mechanism of

criminal procedural coverage of the territory,

mechanism of regional security, mechanism of

perception of emotional prohibitions, etc.) are used

quite often both when describing systems and when

analyzing elements of these systems. That is, in the

most general terms, mechanisms are understood as

devices, prefabricated structures, notional models and

dynamic social systems, the totality of elements of

which, interacting with each other, has some impact

on the elements and phenomena for the sake of

achieving a certain goal. (Aleksandra S. Vasilenko,

Vladimir M. Filippov, Maria A. Simonova, and

Sergey A. Kovalenko. 2020).

We have just attempted to express the notion of

mechanism through the category of dynamic system,

since any mechanism is ultimately a system of

involuntary elements.

Therefore, it is quite right to correlate the

mechanism as a phenomenon with the structure, the

ordered totality, the systematicity of a certain group

of elements.

Professor S.S. Alekseev pointed out this

circumstance in the work «Mechanism of legal

regulation in a socialist state». By the way, exactly

after the publication of this work, in Russian

jurisprudence there appeared many works devoted to

this topic (V.S. Prokhorov, N.M. Kropachev, A.N.

Tarbagayev, 1989).

Unfortunately, scientific criminal law studies in

recent decades quite rarely address the category of

legal mechanisms, but it is thought that the potential

of this scientific phenomenon, both in the institutional

and ontological sense, is not fully used. (V.N.

Protasov, 1995).

The aim of this study is the problem of the

presence of substantial functional relations between

the institutions of criminal law and law enforcement

intelligence operations. Intensive processes

characterize traditional methods and ways of

assessing and identifying these relations. It is

proposed to conduct research from the point of view

of extensiveness, namely, to consider the proposed

problem from the position of criminal law assessment

of harm caused in the course of legal law enforcement

intelligence operations.

The objectives of the study are as follows:

defining (outlining) the main features of the existing

problem of establishing determinant relations

between criminal law and law enforcement

intelligence operations, establishing the possibility of

using the criminal law assessment of the harm caused

in the course of law enforcement intelligence

operations as a link in the intersectoral relations

between criminal and law enforcement legislation.

2 MATERIALS AND METHODS

Materials used in this study:

 Works devoted to the problem of intersectoral

relations of functioning of the main elements of the

mechanism of legal regulation;

 Current scientific studies devoted to the

problem of criminal law assessment of harm caused

in the achievement of socially beneficial goals;

 Publications devoted to the problem of non-

criminalization of persons who willfully caused harm,

subject to criminal law assessment, during the

implementation of law enforcement intelligence

operations;

 Current scientific developments that analyze

the complex of social relations regulated by the set of

norms relating to various branches of legislation;

 Official statistical data of law enforcement and

judicial bodies of the Russian Federation, reflecting

the intensity of the application of criminal legislation

in terms of implementation in the non-criminalization

due to the lack of evidence of criminality of the ac;

 Criminal, law and intelligence legal acts

regulating the issues of judicial implementation in

terms of circumstances precluding criminality of the

act in the implementation of law enforcement

intelligence operations.

Research methods: logical-legal, formal-

legal, method of comparative analysis, as well as

Intersectoral Assessment of Criminal Law Harm in the Implementation of Law Enforcement Intelligence Operations

295

scientific modeling, complex method and

classification.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

When the term "regulation" is used, it usually refers

to some kind of organization, bringing into proper

order, a system, some kind of systematization. We

have already noted that any mechanism of regulation

is a certain system, the elements of which have some

impact either on the elements themselves, or on the

environment. That is the mechanism of influence

affects some elements, phenomena and

circumstances, regulating and ordering elements and

relations.

The above-mentioned mechanism of criminal law

regulation is a socio-legal unity of means and

methods of legal impact on social relations (S.S.

Alekseev, 1982). These elements of the mechanism

of criminal law regulation affecting social relations

are norms and relationships that turn after the legal

impact of criminal law norms into criminal law

relationships. Within the framework of these criminal

law relationships, a criminal responsibility arises. The

considered dynamic system of criminal law impact

represents an integral part of the overall mechanism

of legal regulation, which is derived from it. Due to

this circumstance we can assert for sure that at this

stage the social relationships arising in the

implementation of law enforcement intelligence

operations need criminal law regulation.

The needs of operational and service practice

determine the emergence of specific means and

methods of collecting information, decision-making,

detection and suppression of crime, and searching for

criminals. Due to the fact that these activities are

directly related to the suppression of crimes and

offenses in the early stages of criminal activity, then

it for sure needs criminal law regulation at these

stages. That is, the criminal law acts as a kind of

servicing mechanism, without the support of elements

of which law enforcement intelligence operations are

doomed to ineffectiveness or, even worse, doomed to

the commission of offenses.

Links and elements of the mechanism of criminal

law regulation function with a consistent phasing

(A.M. Pleshakov, G.S. Shkabin, 2020). With criminal

law impact, the subject of criminal law regulation is

not just social relations, but precisely those that bear

in their potential an extremely negative, dangerous,

threatening other social relations. This is the sense

that gives rise to the need for the emergence of

criminal law prohibitions under threat of punishment.

Subsequently, the sanction-responsible mechanism

begins to work with the violation of the criminal law

prohibition. However, on the other hand, criminal law

also carries incentives in its content. This is expressed

in the need to create a mechanism of criminal law

protection of persons carrying out law enforcement

intelligence operations and forced, for the sake of

achieving socially beneficial goals, to commit actions

that are considered as deeds involving the infliction

of socially dangerous consequences.

The mentioned mechanism of criminal law

protection, as well as the mechanism of sanction-

responsible order, is characterized by such a kind of

impact, which we usually call external or objective.

However, external manifestation and application

causes a subjective assessment of the impact of some

internal psychological attitude to this impact (A.M.

Pleshakov, G.S. Shkabin, 2020). In this regard, it

cannot be denied that the ultimate goal of ordering

social relations, which carry a threat to other links

within society, is the emergence of criminal

responsibility. And not in its usual retrospective

understanding, but responsibility as a duty to treat

properly the criminal law prohibitions.

That is, any system having characteristics of a

mechanism of criminal law regulation is

characterized by the presence of elements of both

social and legal properties. These elements either

experience the socio-legal impact of a set of means

and methods, or they themselves have an impact on

the socio-legal relations. Meanwhile, we should not

forget that social relations are not the only ones and

not so much a set of rights and legitimate interests,

but also activities that arise in relation to these rights

and interests, correlating with obligations. (L.A.

Bukalerova, A.V. Ostroushko, N.E. Rustamov,

2016).

These social relations act as social matter,

experiencing the means of legal impact – the criminal

law norm. That is, the rights and obligations in

criminal law relations are formed by the criminal law

norms. However, these relations have in their content

some actions, activities. This is the object of criminal

law relation that is tied to the activity of subjects. And

this activity can act as a scientific phenomenon

researched by us – law enforcement intelligence

operations. (A.M. Pleshakov, Shkabin. 2018). In this

regard, another aspect of the relationship between

criminal law and law enforcement intelligence

operations is manifested – in the part of criminal law

relations, the material content may be law

enforcement intelligence operations, and the legal

form – criminal law norms. Such kind of criminal law

CLOSA 2021 - VII INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC-PRACTICAL CONFERENCE “CRIMINAL LAW AND OPERATIVE SEARCH

ACTIVITIES: PROBLEMS OF LEGISLATION, SCIENCE AND PRACTICE”

296

relations can be called intelligence criminal law

relations.

Thus, the term mechanism is also understood as a

certain way of functioning of social relations; the

system of means of direct impact of legal regulation

is a system of legal means, producing an effective

legal impact on social relations (S.A. Komarov,

1994).

Consequently, the responsibility and sanction part

of the mechanism of legal regulation of any branch is

located in the legal norm, without affecting the

general methodological postulates and requirements

relating to the subject and methods of legal

regulation, because the norm accepts indicating both

the range of social relations, which will be subjected

to legal impact, and those methods of impact that will

be applied.

The general theory of law does not deny the

postulate that a number of law branches has service-

supporting functions. The proof is the fact that in a

number of branches of Russian law (for example,

transport, environment, labor, forestry, land, tax,

etc.), there are no separate norms with a sanction

mechanism, because these functions are implemented

by criminal and administrative law. At the same time,

Tax and Labor Codes have provisions stipulating tax

liability, on the one hand, and the administrative and

criminal law have norms providing for sanctions

serving the main tort cases of tax aspect, on the other

hand. A similar picture is observed not only in some

branches of Russian legislation, but also in some

branches of Muslim law (L.V. Bertovskii, A.K.

Manna, M.Ya. Murkshtis, N.A. Selezneva, M.A.

Ignatova, 2017).

Thus, in the science of criminal law, there is a

problem of determining the scope and limits that are

necessary for law enforcement intelligence

operations. On the one hand, determining the scope

of criminal responsibility for illegal actions or illegal

law enforcement intelligence operations. On the other

hand, determining the scope of recognition of harm

during the implementation of law enforcement

intelligence operations, that is, as lawful ones.

Due to the bipolarity of harm assessment, the

intersectoral nature of the implementation of legal

regulation, the presence of relations between criminal

law and law enforcement intelligence operations as a

complex inter-legislative problem, its development

would be required within the framework of the

promotion of the scientific concept of "Theoretical

foundations of criminal law jurisdiction in law

enforcement intelligence operations".

Whether to choose the intensive or extensive way

of developing this concept is a question of the near

future. It should be noted that many years of intensive

research on this problem have brought some scientific

results, but they have not led to a legislative solution

of the problem. (L.V. Bertovskii, S.M. Kurbatova,

2020).

Intensive developments are being conducted in

the direction of methodological support for

interdisciplinary and intersectoral developments.

There is no denying that this kind of research is

undoubtedly in great demand, having obvious

scientific attractiveness. From a scientific point of

view, discovery is made precisely at the junction of

sciences and branches of cognition.

However, representatives of both sides (Natalia

A. Orekhovskaya, Alexey A. Chistyakov, Nina I.

Kryukova, Julia A. Krokhina, Yuri V. Ospennikov

and Elena V. Makarova. 2019) most often criticize

interdisciplinary researches. Often, both studies that

have already been conducted and those that are yet to

be conducted are declared unacceptable. This kind of

opposition and rejection can be explained both

psychologically and methodologically.

From the psychological point of view, fear is

aroused by everything new, previously unknown, and

unconventional. It is perceived as hostile. (S.S.

Oganesyan, S.K. Shamsunov, 2018). In this sense,

interdisciplinary researches are perceived with

greater difficulty.

Methodological assessment of interdisciplinary

works is often reduced to a negative assessment of the

methodology used by the author. In this case,

opponents often point to the disadvantages of using

the new methodology instead of its positive aspects

(L.V. Bertovskii, P.A. Lutcenko, I.V. Maslov, V.A.

Sinitsyn, A.A. Nichiporenko, 2020). Because of this,

the proposed complex problem begins to be

considered not as a single whole, but as two parts of

a single problem. While one part begins to be opposed

to the other part, and both parts to the whole.

The problem of identifying and establishing

relations between criminal and law enforcement

legislation belongs to this kind of problems. It seems

that the connection between these two branches is

quite tangible and obvious. The following arguments

can be raised in favor of this thesis:

 First, materials identifying and exposing the

subjects involved in the commission of crimes, are

carried out by means of law enforcement intelligence

operations as well. Of course, the evidence obtained

operationally, is not a source of evidence.

Nevertheless, law enforcement intelligence

operations carried out properly lead to the exposure

of the perpetrators.

Intersectoral Assessment of Criminal Law Harm in the Implementation of Law Enforcement Intelligence Operations

297

 Second, those persons who carry out law

enforcement intelligence operations are protected by

norms of criminal law, and those who cause harm in

the course of law enforcement intelligence operations

are held criminally liable.

 Third, persons carrying out law enforcement

intelligence operations without special powers are

held criminally liable.

 Fourth, when carrying out law enforcement

intelligence operations, the subject of such operations

can cause harm to the rights, freedoms and legally

protected interests of institutions, organizations and

individuals in circumstances that exclude the

criminality of his act. Harm is considered as non-

criminal, but it is the criminal law that determines its

non-criminal nature.

 Finally, fifth point stating that the mere

existence of a criminal law carries out general

prevention, and this is of particular importance for the

law enforcement intelligence operations. Planning

law enforcement intelligence operations

is often

made on the basis of the potential to prevent criminal

behavior. For example, using law enforcement

intelligence means and methods, it is possible to

establish and expose various systems and schemes of

fraudulent actions (L. Bertovskii, E. Petuchov, L.

Suhanova, 2019). This is especially relevant to the

budgetary sphere; therefore, the role of criminal law

and law enforcement intelligence prevention lies in

the fact that the measures of law enforcement

intelligence operations are aimed at preventing the

commission of crimes. And the purpose of criminal

law is to achieve non-criminal behavior. That is, in

this case, the purposes of law enforcement

intelligence operations and the criminal law coincide

with each other.

The above circumstances are clearly manifested in

the implementation of law enforcement intelligence

measures, judged by the courts as either quite

legitimate, or as a provocation-criminal.

the introduction into the text of the criminal code

of the russian federation (1996) of norms not

previously known to russian criminal law

surely

opens up the broadest prospects for the study of new

criminal law institutions.

but we have not witnessed

a relatively large number of works devoted to a

completely new topic. to a greater or lesser extent,

this applies to the criminal law assessment of such a

phenomenon as crime provocation.

the presence in the current code of articles

regulating the issues of punishment for provocation

of bribery or commercial bribery (article 304 of the

criminal code of the russian federation)

does not fully

solve this problem for a number of the following

circumstances. firstly, should the introduction of the

mentioned norm be considered only as a special case

of falsification of results of law enforcement

intelligence operations, or is it a knowingly false

accusation, which in this case is combined with

falsification of prosecution evidence? secondly, it is

not quite clear why we are talking about criminal

responsibility only for provocation of bribery or

commercial bribery? thirdly, the relationship between

provocation and incitement to commit a crime is not

quite clear. finally, in these situations, the further fate

of the provoked person is not clear: whether he/she

will be released from criminal responsibility; whether

the criminal responsibility will be mitigated against

him/her; what should be done by the criminal justice

further, if the crime committed by the provoked

person

is the sole consequence of the actions of the

provocateur;

to what limits does the operation

experiment and similar measures extend; is it

permissible for law enforcement officer not to prevent

the forthcoming crime, but to wait for its beginning to

obtain tangible evidence; when this will allow

applying proper means of state-legal coercion to the

guilty person, etc.

These circumstances are quite correlated with

general theoretical criminal law researches and are

generally approved by representatives of the law

enforcement intelligence science. In this case,

consideration of this problem as certain artificially

integrated problem does not give effective results

and, first of all, it affects the quality of law

enforcement intelligence operations.

Recently we have managed to overcome a certain

negative perception of stimulation of obtaining

results of law enforcement intelligence operations by

means of criminal law, as well as by application of

norms on extreme necessity in the process of

implementation of law enforcement intelligence

operations. We have attempted to assess the harm

caused in the course of law enforcement intelligence

operations by means of criminal law exactly in order

to identify additional arguments in support of the

specified scientific position.

4 CONCLUSIONS

Thus, the relationship between criminal law and law

enforcement intelligence operations can be traced in

the issues of criminal law regulation of law

enforcement intelligence operations, despite the fact

that they violate a number of constitutional rights and

freedoms of human and citizen, are implemented on

the basis of and within the framework of the federal

CLOSA 2021 - VII INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC-PRACTICAL CONFERENCE “CRIMINAL LAW AND OPERATIVE SEARCH

ACTIVITIES: PROBLEMS OF LEGISLATION, SCIENCE AND PRACTICE”

298

legislation on law enforcement intelligence

operations and other bylaws, and therefore

recognized as lawful from the perspective of criminal

law.

In addition, we should not forget that causing

harm in the course of law enforcement intelligence

operations may be inflicted within the criminal law

institute of reasonable risk, and this also excludes

criminality of an act. In this case, this issue is

regulated by norms of criminal law.

Obviously, risk is never considered reasonable if

it knowingly involves a threat to the lives of many

people. And all of these circumstances relate to

criminal law. At the same time, the theory of law

enforcement intelligence operations

recognizes the

fact that such operations are associated with increased

risk, and therefore a concept of operational risk,

which clearly demonstrates the connection of law

enforcement intelligence operations with the criminal

law, has been developed.

Consequently, any type of law enforcement

intelligence operations

that cause harm must be

considered either from the perspective of

administrative law or criminal law.

REFERENCES

Alekseev, S. S., 1982. General Theory of Law: in 2

volumes. 2. p. 24.

Bertovskii, L., Petuchov, E., Suhanova, L., 2019. Legal

support of the participation of foreign lawyers in the

criminal proceedings of Russia and Kazakhstan as

border regions Advances in Social Science, Education

and Humanities Research. International Conference on

Sustainable Development of Cross-Border Regions:

Economic, Social and Security Challenges (ICSDCBR

2019). 364. pp.463-468.

Bertovskii, L.V., Kurbatova, S. M., 2020. Protecting the

Rights of Persons With Disabilities as a Constitutional

Value Proceedings of the XIV European-Asian "The

value of law" (EAC-LAW 2020) Series:Advances in

Social Science, Education and Humanities Research.

Bertovskii, L.V., Lutcenko, P. A., Maslov, I. V., Sinitsyn,

V. A., Nichiporenko, A. A., 2020. Comparative

analysis of anglo-american and continental models of

judicial investigation involving the jury. In Revista

Genero & Direito. 9(5). pp. 523-545.

Bertovskii, L. V., Manna, A.

K., Murkshtis, M. Ya.,

Selezneva, N.A., Ignatova, M. A., 2017. Adultery and

Rape in the Muslim Criminal Law. In Comparative Law

Analysis Journal of Advanced Research in Law and

Economics, 8(1): JARLE Volume VIII Issue. 1(23).

Bukalerova, L. A., Ostroushko, A.V., Rustamov, N. E.,

2016. Determinants of murders motivated by political,

ideological, racial, national or religious hatred or

enmity, or motivated by hatred or enmity towards a

social group. In All-Russian Journal of Criminology.

10(1). pp.40-49.

Komarov, S. A., 1994. General Theory of State and Law:

Course of lectures. In Mordovian University Press. pp.

286 – 287.

Oganesyan, S. S., Shamsunov, S. K., 2018. Civilization

mentality and environmental problems. In Ecology. 27

(106). pp. 1639–1644.

Orekhovskaya, N. A., Chistyakov, A. A., Kryukova, N. I.,

Krokhina, J. A., Ospennikov, Yu. V., Makarova, E.V.,

2019. Orthodoxy and modernity their contact facets in

russian societ. In European Journal of Science and

Theology. 15(2). pp. 67-77.

Pleshakov, A. M., Shkabin, G. S., 2020. Аnimals as crime

victims. In Journal of Gender and Law. 1(1). pp. 419-

428.

Pleshakov, A. M., Shkabin, G. S.,2020. Мethodology of

the initial stage of the preparation of the master's thesis

on criminal law. Theory and Practice of Project

Management in Education: Horizons and Risks.

International Scientific and Practical Conference.

p. 2011.

Pleshakov, A. M., Shkabin, G. S. Animal sacrifice as a form

of zoological violence. In Contemporary Dilemmas-

Political Education and Values.

Prokhorov, V. S., Kropachev, N. M., Tarbagayev, A. N.,

1989. Mechanism of criminal law regulations. p. 4.

Protasov, V. N., 1995. What and how the law regulates: A

textbook. p. 64.

Tavstukha, O. G., Korzhanova, A. A., Chistyakov, A. A.,

Chistyakov, K. A., Shatskaya, I. I., Vasilenko, A. S.,

Starikova, L. D., Maleko, E. V., 2018. Personality

Ecological Consciousness: Values Ethical Vector of

Nature Safety Sustainable Development. In Ecology. 27

(106). pp. 1355 – 1364.

Vasilenko, A. S., Filippov, V. M., Simonova, M. A.,

Kovalenko, S. A., 2020. Probabilistic Model of

Implementing Mediation into Russia’s Criminal

Procedure in the Conditions of Society’s Digital

Transformation. Conference materials: Scientific and

Technical Revolution: Yesterday, Today and

Tomorrow. In Lecture Notes in Networks and System.

129. pp. 1286–1293.

Intersectoral Assessment of Criminal Law Harm in the Implementation of Law Enforcement Intelligence Operations

299