Wildberries warehouse fire: legal assessment of one version of what is happening

We continue to analyze Wildberries warehouse fire in the village of Shushary, Pushkinsky District, St. Petersburg, which happened over the weekend.

Thus, according to a number of sources, during the fire, some security officers, despite the emergency situation, did not let people outside without inspection to prevent the goods from being stolen. Apparently, they acted out of the misunderstood interests of the service. As reported Baza telegram channel, all this happened “despite the panic, the alarm and the huge crowd at the exit”.

We do not know how accurate this information is, but we suggest analyzing the situation from a criminal law point of view.

How can the actions of security officers be qualified?

We believe that the actions of the responsible officer fall under the characteristics of a crime under part 1 of article 238 (“Production, storage, transportation or sale of goods and products, performance of work or provision of services that do not meet safety requirements”). The maximum penalty is two years in prison.

The security activities carried out by organizations are regulated The Law of the Russian Federation No. 2487-1 dated March 11, 1992. According to it, security organizations must be licensed, and a job description must be developed for employees, based on Order No. 419 of the National Guard dated October 19, 2020 (paragraph 12.4 specifies the duties of a security guard in case of an emergency).

So the security officer who worked at the Wildberries warehouse that day also has a job description, the content of which we don't know. But if we proceed from logic and common sense, in the event of a fire, the security guard must take measures to preserve people's lives and health, and not prevent evacuation from the burning building.

It turns out that the security guard violated his job description in terms of performing his duties in the event of an emergency.

To prosecute part 1 of article 238 of the Criminal Code there is no need for any socially dangerous consequences. In addition, a crime can be committed either intentionally or through negligence (under the provisions of the General Part of the Criminal Code).

There is a practice of attracting security officers specifically article 238 of the Criminal Code due to violation of the provisions of job descriptions.

Judicial practice

In action №1-191/2020 to responsibility for p. Article 238 (2) of the Criminal Code an employee of the private security company was involved, who did not identify the person, but let him go to school. The person who passed was neither a student nor an employee. He went to school and caused serious harm to the health of a number of students.

‍