The article examines ways of improving the practice of criminal law enforcement in the cases of the abuse and excess of authority in public property management. The author proves the insufficiency of the current indicators of criminal punishability when the excess or abuse of authority in the management of public property takes place. It is necessary to include into law (at least within the framework of the guidelines of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation) the presumption of the maximum effectiveness of the selected method of managing the public property. The author attempts to formulate and describe the normative content of the suggested presumption using the thesis of equal effectiveness' potential for different forms of property. The author also comes to an interim conclusion that this presumption is a specific case of a more general presumption of the effectiveness of a public owner. It is proven that the use of the analyzed presumptions agrees with the solidifying social role of public property, unlike the empirically unsubstantiated thesis of its apparent ineffectiveness. This circumstance excludes the linear approach to the assessment of managerial decisions regarding public property and, thus, shows that the established indicators of criminal punishability of the excess or abuse of authority by officials are insufficient for making well-grounded decisions on the initiation of criminal prosecution in connection with public property management. It is suggested that criminal punishability must be based on the expert assessment of managerial decisions made by officials, of their actions (inaction) in comparison with other possible scenarios within the examined managerial situation, which must be carried out at the stage of initial inquiry. The results of this expert assessment must form the grounds for making decisions regarding the initiation of criminal cases on the excess or abuse of authority against specific officials. Besides, the author also states that there are certain limits to applying this approach and that it is not universal.

The paper discusses the essence of such public property management principles as transparency (publicity) in managing state and municipal property as well as professionalism in public property management. These principles are examined within the framework of developing, institutionalizing and implementing preventative measures aimed at the prevention of crimes of corruption in the sphere of public property. The analysis and interpretation of active Russian legislation allows the authors to conclude that the transparency of managing state and municipal property implies such a level of management processes' openness that ensures due provision of information to the society (or its interested part) regarding the reasons, goals and results of corresponding management decisions. The authors present specific mechanisms of reaching such a balance aimed at instilling in the officials the understanding that corruption crimes will be inevitably detected and, thus, of sustaining the needed level of potential crimes' prevention. Similar methodology is used to analyze active Russian legislation and the practice of its implementation where it concerns the legal support for the requirement of the professional management of public property. The authors believe that it is necessary to ensure the development and institutionalization not only of the level of professional qualification and requirements for public officials, but also of professional standards of conducting certain operations of public property management. They note that the principle of professionalism in public property management is only fragmentarily included in active Russian legislation, while its practical implementation is often put off due to different reasons. In this connection the authors conclude that it is necessary to concentrate efforts on the thorough development and comprehensive legislative support of professional requirements for the participants of public property management process as it is impossible to provide a systemic solution to the task of reducing corruption in this public sphere without it.