The Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs has recommended that investigative units not automatically consider a driver who violated traffic rules while trying to avoid a collision as the culprit in a “non-contact” accident. If it is established that the maneuver was forced and the driver acted under extreme necessity, the violation of rules should not be the basis for criminal liability under Article 264 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
The problem arises in accidents where vehicles do not directly collide. For example, one driver violates overtaking, maneuvering, or priority rules and creates a threat, while another, avoiding a collision, sharply changes trajectory, drives outside the permitted lane, and ultimately crashes into another vehicle, an obstacle, or hits a pedestrian. As a result, serious harm to health or death may occur due to the actions of a driver who did not physically contact the vehicle that created the danger.
The Ministry of Internal Affairs emphasizes that in such cases, it is impossible to determine the culprit in advance solely by who directly caused the accident. The investigation must establish the actions of each participant and, if necessary, involve experts, separately checking whether the situation was one of extreme necessity.
The agency's position is based on the definition of the Constitutional Court No. 1782-O: a violation of traffic rules that negligently led to consequences provided for in Article 264 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not have signs of criminal unlawfulness if the person acted under extreme necessity.
This does not mean automatic exemption for any driver who violated the rules before an accident. The investigation will have to establish the circumstances of the danger, the causal link between the actions of the participants, and the possibility of avoiding the incident in another way.