THE PROBLEMS OF PUNISHMENT EXECUTION AS A COMPULSORY WORK IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2020 ◽  
pp. 45-52
Author(s):  
Алевтина Олеговна Зубова ◽  
Александр Олегович Симагин
Keyword(s):  
Correctional Facility ◽  
Forced Labor ◽  
State Coercion ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Penalties ◽  
The Law ◽  
Forced Labour ◽  
Almost All ◽  
And Control

С 1 января 2017 г. в России может быть назначен судами еще один вид уголовного наказания - принудительные работы. В силу их схожести с другими видами уголовных наказаний авторы видят необходимость выделения принудительных работ в общей классификации отечественной системы уголовных наказаний. Представляется целесообразным определить их как самостоятельную меру государственного принуждения. В этом случае они будут занимать особый переходный статус от альтернативных лишению свободы наказаний к наказаниям, связанным с лишением свободы. Тем более что в случаях, предусмотренных законодательством, практически все наказания без лишения свободы выступают в качестве альтернативы лишению свободы. Рассмотрение практики реализации принудительных работ выявило ряд проблем. Авторы исследования предлагают выделить следующие направления, по которым будет осуществляться их анализ: организация трудовой деятельности осужденных; организация содержания осужденных; надзор и контроль за осужденными, содержащимися в ИЦ (УФИЦ). Характеризуя проблемы при организации трудовой деятельности, можно отметить нехватку рабочих мест, причем, если учреждение функционирует в режиме УФИЦ, то вопрос с трудоустройством стоит не так остро (есть возможность работать в колонии). Еще один неоднозначный вопрос связан с оформлением отношений при трудоустройстве осужденных к принудительным работам. Анализ организации содержания осужденных в ИЦ позволил авторам выявить отсутствие дифференцированного подхода в зависимости от криминологических характеристик, что является нарушением законодательства. Говоря о проблемах, связанных с надзором и контролем, авторами отмечается отсутствие порядка организации личных обысков и досмотров и недостаток основания для их проведения. В завершение статьи авторами предлагаются пути решения выявленных проблемных вопросов. As of 1 January 2017, another type of criminal punishment may be imposed by the courts in Russia - forced labour. Due to their similarity with other types of criminal penalties, the authors see the need to allocate forced labor in the general classification of the domestic system of criminal penalties. It seems reasonable to define them as an independent measure of state coercion. In this case, they will occupy a special transitional status from alternatives to imprisonment to custodial sentences. Moreover, in cases provided for by the law, almost all penalties without deprivation of liberty are an alternative to deprivation of liberty. Analysis of the practice of forced labour revealed a number of problems. The authors of the study suggest the following areas in which their analysis will be carried out: organization of labor activity of convicts; organization of detention of convicts; supervision and control over convicts held in the correctional facility (UFIC). Characterizing the problems in the organization of labor activity, we can note the lack of jobs, and if the institution operates in the UFIC mode, the issue of employment is not so acute (there is an opportunity to work in the colony). Another ambiguous issue is related to the registration of relations in the employment of convicts for forced labor. Speaking about the organization of the detention of convicts in the correctional facility, the authors have not revealed a differentiated approach depending on the criminological characteristics. Which is a violation of the law. Analyzing the problems associated with supervision and control, we can highlight the lack of order of organization of personal searches and searches, and lack of grounds for their conduct. In their article, the authors try to find a solution to these issues by defining the vectors of their resolution.

scholarly journals System of criminal penalties of Russian federation: legal regulation and sentencing practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 135 ◽  
pp. 04066
Author(s):  
Alexandra Brovkina ◽  
Victor Vezlomtsev ◽  
Svetlana Zakharova ◽  
Olga Shuranova ◽  
Yuri Truntsevsky
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Forced Labor ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Criminal Penalties

The article presents the questions of constructing a system of criminal penalties under the legislation of the Russian Federation, the problems of imposing various types of punishments taking into account the rules for constructing criminal law sanctions. Changes and additions, various types of criminal penalties, including the content of sanctions in the articles, lead to an imbalance in the principles of their construction. The punishment system is currently in need of reform. An analysis of the sanctions of the articles of a special part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation revealed inconsistencies with the requirements of legislative equipment in their development, which creates serious difficulties in the appointment of sentences by the courts. Penalties under criminal law sanctions include punishment in the form of punishment, forced labor, imprisonment for a specified period. The legislation does not take into account the nature and degree of threat to crimes committed in the formation of sanctions articles. Criminal law and criminal law protection, and criminal procedural requirements, and punishments. In accordance with the peculiarities of the formation of the punishment system, the creation of criminal sanctions, as well as taking into account the goals of punishment in the domestic criminal law, which allows us to develop recommendations on the preparation of sanctions for articles of the criminal code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Classification of Measures of Restriction: From a “Mixed” Criterion to a Connection with the Object of Restriction

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 154-165
Author(s):  
E. V. Mandzhieva
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Coercive Measures ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

Achieving the aims of criminal proceedings is impossible without coercion, which significantly restricts human rights and freedoms, including constitutional ones, and, therefore, it is permissible only if there are grounds and in the manner prescribed by the criminal procedure legislation. The grounds, conditions and procedure for applying measures of restriction in criminal proceedings largely depend on the correct systematization of criminal procedure legislation, which may be the basis for a systematic interpretation of the text of the law. Combining other measures of procedural coercion in Ch. 14 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation does not have clear criteria, which is fraught with the erroneous use of procedural coercion against participants in criminal proceedings. The purpose of the paper is to assess the directions of possible improvement of the legislation regarding the systematization of procedural coercion measures. Measures of procedural coercion should be structured and systematized in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation on clear and uniform grounds, including coercive measures, which are not measures of restriction. Currently, there are no such grounds in relation to other measures of procedural coercion, united in Ch. 14 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, which impedes their reasonable application. The contents of Ch. 14 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation should be revised taking into account logical and legal ties. As a result of the research the author developed the ideas on logical connections as one of the main bases for the classification of the norms governing the use of procedural coercion, affecting its legality and validity.

scholarly journals Analysis of the results of epizootic monitoring of rabies in the Russian Federation in 2020

2021 ◽  
pp. 52-58
Author(s):  
V. V. Mikhailova ◽  
T. P. Lobova ◽  
M. S. Shishkina ◽  
A. N. Skvortsova ◽  
A. A. Varentsova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Prevention And Control ◽  
Federal District ◽  
Annual Reports ◽  
Economic Costs ◽  
The World ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Almost All ◽  
And Control ◽  
Positive Results

Relevance. Currently, rabies is registered in almost all countries of the world and is included in the list of dangerous viral diseases. According to WHO estimates, more than 50,000 people die from hydrophobia in the world every year. The urgency of the problem is also associated with the huge economic costs of prevention and antiepizootic measures. Annual rabies monitoring is an important link in the chain of epizootic situation improvement. Based on its results, a further strategy for the prevention and control of rabies is being built.Methods. The assessment of the epizootic situation in the Russian Federation for rabies in 2020 was carried out based on the results of the analysis of data from annual reports in the 4-vet form provided by state veterinary laboratories to the FSBI CNMVL.Results. Annual rabies epizootic monitoring is carried out throughout the territory of the Russian Federation. In 2020, 1517 positive results were obtained. Of these, 47% of cases are in pets (dogs, cats), 43% — on wild animals, 9% — on agricultural animals. Unfavorable items were recorded in 61 constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The most tense epizootic situation has developed in the Central Federal District and the Privolzhskiy Federal District (603 and 505 positive cases respectively).

scholarly journals Manifestation of Furor as an Element of a Gross Violation of the Regime in Places of Deprivation of Liberty

2020 ◽  
pp. 75-79
Author(s):  
Andrey A. Pavlenko ◽  
◽  
Andrey N. Gordopolov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Correctional Facility ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Penal System ◽  
Security Measures ◽  
Physical Force ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of

Currently, when executing a sentence of imprisonment, officials of the penal system often encounter convicts who show gross disobedience, including via furor. The increase in the number of acts of violence against staff performing their official duties illustrates a situation that requires legal regulation. Penal legislation has no clear definition of the concept “furor”. It is only mentioned in Part 1 of Article 86 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation. The discrepancy between the norms of the law of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation and the law on institutions and bodies on the application of security measures to convicts in furor reduces the effectiveness of the response actions of the penal system employees. For the formation of the most complete understanding of the concept “convict’s furor”, scientific works are analyzed; A.V. Brilliantov presents the most complete concept. The etymological meaning of the term is established. The history of the formation of the term “furor” in medical encyclopedias and reference books, and in the norms of law in the period from the end of the 19th century to the present is considered. A hypothesis is made that repeated malicious disobedience may be in the form of manifesting furor. A connection between the concepts of malicious violation of the sentence serving regime and the manifestation of furor in the norms of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation is noted. Part 1 of Article 86 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation mentions malicious disobedience to legal requirements, which is similar in content to Part 1 of Article 116 of this code, in which one of the malicious violations of the sentence serving regime is “a threat, disobedience to representatives of the administration of a correctional facility and their insult in the absence of signs of a crime”. As a result, two ways of solving the problem of inconsistency of the grounds for the application of security measures in the RF Penal Code and in the law on institutions and bodies are proposed. The first way is to exclude the term “manifestation of furor” from the list of grounds for applying security measures in the RF Penal Code. The second is defining the term “manifestation of furor” in the norms of law and its consolidation as the basis for the use of physical force and special means in the law on institutions and bodies.

SPECIFIC FEATURES OF THE RUSSIAN PENAL SERVICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FEDERAL LAW № 197

2020 ◽  
pp. 140-144
Author(s):  
Дмитрий Эдуардович Марченко ◽  
Оганнес Давитович Мкртчян
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Social Protection ◽  
Financial Economic ◽  
Penal System ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Executive System ◽  
Criminal Penalties ◽  
The Law

В статье изучаются особенности прохождения службы сотрудниками уголовно-исполнительной системы в соответствии с Федеральным законом от 19.07.2018 № 197-ФЗ «О службе в уголовно-исполнительной системе Российской Федерации и о внесении изменений в Закон Российской Федерации "Об учреждениях и органах, исполняющих уголовные наказания в виде лишения свободы"». Авторами исследуются принципы прохождения службы в уголовно-исполнительной системе, положения, благодаря которым реализуются данные принципы, а также нормы, касающиеся правового статуса сотрудника уголовно-исполнительной системы. В статье особое внимание уделяется ограничениям и запретам, связанным с принятием на службу. Подробно рассматривается понятие «контракт», особенности его заключения, продления и основания для прекращения его действия. Изучается такое понятие, как испытательный срок, выясняется, от чего зависит его продолжительность. Рассматриваются социальные гарантии сотрудников уголовно-исполнительной системы. В ходе исследования авторы приходят к выводу, что изучаемый закон устанавливает правовые, организационные и финансово-экономические начала прохождения службы в уголовно-исполнительной системе, а также определяет правоотношения, которые возникают при поступлении граждан Российской Федерации на службу в УИС, и гарантии социальной защиты сотрудников УИС. In the article, the authors study the features of service by employees of the criminal Executive system in accordance with the Federal law of 19.07.2018, no. 197-ФЗ «On service in the penitentiary system of the Russian Federation and on introducing amendments to Russian Federation Law "On institutions and bodies executing criminal penalties of imprisonment"». The authors study the principles of service in the criminal Executive system, as well as study the provisions by which these principles are implemented. The norms concerning the legal status of an employee of the criminal Executive system are being studied. In the article special attention is paid to the limitations and prohibitions associated with the adoption of the service. The concept of a «contract» is considered in detail, as well as the specifics of its conclusion, extension, and grounds for termination. The authors study such a concept as a probation period, and find out what determines its duration. Social guarantees of employees of the criminal Executive system are considered. In this study, the authors conclude that the study of the law establishes the legal, organizational and financial-economic start of the service in criminally-Executive system, and also determines such legal relations that arise when the citizens of the Russian Federation entered the service in the penal system, consequently become employees of the UIS and receive guarantees of social protection.

Some questions connected with order of leaving of convicts to imprisonment in the penal system pre-trial detention center

2019 ◽  
pp. 16-22
Author(s):  
Ольга Александровна Алфимова
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Correctional Facility ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Detention Center ◽  
Detention Centers ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Correction System

В статье освещается правовая регламентация вопросов, связанных с условиями и порядком оставления осужденных к лишению свободы в следственных изоляторах уголовно-исполнительной системы. Решение об оставлении осужденного в СИЗО принимается администрацией СИЗО и оформляется приказом начальника. Приказ начальника СИЗО является, по сути, юридическим основанием для оставления осужденного для выполнения работ по хозяйственному обслуживанию и отбывания наказания в виде лишения свободы именно в данном учреждении, а не в том, которое назначил ему суд в обвинительном приговоре. Иными словами, можно сказать, что на сегодняшний день законом предусмотрен внесудебный порядок оставления осужденных в СИЗО для выполнения работ по хозяйственному обслуживанию. В связи с этим нельзя не согласиться с мнением некоторых специалистов, считающих, что такой порядок ставит в некую зависимость возможность отбывания наказания осужденными в СИЗО от воли администрации этого учреждения, а также предоставляет довольно широкий простор административному усмотрению. Вместе с тем, только суд наделен правом определять степень изоляции осужденных и режим отбывания наказания. Эти требования отражены в ст. 58 УК РФ. Это требование закона содержится и в п. 5 ст. 78 УИК РФ, однако в ситуации с оставлением в СИЗО складывается положение, когда решением его начальника, по сути, изменяется вступивший в силу приговор суда в части назначенного осужденному ранее вида ИУ. The legal regulation of the questions connected with conditions and order of leaving of convicts to imprisonment in pre-trial detention centers of penal correction system is covered in the present article. The decision on leaving of the convict in the pre-trial detention center is made by administration of the pre-trial detention center and made out by the order of the chief. The order of the chief of the pre-trial detention center is in fact a legislative basis for leaving of the convict for performance of work on economic service and serving sentence in the form of imprisonment in this establishment, but not in that which was appointed to it by court in a conviction. In other words it is possible to tell that today the law provided an extrajudicial order of leaving of convicts in the pre-trial detention center for performance of work on economic service. In this regard, it is necessary to agree with opinion of some authors considering that such order puts into certain dependence a possibility of serving sentence condemned in the pre-trial detention center from will of administration of this establishment and also provides enough “broad lands to an administrative discretion”. At the same time, only the court is given the right to define extent of isolation of convicts and the mode of serving sentence. These requirements are reflected in Art. 58 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. This requirement of the law contains also in Paragraph 5 of Art. 78 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation, however in a situation with leaving in the pre-trial detention center there is situation when the decision of his chief, in fact, the court verdict which came into force regarding the appointed correctional facility condemned before a look changes.

Principles of Russian civil procedure law: positivist approach

2020 ◽  
pp. 515-522
Author(s):  
Vera Iliukhina
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
The Third ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Positivist Approach

Based on the positivist approach to consciousness the law principle, the classification of the principles of Russian civil procedure law is clarified. The principles of civil procedural law of the Russian Federation are understood as the basic provisions of the civil procedural law branch, enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation and (or) the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Depending on the source of consolidation, there are three types of normative principles of civil procedure law: 1) constitutional principles of civil procedure law, duplicated in the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation; 2) constitutional principles of civil procedure law that are not duplicated in the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation; 3) branch principles of civil procedure law, reflected in the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The first group includes 12 prin-ciples, the second – 7 principles, and the third – 2 principles. In contrast to the previously proposed approach to the principles of civil procedure law in our classification, the number of principles included in the first and second groups is expanded. In particular, the first group includes the principle of le-gality, the principle of guaranteed protection of human and civil rights and freedoms, the principle of respect for the individual's honor and dignity, the principle of the individual's freedom and inviolability, the principle of secrecy of correspondence, telephone and other conversations, postal, telegraphic and other messages, the principle of home inviolability, the principle of freedom from the obligation to testify, and the principle of administering justice only by the court. We put forward the position that some of the nor-mative provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are not the initial, funda-mental ideas of civil procedure law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document