MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 85-104 , October 2017 
 
 
Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the 
Republic of Belarus: Legal Analysis 
 
PAVEL SASCHEKO 1 
 
Abstract Counterfeiting of medicines constitutes as a threat to public 
health, which nowadays has a “pandemic character”. In this regard, 
the legislation of the Republic of Belarus should properly address the 
risks caused by counterfeited medicines. Being a member of several 
economic alliances aimed at simplifying turnover of goods, including 
medical products, Belarus needs to develop comprehensive 
preventive measures and provide effective and proportionate criminal 
and other sanctions for the commission of acts connected with 
counterfeiting of medicines. This article focuses on key factors which 
impact the development of Belarusian legislation. The main obstacles 
for effective international cooperation in criminal matters concerning 
turnover of counterfeit medicines are also explored. Amendments to 
legislation aimed at improving the effectiveness of combating 
counterfeiting of medicines will also be discussed. 
 
Keywords: • medicine • counterfeiting of medicines • crime • 
criminal liability • administrative liability • Belarus 
                                                         
CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS: Pavel Sascheko, Ph.D, Scientific Center of the Prosecutor 
General’s Office of the Republic of Belarus, 76 Zakharova str., 220088 Minsk, Belarus, 
e-mail: pavel_sascheko@mail.ru. 
 
https://doi.org/10.18690/2463-7955.10.2.85-104.2017 ISSN 2463-7955 
© 2017 University of Maribor Press 
Available at http://journals.um.si/index.php/medicine. 
86 MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
 
1 Introduction 
 
Article 45 of The Constitution of the Republic of Belarus1 guarantees the right of 
the citizens to health care. Effectively combating the counterfeiting of medicines is 
one of the vital factors in which to ensure the realization of this constitutional right. 
Therefore, the state should develop a legal framework which is aimed at the 
protection of people from the appearance of counterfeit medicines on the Belarusian 
market of medical products. The principal legal act in the field of turnover of 
medicines is the Law of the Republic of Belarus of 20 July 2006 “On medicines”.2 
Other regulations have been adopted as well. One example is the Resolution of the 
Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus of 22 December 2009 No 1677, 
which prescribes the procedure for the withdrawal of counterfeit medicines from 
turnover and their destruction.3  
 
It should be noted that the development of relevant legislation in Belarus is 
influenced by its participation in several international alliances: the Eurasian 
Economic Union (the EEU), the Commonwealth of Independent States (the CIS), 
and the Union State of Belarus and Russia. As a result of their activities, the 
harmonization of civil, criminal, administrative and other legislation is taking place. 
 
For example, in accordance with the Treaty on the EEU,4 the common market of 
medical products was established on 1 January 2016 based on the principles of 
harmonization of legislations of member states and the application of unified rules 
for evaluation of quality, effectiveness, and safety of medicines (article 100). 
Various legal acts were adopted with a view to enable proper functioning of the 
common market, including simplification of trade and distribution of medicines. 
For example, under Clause 7 of Article 7 of the Agreement on Common Principles 
and Rules of Turnover of Medicines within the EEU, the member states 
recognizethe registration of medicines, the results of pre-clinical, clinical and other 
examinations of medicines, and the results of manufacturing inspections which have 
been conducted in another member state5.  
 
As a member of the Union State with Russia, Belarus has no border with the Russian 
Federation, so counterfeit medical products from Russia have virtually no obstacle 
in the course of their import into Belarusian territory, and vice versa. Common 
measures need to be addressed in order to solve this problem. However, this process 
can be complicated in part because Belarus and Russia sometimes take different 
measures in the way they fight against falsification of medicines. For example, 
Russia has signed the Council of Europe Convention on the Counterfeiting of 
Medical Products and Similar Crimes involving Threats to the Public Health 
adopted on 28 November 2011 (the Medicrime Convention),6 while Belarus has not. 
 
However in recent years some legal issues of turnover of medicines in Belarus have 
been a subject of scientific research (Reutskaja, 2016; Rocheva, 2014; Rocheva, 
MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
87 
 
2016; Sherjakov, 2009), but the legal dimensions of fighting against counterfeiting 
of medicines has not been examined. Having in mind the legal issues mentioned 
above, practical need and almost complete absence of the relevant studies, issues 
regarding legal measures for prevention and combating counterfeiting of medicines 
and international cooperation in criminal matters merits examination. This article is 
aimed at a comprehensive overview of Belarusian legal regulation aimed at 
combating counterfeiting of medicines. The article is divided into three section. In 
the first section, preventive measures provided for by domestic legislation and 
international treaties of Belarus are examined. The criminalization of counterfeiting 
of medicines and administrative sanctions for similar acts are explored in the second 
section, while the third section deals with international cooperation in criminal and 
administrative matters. 
 
2 Preventive Measures 
 
As the well-known saying goes, an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of 
cure. So, it is natural that both practitioners and theorists are in constant search of 
the most effective and comprehensive measures aimed at the prevention of the 
manufacturing and appearance of falsified medicines on the market. 
 
Belarusian Law on medicines contains a set of measures aimed at providing quality 
of medicines, including registration of medicines; licensing of pharmaceutical 
activity; system for medical product quality inspection and for pharmaceutical 
supervision (supervision aimed at detection of changing in effectiveness and risks 
of application of medicines); use of supervision system for manufacturing 
environment, conditions of producing of medicines in pharmacies, transportation 
and application of medicines in health care institutions; elaboration and 
implementation of Good Manufacturing Practices, export and import rules.  
 
However, in reality these measures have some weak points. The quality control 
system of goods which are manufactured, imported, and distributed, focuses on the 
control of legally-established and law-abiding entities. As E. I. Shornikov points 
out, in Russia there were cases of distribution of falsified medicines which had on 
their package exactly the same serial number as those medicines that were lawfully 
distributed and certified for distribution (Shornikov, 2011: 37-38). In these cases, 
the quality control system often can be ineffective. Sometimes unimpeded delivery 
of counterfeit medicines to the consumer is ensured by bribes (Rocheva, 2016). 
Moreover, it is necessary to take into account that measures provided for by the Law 
were not elaborated to prevent counterfeiting of medicines. These measures can be 
considered just as supplementary ones.  
 
The crucial role is to be played by preventive measures, which are specially 
designed to fight against falsifying medicines as a sort of illegal activity. In 2005 
Belarus introduced a very important measure which can serve as a good example: 
88 MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
 
the requirement to import medical products directly from producer or his official 
distributor. As Sherjakov stated in 2009, the counterfeit medicines had been 
detected on Belarusian market only from 1999-2004, and after 2005 there were no 
such medicines (Sherjakov, 2009). The effectiveness of these measure was 
confirmed in 2017 by Reutskaya, head of department for pharmaceutical inspection 
and organization of medicinal support of the Ministry of Health, who said in an 
interview that for the past ten years there have been no incidents of detection of 
counterfeit medicines in Belarus due to the fact that they have been imported only 
directly from the manufacturer or via distributors (Kostiukevich, 2017). It should 
be noted as well, that shortening the chains of distributors of medicines is one of the 
measures aimed at prevention of dissemination of falsified medicines, which has 
been offered recently in Russian scientific literature (Aksenova-Sorohtej et al., 
2016: 147).  
 
However, the absence of cases of detection does not mean that there is no necessity 
to enhance the existing organizational and legal system of counteraction of 
falsification of medicines. It should be added that these crimes are often latent.  
 
Some effective measures aimed at prevention of falsifying medical products can be 
found in international agreements to which Belarus is a state-party.  
 
In the CIS, such measures mainly focus on joint actions and are executed under the 
Agreement on Cooperation in the Fight against the Turnover of Counterfeit 
Medicines.7 It provides for the exchange of information concerning means and 
methods used to conceal counterfeit medicines during transportation and selling; 
exchange of information regarding methods for detecting such medicines; 
harmonization of legislation in accordance with international standards and WHO 
recommendations; development of methods for controlling the quality of medical 
products and detecting counterfeit medicines (Strban, 2016); development of 
training programmes for personnel responsible for fighting against the turnover of 
counterfeit medicines; provision of technical assistance and assisting one another in 
introducing modern protective technologies including marking of medicines.  
 
Within the EEU, the basis for cooperation is the Agreement on Unitary Principles 
and Rules for Turnover of Medicines in the EEU.8  
 
The detailed procedure for cooperation is provided by the Decision of the Council 
of Eurasian Economic Commission of 3 November 2016 No 86 “On Procedure for 
the cooperation of member-states of Eurasian Economic Union in detection of 
counterfeit medicines, medicines infringing intellectual property rights or suffering 
from quality defects”.9 
 
Decision No 86 prescribes the establishment of contact points of member states and 
creation of the integrated database of the EEU. Article 13 of the Agreement on 
MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
89 
 
Unitary Principles obliges each state party to immediately inform Eurasian 
Economic Commission and competent authorities of the state parties about 
detection of counterfeit medicines and to take necessary measures for withdrawal 
of them from turnover. 
 
Belarusian Law on medicines provides that it is the Ministry of Health of the 
Republic of Belarus which is in charge of withdrawing false medicines from 
turnover. The procedure for the withdrawal of counterfeit medicines from turnover 
and destruction of them is prescribed in details in the Resolution of the Council of 
Ministers of the Republic of Belarus of 22 December 2009 No 1677.10  
 
One more important measure, which was prescribed in the Decision No 86, was the 
establishment of the integrated database of the EEU. The database is comprised of 
several databases: the database on medicines suffering from quality defects or 
infringing intellectual property rights and counterfeit medicines which are detected 
in member-states; the database on medicines which registration certificates has been 
suspended, medicines recalled or prohibited for medical use in member-states; and 
the database on registered medicines of the Union. 
 
Information on detection of a counterfeit medicine includes:  
 
 the member-state and the entity where a counterfeit medicine has been 
detected; name and address of manufacturer marked on the label; name of the 
supplier and a state where it is situated;  
 the trade mark used (in accordance with a register of a member state or the 
unitary register of the EEU) and international nonproprietary name;  
 number of medicines detected; the pharmaceutical dosage form of a medicine, 
dosage; formulation; model of the package; number of a batch, date of 
manufacturing, and validity term indicated on package;  
 description of signs of counterfeiting (a photo, sample of a counterfeit 
medicine, etc.);  
 actions which were made by competent authority of the member state where 
such a medicine was detected. 
 
Effective functioning of the database requires a uniform understanding of what the 
objects are, which are considered as counterfeit medicines. However, it should be 
admitted that there is no unified definition of a counterfeit medicine in member 
states of the EEU. 
 
For instance, in the Republic of Belarus, the Law on medicines defines a counterfeit 
medicine as a medicine which is intentionally accompanied with a false 
representation, such as the composition and/or manufacturer. Identical notion is 
given in article 4 (clause 37) of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation “On the 
turnover of medicines”.11 However, in the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
90 MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
 
People’s Health and Health Care System the following definition is given: falsified 
medicinal product, medical device and medical equipment – medicines, medical 
device and medical equipment, unlawfully and intentionally supplied with false 
information and fake label about their composition or configuration and (or) 
manufacturer, and also secretly manufactured.12 
 
In addition, Decision of the Council of Eurasian Economic Commission of 3 
November 2016 No 80 “On approval of Good distribution practice of the Eurasian 
Economic Union13 defines a counterfeit medicine not only as a medicine 
intentionally accompanied with a false representation as regards composition and/or 
manufacturer but as a medicine accompanied with a false representation as regards 
the supply including records and documents concerning distribution channels. 
 
The possible consequence of existing differences in respect of definitions can be the 
situation where states will detect different types of medical products considered as 
counterfeit medicines and collect dissimilar data about them. So, there is a risk of 
inserting non-uniform data from member states into the integrated database created 
in the EEU under the Decision No 86.14  
 
One of the ways to solve the problem concerning unified definition is to amend the 
related domestic legislation of member-states in accordance with the Decision No 
80. However, it should be taken into account that several members of the CIS and 
the EEU are state parties to the Medicrime Convention. For instance, such CIS 
countries as Armenia, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine ratified the 
Convention.  
 
The Medicrime Convention provides definitions of the following; medical product, 
medicinal product, and medical device. It also states that the term “counterfeit” shall 
mean a false representation as regards identity and/or source. It is clarified in the 
Explanatory Report to the Medicrime Convention that an adulterated medical 
product (i.e. a medical product – usually a powder or a liquid – made poorer in 
quality by intentionally adding or substituting another undeclared substance) shall 
be considered as counterfeit; the term “adulterated medical product” is not regarded 
as notion distinct from “counterfeit medical product”.15 The term “source”, in 
accordance with the Explanatory Report, is understood in a broad sense, including 
the supply and distribution history of the medical product, active substance, 
excipient, part, material or accessory. 
 
Since it is not clear from the Belarusian Law on medicines if the term “counterfeit 
medicine” covers adulterated medicines or false representation regarding supply 
and distribution history, it should be amended to facilitate unified and unambiguous 
understanding and application of this term. Similar changes can be introduced into 
legal acts of the EEU, including Decision No 80. This will enable more effective 
prevention of counterfeiting of medicines in terms of international cooperation.  
MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
91 
 
Decision No 80 is a very important legal act on the EEU level not only because it 
provides the definition of a counterfeit medicine, but because this act contains 
requirements to the quality management aimed at the impossibility of falsifying 
medicines while they are being transported or stored. It prescribes rules regarding 
due decision-making process, special training of staff, the isolation of counterfeit 
medicines from the other medicines, measures for saving the identity of medicines, 
special rules in respect of the distribution of medicines vulnerable to counterfeiting, 
and coordination of participants of distribution during the process. It also provides 
for the information exchange about detection of counterfeit medicines; procedures 
to avoid falsification of medicines returned to the supplier, documentation of all 
actions involving counterfeit medicines, risk assessment requirements and 
requirements for the transportation of medicines. All of these measures are 
specifically designed to fight against counterfeiting of medicines and they should 
be provided for by domestic legislation of the Republic of Belarus. 
 
Even though national legislation and legal acts of the EEU and CIS provide for a 
number of measures aimed at the prevention of falsification of medicines, some 
additional measures are offered in the scientific legal literature (e.g. publication of 
information about detection of falsified pharmaceutical products; on-line 
publication of data on pharmaceutical companies obtained licenses for wholesale 
trade, etc.) (Kagadeeva, 2015: 428). Kopytin indicated that Russian legislator also 
should take into account European experience in prevention of counterfeiting of 
medicines, for example some measures provided for by Directive 2011/62/EU of 8 
June 2011 could be introduced (e.g. obligation of wholesale distributors to verify 
their supplying wholesale distributors; accreditation of web-cites of pharmacies, 
etc.) (Kopytin, 2012: 10-13). 
 
Thus, legal regulation concerning prevention of counterfeiting of medicines should 
be improved in the Republic of Belarus. First of all, the definition of counterfeit 
medicine provided for by the Law on medicines should be amended. Secondly, a 
separate article focused on prevention of counterfeiting of medicines needs to be 
introduced in the Law to enhance public awareness about the problem. Thirdly, 
further elaboration of the legal framework can be achieved by creation of a law 
which will comprehensively cover all issues aimed at prevention of counterfeiting 
of medicines, including measures aimed at staff training; enhancement of public 
awareness of traits of counterfeit medicines; development of marking; requirements 
to distributors and suppliers of medicines; cooperation with law-enforcement 
bodies; procedures regarding databases, keeping of falsified medicines, etc.  
 
3 Criminal and Administrative Offences 
 
Effective fighting against counterfeiting of medicines is impossible without a set of 
criminal and administrative measures. Analysis of the Criminal Code (the CC) of 
the Republic of Belarus demonstrates that several articles of the Code can be used 
92 MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
 
to some extent with a view of fighting against counterfeiting of medicines.16 
 
Article 335 of the CC in paragraph 1 criminalizes illegal treatment or 
pharmaceutical activity conducted as a profession by a person who does not have a 
license if such actions caused by negligence the bodily harm of average gravity. 
Paragraph 2 of the article provides criminal liability for the same act, in which a 
person had grave bodily harm or even death because of negligence.  
 
It should be noted here that the term “pharmaceutical activity” is defined in article 
1 of the Law of the Republic of Belarus “On Health Care” as activity conducted by 
legal entities or entrepreneurs in the field of turnover of medicines, pharmaceutical 
substances or plant feedstock materials in accordance with rules established by 
legislation of the Republic of Belarus.17 
 
Though illegal pharmaceutical activity entails some acts which involve 
counterfeiting of medicines, numerous actions are not covered by article 335 of the 
CC, because the scope of criminal liability is limited by the elements “conducted as 
a profession by a person who does not have a license”, “if bodily harm of average 
gravity is caused by negligence”. It is evident however, that counterfeiting of 
medicines can be committed by a person who has obtained a license. Moreover, use 
of a counterfeit medicine does not necessarily cause harm to the health of a person. 
As Khasanov indicates, experts divide counterfeit medicines into three types: 
medicines which do not contain any active substance; medicines which contain a 
falsified active substance or contain less active substance then genuine ones as well 
as medicines copying the form of originals; and medicines with expired shelf life 
(Khasanov, 2015: 49-51). He also states that the medicines of the first type are the 
safest among falsified ones (Khasanov, 2015: 49-51). So, if a disease is not grave, 
a person can recover even without medicines. It is necessary to add that medicines 
can also be used to diagnose health, to ensure medical rehabilitation or even to 
prevent pregnancy; in such cases falsified medicines do not necessarily cause harm 
to health. 
 
Article 337 of the CC prohibits production or sales of products of poor quality. This 
criminal offence encompasses putting of poor quality products on the commodity 
market, the sale of such products to consumers, if these acts are capable of causing 
illnesses or poisoning of people, or if such products are contaminated with 
radioactive nuclides in extent exceeding allowed level. A person is criminally liable 
for the acts indicated in the article if the acts are committed within one year after an 
administrative sanction was imposed on him or her for the same acts. Paragraphs 2 
and 3 of Article 337 of the CC contain such aggravating circumstances as causing 
grave bodily harm or bodily harm of average gravity or death of a person (in such 
cases prior administrative liability is not a necessary pre-condition for criminal 
liability). 
 
MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
93 
 
The most significant shortcoming of Paragraph 1 of Article 337 of the CC is that 
the imposition of an administrative sanction is established as a pre-condition for 
criminal liability. It limits the abilities of law enforcement bodies to stop the illegal 
activities, as offenders are generally not afraid of losses caused by the imposition of 
administrative sanctions, because counterfeiting of medicines is a highly profitable 
activity. Moreover, Article 337 does not cover all actions connected with 
counterfeiting of medicines, because the terms “products of poor quality” and 
“counterfeit medicines” differ in meaning.  
 
The manufacturing of counterfeit medicines if this act is not connected with placing  
falsified medicines on commodity market or selling to consumers is also not in the 
scope of Article 337 of the CC. As indicated in the Commentary to the CC of the 
Republic of Belarus, the acts provided for by Article 337 of the CC constitute a 
criminal offence if they are committed by a public official of a legal entity,  an 
entrepreneur, or a person who is in charge of sales (shop assistants) (Ahramenka et 
al., 2010: 778). Thus, Article 337 of the CC cannot be applied in a situation where 
counterfeiting is committed by a “normal” person who is not a public official,  an 
entrepreneur, or is not in charge of sales. 
 
Article 337 of the CC is not an effective instrument against counterfeit medicines, 
because similar to Article 335 of the CC, the use of counterfeit medicines that do 
not cause illnesses, poisoning of people or harm to health in all cases, the law cannot 
be applied. 
 
Article 248 of the CC prohibits the illegal use of trademark (service mark), business 
name, geographical identification of a competitor, or sale or offer for sale of a good 
(service) using cautionary marking with respect to a trademark not registered in 
Belarus. The same goes for the copying of industrial models, which entails 
confusion of production (goods, works or services), or activity with ones produced 
by a competitor if these acts are committed intentionally, and if they are committed 
during the period of one year after an administrative sanction was imposed on a 
person for the same act. The crux of the article is that these acts give rise to criminal 
liability only in cases when they are committed by a public official of a legal entity 
or an entrepreneur. The scope of application of this article is also limited, since 
counterfeiting of medicines can be committed by persons not registered as 
entrepreneurs or without the establishment of a legal entity; there is also a 
requirement of prior imposition of administrative sanction for the same acts as a 
necessary pre-condition for criminal liability. 
 
In a limited number of cases, Article 257 of the CC of Belarus can be applied to 
punish illegal activities connected with counterfeiting of medicines. According to 
this article the following acts are prohibited: deceit of customers, clients or other 
consumers by an employee of an entrepreneur or legal entity selling goods, fulfilling 
works or providing services; deceit of consumers by an entrepreneur who carried 
94 MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
 
out the activities mentioned above. These acts are punishable if they are committed 
within one year after an administrative sanction was imposed on a person for the 
same act or if the acts are committed on a significant scale. Article 257 specifies the 
following aggravating circumstances: commission of the offence by a group of 
persons by prior collusion or by a person convicted for the same act previously and 
commission of the offence on a large scale.  
 
As the CC of Belarus does not properly address the issue of counterfeiting of 
medicines, the development of effective and dissuasive measures against 
counterfeiting of medicines is one of the topical issues for the republic. The latest 
developments in the field under consideration in the Russian Federation merit 
particular attention due to existing similarities of Belarusian and Russian criminal 
codes, which stem from their common Soviet roots and strong economic, social and 
political ties between two countries. Contrary to the approach used in the CC of 
Belarus, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation contains specific provisions 
aimed at fighting against counterfeiting of medicines.18  
 
The Russian Federation introduced criminal liability for turnover of counterfeit 
medicines, medicines of poor quality, or medicines not registered, for turnover of 
such medical items as well as for turnover of counterfeit biologically active 
supplement. Article 238.1 of the CC of Russia criminalizes the following acts if 
they are committed on a large scale (the value of products should exceed 100 000 
roubles): manufacturing, sale or import of counterfeit medicines or medical items 
to the territory of Russia; sale or import of medicines of poor quality or medical 
items to the territory of Russia for the purpose of sale; illegal manufacturing, sale 
or import to the territory of Russia of counterfeit biologically active supplement 
which contain pharmaceutical substances not claimed during state registration. 
 
Paragraph 2 of Article 238.1 of the CC of Russia contains such aggravating 
circumstances as the commission of the offence by a group of persons by prior 
collusion or by an organized group, entailing through negligence grave bodily harm 
or death of a person. Paragraph 3 of the article establishes criminal liability for the 
commission of the act indicated in Paragraphs 1 or 2 of the article if the act entailed 
through negligence the death of two or more persons. 
 
Article 327.2 of the CC of Russia establishes criminal liability for manufacturing 
(for the purpose of using or selling) or using of forged documents related to 
medicines or medical devices (registration certificate, certificate of conformance, 
instruction for use or normative, technical or maintenance documentation of 
manufacturer (producer) of medical article). Paragraph 2 of article 327.2 prohibits 
manufacturing (for the purpose of sale or use) or using of knowingly forged primary 
and/or secondary (consumer) package of a medicine. Paragraph 3 of Article 327.2 
of the CC of Russia contains such aggravating circumstances as the commission of 
the offence by a group of persons by prior collusion or by an organized group. 
MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
95 
 
 
In addition Article 235.1 of the CC of Russia provides criminal liability for illegal 
manufacturing of medicines or medical devices (without permit or license if 
obtaining them is obligatory). Paragraph 2 of the article stipulates as aggravating 
circumstances commission of the offence by an organized group as well as the 
commission of the offence on a large scale. 
 
Though the CC of Russia criminalizes counterfeiting of medicines and related 
crimes, it has some shortcomings and gaps. For instance, as Maksimov indicates, 
the fact that the legislation of the Russian Federation does not provide for any 
grounds for criminal or administrative responsibility for the export of counterfeit 
medicines from the Russian Federation, this is not in line with international legal 
norms (Maksimov, 2014: 86). At the same time, it should be noted that export 
actions may be partially covered by elements of "manufacturing" and "sale", though 
situations of exclusively exporting counterfeit medicines abroad are possible.  
 
Russian scientist Godunov notes another shortcoming of the CC of Russia. In 
accordance with existing rules, less dangerous manufacturing of medicines without 
special permission (license), if such permission (license) is mandatory, (Paragraph 
1 of Article 235.1 of the CC) can be punished more severely than the more 
dangerous manufacturing of counterfeit medicines (Paragraph 1 of Article 238.1 of 
the CC provides for a milder form of punishment – compulsory works, which is 
absent in paragraph 1 of article 235.1 of the CC). He also points out that such 
element of the criminal offence provided for by article 238.1 of the CC as 
“committed on a large scale” can be an obstacle for punishing persons involved in 
cases where the value of illegal products less than 100.000 roubles, though the 
products are dangerous for health (Godunov, 2015).  
 
In the process of development of domestic legislation Belarus also should take into 
account provisions of the Medicrime Convention, which constitutes one of the best 
international standards in the field. 
 
For example, specific provisions can be introduced in the Belarusian legislation 
which will establish criminal offences when committed intentionally, acts described 
in article 6 of the Convention (the supplying or the offering to supply, including 
brokering, trafficking, including keeping in stock, importing and exporting of 
counterfeit medical products, active substances, excipients, parts, materials and 
accessories) and in Article 7 (the making of false documents or the act of tampering 
with documents when committed intentionally).  
 
It should be added here that in accordance with Article 4 of the Convention, the 
term “document” means any document related to a medical product, an active 
substance, an excipient, a part, a material or an accessory, including the packaging, 
labeling, instructions for use, certificate of origin or any other certificate 
96 MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
 
accompanying it, or otherwise directly associated with the manufacturing and/or 
distribution thereof. The criminalization of falsifying documents related to 
medicines can be viewed as one of the fundamental pillars for effective fighting 
against counterfeiting of medicines. Though the CC of Belarus establishes criminal 
liability for forgery of official documents granting right or relieving from duty or 
for the use of forged documents or sale of thereof (Article 380) and forgery by an 
official (Article 427), the scope of these articles is limited to so called official 
documents only. Packages, labels, instructions for use and some other documents 
associated with medicines cannot be considered as official documents in terms of 
elements of criminal offences provided for by Articles 380 and 427 of the CC of 
Belarus. It should be noted that the similar problem had existed in the CC of Russia 
before introducing to the CC the Article 327.2, providing criminal liability for 
making false documents related to medical products. As Maksimov indicates, at that 
time falsification of documents had been a criminal offence in accordance with 
Article 327 of the CC of Russia, but documents related to medical products (e.g. 
labels, instructions for use, etc.) had not been recognized by judges as the element 
“documents” of the criminal offence provided for by Article 327 of the CC 
(Maksimov, 2014: 86).  
 
Thus, the Republic of Belarus faces the necessity of improving domestic legislation 
related to criminal liability for counterfeiting of medicines and for related crimes. 
The provisions of the CC of the Russian Federation, the Medicrime Convention, 
and other foreign and international legal instruments can be used in this process. 
 
The Code of the Republic of Belarus on Administrative Offences (CAO)19 provides 
some tools which can also be used for fighting against counterfeiting of medicines. 
In this respect Articles 12.16 (deceit of consumers), 11.26 (illegal use of business 
reputation of a competitor), 16.7 (putting or sales of products of poor quality) 
require specific attention.  
 
The description of the administrative offences in the CAO is similar to the 
description of criminal offences in Articles 257, 248 and 337 of the CC. The 
difference is that Article 257 of the CC names “significant scale” as one of the 
alternative elements of the offence and both Articles 257 and 337 contain 
aggravating circumstances (in the case of significant scale or presence of 
aggravating circumstances a person is criminally liable even if an administrative 
sanction has not been imposed previously).  
 
Imposing administrative sanctions in accordance with these articles of the CAO is 
a necessary pre-condition for criminal liability under Articles 257, 248 or 337 of the 
CC correspondently if the same act is committed during one year after imposing an 
administrative sanction.  
 
The articles mentioned above do not cover all possible acts related to counterfeit 
MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
97 
 
medicines. Furthermore, the simplified procedure used in an administrative process 
is not appropriate to detect and prove such sophisticated activity as counterfeiting 
of medicines, since such activity is often committed by organized criminal groups 
and involves the use of laboratories and special equipment. 
 
Article 15.42 of the CAO provides for administrative sanctions for infringement of 
requirements to transportation, storage or use of medicines, biological preparations 
or other veterinary agents. But the word “other” in Article 15.42 indicates that this 
article does not cover acts in respect of medicines for human use. As a result, it 
needs to be amended to ensure application of this provision to the cases of 
infringements of requirements to transportation, storage or use of medicines for 
humans. 
 
Further enhancement in the field can be achieved by introducing administrative 
liability for violation of rules in respect to distribution of medicines vulnerable to 
counterfeiting, procedures established for the exchange of information on 
counterfeit medicines, requirements of isolated storage of counterfeit medicines 
from other medicines, procedures in respect of documentation on actions involving 
counterfeit medicines, etc. (if such act or omission does not constitute a criminal 
offence). The necessity of introducing administrative liability for acts mentioned 
above can be supported by facts detected in practice of Russian prosecutor’s bodies. 
Sharova points out that the analysis of materials shows that state bodies responsible 
for quality control do not always trace actual destruction of counterfeit medicines 
and do not react properly in all cases to information about poor quality medicines, 
etc. (Sharova, 2009: 30).  
 
Some other possible problems can be illustrated by the Russian experience. In 
accordance with article 6.33 of the Code of the Russian Federation on 
Administrative Offences, administrative liability is established for turnover of 
counterfeit medicines, pirate copies of medicines, medicines of poor quality or 
medicines not registered, medical devices as well as for turnover of counterfeited 
biologically active supplements.20 The key distinctive feature between criminal 
offence specified in Article 238.1 of the CC of the Russian Federation and Article 
6.33 of the Code on Administrative Offences is that an act constitutes a criminal 
offence if it is committed on a large scale. As a result, criminals can try to escape 
criminal liability by selling small batches of counterfeit medicines or by producing 
cheap products – e. g., a counterfeit medicine which does not contain active 
substance can be inexpensive.  
 
Overall, the analysis shows that currently there is a room for improvement of both 
criminal and administrative legislation in the field of combating the counterfeiting 
of medicines. In this regard, amendments to the CC should be made in order to fill 
existing gaps in criminalization. Administrative liability for infringements creating 
favorable conditions for counterfeiting of medicines should be introduced as well.  
98 MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
 
4 International Cooperation 
 
The Republic of Belarus has necessary legal framework to ensure active and 
efficient international cooperation with other countries. Several international 
treaties create the legal basis for cooperation in prevention of counterfeiting of 
medicines in the CIS and the EEU. Belarus is also a member-state to specific 
conventions and bilateral treaties that create framework for providing mutual legal 
assistance. 
  
Talking about the latter, it is worth noting that Belarus is a party to conventions on 
legal assistance in civil, family and criminal matters concluded among CIS 
countries in 1993 and 2002, and the United Nations Convention against 
Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC).21 Belarus concluded bilateral treaties on 
mutual legal assistance in criminal matters with Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, Egypt, 
China, Serbia, etc. The Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Belarus 
(CPC) contains provisions on international cooperation in criminal matters as 
well.22 Moreover, Belarus participates in some inter-governmental agreements and 
agreements between law enforcement bodies on combating criminality (generally 
on information exchange and cooperation between law enforcement bodies).  
 
Article 2 of the Law of the Republic of Belarus “On international legal assistance 
in criminal matters” names international treaties and principle of reciprocity as 
grounds for legal assistance in criminal matters.23 Belarusian CPC, in the same way 
as multilateral and bilateral international treaties, contains provisions on requests 
for mutual legal assistance, extradition, transfer of criminal proceedings, etc. The 
existing legal framework allows taking evidence, executing searches and seizures, 
providing evidentiary items and expert evaluations, providing original and certified 
copies of documents, etc. Legal assistance can take place on the basis of reciprocity 
as well.  
 
Some existing lacunas and shortcomings in the criminalization of counterfeiting of 
medicines and related acts create an obstacle for effective international cooperation. 
The main issue is the requirement of dual criminality which is usually indicated in 
multilateral and bilateral agreements as a precondition for extradition, transfer of 
criminal proceedings, etc. For instance, as Klimenko and Tretjakova point out, the 
Russian Federation did not have a legal basis for recognition of counterfeiting of 
medicines as a criminal offence and for providing mutual legal assistance in 
criminal matters until counterfeiting of medicines was criminalized in Russia in 
2015 (Klimenko & Tretjakova, 2015). It should be noted in this regard that this 
statement is vulnerable to criticism, because some acts had been criminally liable 
under other articles of the CC of Russia, whereas some acts had not been. So, mutual 
legal assistance could be provided in some cases taking into account that differences 
in description of criminal offences in accordance with international law cannot be 
considered as a reason for refusal of legal assistance.  
MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
99 
 
In order to use the mechanism of international legal assistance for crimes connected 
with counterfeit medicines, it is necessary to consider the definition of the organized 
criminal group and to assess sanctions stipulated in the CC.  
 
As counterfeiting of medicines is usually committed by organized criminal groups 
and criminal organizations, the UNTOC can be used as a legal basis for mutual legal 
assistance in criminal matters with regard to taking evidence, effecting service of 
judicial documents, executing searches and seizures, and freezing, etc. (Article 18) 
and for extradition (Article 16). 
 
As specified in Article 3 Paragraph 1 (a) and (b) of the UNTOC the scope of its 
application encompasses the offences established in accordance with articles 5 
(criminalization of participation in an organized criminal group), 6 (criminalization 
of the laundering of proceeds of crime), 8 (criminalization of corruption) and 23 
(criminalization of obstruction of justice) of the UNTOC and serious crime as 
defined in article 2 of the UNTOC where the offence is transnational in nature and 
involves organized criminal group. According to the Article 2 (b) of the UNTOC 
the term “serious crime” means “…conduct constituting an offence punishable by a 
maximum deprivation of liberty of at least four years or a more serious penalty”. 
However, offences specified in Paragraph 1 of Article 335 and Paragraph 2 of 
Article 337 of the CC are punishable by a maximum deprivation of liberty of three 
years, whereas Paragraph 1 of the Article 337, Articles 257 and 248 do not contain 
such punishment as deprivation of freedom at all. Only sanctions of Paragraph 2 of 
Article 335 and Paragraph 3 of Article 337 of the CC contain maximum deprivation 
of liberty up to five years, and offences provided for by them are covered by the 
scope of application of the UNTOC. 
 
Article 2 (a) of the UNTOC defines organized criminal group as “…a structured 
group of three or more persons, existing for a period of time and acting in concert 
with the aim of committing one or more serious crimes or offences established in 
accordance with this Convention, in order to obtain, directly or indirectly, a 
financial or other material benefit”. However, Paragraph 1 of Article 18 of the CC 
of Belarus states that an organized group consists of two or more persons who united 
to form a stable operating group for conducting joint criminal activity. This 
inconsistency can create obstacles for international cooperation, because in a case 
where actions do not constitute several criminal offences, they cannot be considered 
as “criminal activity”. Accordingly, the required element of an organized criminal 
group is absent, and the UNTOC is not applicable in cases where organized criminal 
groups are not involved.  
 
Some agreements concluded by the Republic of Belarus contain provisions on 
cooperation in administrative matters, for instance the Agreement on Legal 
Assistance and Cooperation of Customs Offices of Member States of Customs 
Union in Criminal Matters and Matters on Administrative Offences24. This 
100 MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
 
Agreement can be used as a legal basis for combating administrative offences 
involving smuggling of counterfeit medicines. But taking into consideration 
simplified procedure used in administrative process and lacunas in the CAO, mutual 
legal assistance in administrative matters cannot be considered as an effective 
measure for combating counterfeiting of medicines. 
 
In general, the existing legal framework allows effective cooperation between states 
in cases related to fighting against counterfeiting of medicines. Existing 
shortcomings and gaps in the CC of Belarus regarding criminalization can be fixed 
by legislative changes taking into account international and foreign legislative, as 
well as practical experience.  
 
5 Conclusion 
 
The present study demonstrates that although Belarusian legislation contains 
various provisions that can be used for combating counterfeiting of medicines, they 
are not fully appropriate with regard to contemporary forms of illegal activity. 
Amendments to the Law on medicines directly aimed at combating manufacturing 
and distribution of counterfeit medicines are needed. It is also necessary to take 
steps to implement into domestic legislation the provisions on prevention of 
counterfeiting of medicines stipulated in the Decision No 80 and the Agreement on 
Cooperation in Fight against Turnover of Counterfeit Medicines. This will allow for 
more effective fighting against counterfeiting of medicines both on national and 
international levels.  
 
The criminal offences of counterfeiting of medicines and counterfeiting of 
documents related to medicines (labels, packages, instructions for use, certificate of 
origin, etc.) need to be introduced in the CC of Belarus in separate articles. Elements 
of criminal offences, which limit criminal liability, should not be used in order to 
provide the effective scope of criminalization. 
 
Taking into account that counterfeiting of medicines and related offences are often 
committed by organized criminal groups and criminal organizations, the 
applicability of the UNTOC is crucial. Criminal offences regarding counterfeiting 
of medicines in the CC should be considered as “serious offences” in accordance 
with the UNTOC. Administrative sanctions should be introduced for violation of 
procedures of legal turnover of medicines and procedures designed to prevent 
counterfeiting of medicines. Such sanctions can be used as a supplementary legal 
instrument which should not interfere with criminal liability.  
 
The legal terminology in respect of counterfeit medicines should be clarified to 
ensure that the term “counterfeit medicines” in domestic legislation explicitly 
covers adulterated medicines, falsified substances and excipients, false information 
about records and documents concerning distribution history . The measures 
MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
101 
 
mentioned above not only will enhance domestic legislation against counterfeiting 
of medicines and related offences, but will also improve international cooperation 
of the Republic of Belarus in the field. 
 
 
Notes 
 
1 Konstitucija Respubliki Belarusʼ (1994), available at: http://pravo.by/pravovaya-
informatsiya/normativnye-dokumenty/konstitutsiya-respubliki-belarus/ (October 11,2017) 
2 Zakon Respubliki Belarus "O lekarstvennyh sredstvah", 20.07.2006 No 161-Z, available at: 
http://www.pravo.by/pdf/2006-122/2006-122(006-101).pdf#page=29 (October 11, 2017) 
3 Ob utverzhdenii Polozhenija o porjadke hranenija, transportirovki, izjatija iz obrashhenija, 
vozvrata proizvoditelju ili postavshhiku, unichtozhenija lekarstvennyh sredstv, dopolnenii, 
izmenenii i priznanii utrativshimi silu nekotoryh postanovlenij Soveta Ministrov Respubliki 
Belarus – Postanovlenie ot 22.12.2009 No 1677 (Resolution of the Council of Ministers of 
the Republic of Belarus), Nacional'nyj reestr pravovyh aktov Respubliki Belarus', 
14.01.2010, No 6, st., 5/30980, available at 
http://etalonline.by/?type=text&regnum=c20901677#load_text_none_1_ (October 11, 2017) 
4 Dogovor o Evrazijskom ekonomičeskom sojuze, 29.05.2014, available at: 
http://pravo.by/document/?guid=12551&p0=F01400176&p1=1&p5=0 (October 11, 2017) 
5 Soglashenie o edinyh principah i pravilah obrashhenija lekarstvennyh sredstv v ramkah 
Evrazijskogo jekonomicheskogo sojuza), 23.12.2014, available at: 
http://www.pravo.by/document/?guid=3871&p0=f01400350 (October 11, 2017) 
6 Convention on the Counterfeiting of Medical Products and Similar Crimes involving 
Threats to the Public Health, 28.11.2011, available at: 
http://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/rms/090000168008482f. 
(October 11, 2017) 
7 Soglashenie o sotrudnichestve v bor'be s obrashheniem fal'sificirovannyh lekarstvennyh 
sredstv, concluded in Chisinau on 14.11.2008, available at: 
http://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=30433637#pos=7;-104. (October 11, 2017) 
8 Soglashenie o edinyh principah i pravilah obrashhenija lekarstvennyh sredstv v ramkah 
Evrazijskogo jekonomicheskogo sojuza, 23.12.2014, available at: 
http://www.pravo.by/document/?guid=3871&p0=f01400350 (October 11, 2017) 
9 Reshenie No 86 O Porjadke vzaimodejstvija gosudarstv - chlenov Evrazijskogo 
jekonomicheskogo sojuza po vyjavleniju fal'sificirovannyh, kontrafaktnyh i (ili) 
nedobrokachestvennyh lekarstvennyh sredstv), Astana, 03.11.2016, available at: 
http://docs.cntd.ru/document/456026105 (October 11, 2017) 
10 Ob utverzhdenii Polozhenija o porjadke hranenija, transportirovki, izjatija iz obrashhenija, 
vozvrata proizvoditelju ili postavshhiku, unichtozhenija lekarstvennyh sredstv, dopolnenii, 
izmenenii i priznanii utrativshimi silu nekotoryh postanovlenij Soveta Ministrov Respubliki 
Belarus – Postanovlenie ot 22.12.2009 No 1677 (Resolution of the Council of Ministers of 
the Republic of Belarus), Nacional'nyj reestr pravovyh aktov Respubliki Belarus', 14. 1. 
2010, No 6, st., 5/30980, available at 
http://etalonline.by/?type=text&regnum=c20901677#load_text_none_1_ .(October 11, 
2017) 
11 Federal'nyj zakon "Ob obrashhenii lekarstvennyh sredstv"), 12.04.2010 No 61-FZ, 
available at: http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_99350/ (October 11, 
2017) 
102 MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
 
12 Kodeks Respubliki Kazahstan o zdorov'e naroda i sisteme zdravoohranenija, 2009, 
available at: https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=30479065 (October 11, 2017) 
13 Reshenie No 80 Ob utverzhdenii Pravil nadlezhashhej distrib'jutorskoj praktiki v ramkah 
Evrazijskogo jekonomicheskogo sojuza, Astana, 03.11.2016, available at: 
http://www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/act/texnreg/deptexreg/LS1/Documents/27.pdf 
(October 11, 2017) 
14 Reshenie No 86 O Porjadke vzaimodejstvija gosudarstv - chlenov Evrazijskogo 
jekonomicheskogo sojuza po vyjavleniju fal'sificirovannyh, kontrafaktnyh i (ili) 
nedobrokachestvennyh lekarstvennyh sredstv), Astana, 03.11.2016, available at: 
http://docs.cntd.ru/document/456026105 (October 11, 2017) 
15 Explanatory Report to the Council of Europe Convention on the counterfeiting of medical 
products and similar crimes involving threats to public health, 2011, available at: 
https://rm.coe.int/16800d383b (October 11, 2017) 
16 Ugolovno-processual'nyj kodeks Respubliki Belarus, 16.07.1999, available at: 
http://etalonline.by/?type=text&regnum=HK9900295#load_text_none_1_ (October 11, 
2017) 
17 Zakon Respubliki Belarus O zdravoohranenii, 18.06.1993 No 2435-XII, available at: 
http://pravo.by/document/?guid=3871&p0=v19302435 (October 11, 2017) 
18 Ugolovnyj kodeks Rossijskoj Federacii, 1996, available at: 
http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_10699/ (October 11, 2017) 
19 Kodeks Respubliki Belarus ob administrativnyh pravonarushenijah, 21.04.2003, available 
at: http://www.pravo.by/document/?guid=3871&p0=hk0300194 (October 11, 2017) 
20 Kodeks Rossijskoj Federacii ob administrativnyh pravonarushenijah, 30.12.2001, 
available at: http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_34661/ (October 11, 
2017) 
21 United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the Protocols 
Thereto. New York, 2004. available at: 
https://www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/UNTOC/Publications/TOC%20Convention/TO
Cebook-e.pdf (October 11, 2017) 
22 Ugolovno-processual'nyj kodeks Respubliki Belarus, 16.07.1999, available at: 
http://etalonline.by/?type=text&regnum=HK9900295#load_text_none_1_ (October 11, 
2017) 
23 Zakon Respubliki Belarus', O meždunarodnoj pravovoj pomošči po ugolovnym delam, 
04.01.2008, No 284-Z, available at: http://zakon.by/pdf/2004-87/2004-87(029-047).pdf 
(October 11, 2017) 
24 Soglashenie o pravovoj pomoshhi i vzaimodejstvii tamozhennyh organov gosudarstv - 
chlenov tamozhennogo sojuza po ugolovnym delam i delam ob administrativnyh 
pravonarushenijah), Astana, 05.07.2010, available at: 
http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_170241 (October 11, 2017) 
 
 
References 
 
Ahramenka, N. F. [et al] (2010) Nauchno-prakticheskij kommentarij k Ugolovnomu kodeksu 
Respubliki Belarus (Minsk: GIUST BGU). 
Aksenova-Sorohtej J., Baranovskaja E., Belaja O. & Knjazeva E. (2016) Nekotorye 
Aktual'nye Aspekty Dekriminalizacii Farmacevticheskogo Rynka Rossijskoj Federacii, 
Uspehi sovremennoj nauki, 8(3), pp. 144-148.  
Godunov, O. I. (2015) K voprosu o realizacii ugolovnoj otvetstvennosti za oborot 
MEDICINE, LAW & SOCIETY 
P. Sascheko: Combating Counterfeiting of Medicines in the Republic of 
Belarus: Legal Analysis 
103 
 
fal'sificirovannyh lekarstvennyh sredstv, Nauchnyj poisk, 1(5), pp. 5-7. 
Kagadeeva, S. O. (2015) Problema fal'sifikacii lekarstvennyh sredstv na territorii RF, 
Medicinskoe pravo: teorija i praktika, 1, pp. 425-430.  
Khasanov, F. Z (2015) Ugolovnaja otvetstvennost za obrashhenie falsificirovannyh 
lekarstvennyh sredstv, Medicinskoe pravo,1, pp. 49 - 51. 
Klimenko, T.M. & Tretjakova E.I. (2015) Mezhdunarodnoe sotrudnichestvo v oblasti 
protivodejstvija oborotu fal'sificirovannyh lekarstvennyh sredstv, In: Kriminalistika: 
vchera, segodnja, zavtra Sbornik nauchnyh trudov, pp. 114-119 (Vostochno-Sibirskij 
institut MVD Rossii). 
Kopytin, D. A. (2012) Bor'ba s fal'sificirovannymi lekarstvennymi preparatami v 
Evropejskom Sojuze i v Rossii, Remedium. Zhurnal o rossijskom rynke lekarstv i 
medicinskoj tehnike, 9, pp. 8-13. 
Maksimov, S. V. (2014) Fal'sifikacija lekarstvennyh sredstv v Rossii i perspektivy ratifikacii 
Konvencii Soveta Evropy «Medikrim», Trudy Instituta gosudarstva i prava Rossijskoj 
akademii nauk, 3, pp. 75-87. 
Reutskaja, L. A. (2016) Mezhdunarodnoe sotrudnichestvo Ministerstva zdravoohranenija v 
sfere obrashhenija lekarstvennyh sredstv, In: Reutskaja, L. A. (ed.) Aktualnye voprosy 
farmacii Respubliki Belarus, V. 2, ch. 1 (Minsk: BGMU). 
Rocheva, E. A. (2014) Projavlenija korrupcii v sfere zdravoohranenija, available at: 
https://www.consultant.ru/sys/ (August 8, 2017). 
Rocheva, E.A. (2016) K voprosu o protivodejstvii obrashheniju fal'sificirovannyh 
lekarstvennyh sredstv, Voprosy kriminologii, kriminalistiki i sudebnoj jekspertizy, 40(2), 
pp. 47-52. 
Kostiukevich, N. (2017) Dlja vseh jeto biznes. Kak v Belarusi pytajutsja snizit' ceny na 
importnye lekarstva, available at: https://news.tut.by/society/563184.html (October 5, 
2017). 
Sharova, G. N. (2009) Fal'sificirovannye lekarstvennye sredstva kak ugroza bezopasnosti 
zhizni i zdorov'ju naselenija, Vestnik Akademii General'noj prokuratury Rossijskoj 
Federacii, 2(10), pp. 27-32.  
Sherjakov, A. A. (2009) Standartizacija i kontrol' kachestva lekarstvennyh sredstv v 
Belorussii Soobshhenie 3. Problemy fal'sifikacii lekarstvennyh sredstv, Vestnik farmacii, 
4(46), pp. 75-79. 
Shornikov, E. I. (2011) Problemy falsifikacii lekarstvennyh sredstv, Obrazovanie. Nauka. 
Nauchnye kadry, 2, pp. 36-38. 
Strban, G. (2016) Supervision of Medical Activities, Medicine, Law & Society, 9(1), pp. 41-
58.