scholarly journals Differentiation and individualization of execution imprisonment when changing the type of correctional institution

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-84
Author(s):  
S. P. Sereda ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Judicial Discretion ◽  
Direct Impact ◽  
Correctional Institution ◽  
Correctional Institutions ◽  
Penal Law ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article deals with the issues of differentiation and individualization of the execution of punishment in the form of imprisonment when changing the type of correctional institution, problems in the legislative framework and practice of applying the procedure and grounds for changing the type of correctional institution, comparing the specified institution of the penal law with incentives and penalties. The main requirements are analyzed, which should underlie the change in the scope of restrictions and deprivations constituting the content of the sentence of imprisonment when changing the type of correctional institution and the place of serving the sentence. It is noted that the perfection of legislative consolidation of the legal mechanisms under consideration has a direct impact on the achievement of the goals of punishment. The system of places of imprisonment in Russia has historically developed in the direction of increasing the differentiation of punishment in relation to various categories of convicts, reducing the proportion of judicial discretion. These trends are reflected in both the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Penal Code of the Russian Federation. The types of correctional institutions are a concrete expression of the compulsory nature of punishment in the form of imprisonment, its content, which in turn is expressed in various kinds of restrictions on the rights and freedoms of the convicted person, which in general constitute the degree of his isolation from society. Therefore, a change in the type of correctional institution must mean a change in the degree and nature of the coercive influence on the person sentenced to imprisonment, the extent of restriction of his rights and freedoms. However the issues of determining the degree of correction of convicts are of particular importance, which requires detailed and precise legislative fixation.

THE MAIN PROBLEMS OF THE USE OF PHYSICAL FORCE AND SPECIAL MEANS BY PENAL OFFICERS OF THE PENITENTIARY SYSTEM

2020 ◽  
pp. 130-138
Author(s):  
Кристина Александровна Насреддинова ◽  
Иван Алексеевич Сластунин
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Correctional Institution ◽  
Correctional Institutions ◽  
Physical Force ◽  
Special Means ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Detention Facilities

Статья посвящена рассмотрению проблем правомерности применения сотрудниками исправительных учреждений и следственных изоляторов физической силы и специальных средств. Актуальность данной темы не вызывает сомнения, так как при применении физической силы и специальных средств осуществляется посягательство на жизнь и здоровье осужденных (обвиняемых и подозреваемых), а ценность данных общественных отношений подлежит безусловной защите, что закреплено и в Конституции РФ, и в Уголовном кодексе РФ. С другой стороны, любой сотрудник исправительного учреждения или следственного изолятора обладает профессиональной виктимностью в связи с осуществлением своих должностных полномочий, связанных с обеспечением безопасности лиц, находящихся в исправительных учреждениях и следственных изоляторах. Соответственно каждый день он сам может стать жертвой насильственного преступления, совершенного уже по отношению к нему. Поэтому выработка знаний, умений и навыков у сотрудников УИС по правомерному применению физической силы и специальных средств является важной задачей, которая стоит перед Федеральной службой исполнения наказания на сегодняшний день. В статье проанализированы официальные статистические данные о количестве фактов применения физической силы и специальных средств сотрудниками УИС, а также о количестве случаев привлечения их к уголовной ответственности за данные деяния. Кроме того, исследованы случаи, когда сотрудники вынуждены безусловно применить физическую силу или специальные средства, а именно факты совершения против них преступлений, предусмотренных ст. 321 УК РФ. Анализ статических данных, а также уголовных дел, научной литературы, правоприменительной практики позволил представить основные детерминанты неправомерного применения физической силы и специальных средств сотрудниками УИС и обобщить основные меры профилактики: предложены как организационно-управленческие решения рассматриваемой проблемы, так и меры, направленные на совершенствование механизма реализации существующих правовых норм, которые регламентируют основания и порядок применения физической силы и специальных средств. The article is devoted to the problems of legality of the use of physical force and special means by penal officers of correctional institutions and pre-trial detention facilities. The urgency of this topic doesn’t cast doubt, as the use of physical force and special means endangers the life and well-being of convicted (accused and suspected) persons. And the values of these public relations are subject to absolute protection that is enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation and in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. On the other hand, any penal officer of a correctional institution or pre-trial detention facility has enhanced professional victimization from the performance of their official powers related to ensuring the safety of persons in correctional institutions and pre-trial detention facilities. As a consequence, every day he can become a victim of a violent crime committed against him. Therefore, the development of knowledge, skills and abilities of the employees of the penitentiary system on the legal use of physical force and special means is an important task facing the Federal penitentiary service of Russia today. The article analyzes official statistical data that make it possible to understand the number of facts of the use of physical force and special means by employees of the penitentiary system, as well as the number of cases of bringing them to criminal responsibility for these acts. In addition, we analyzed cases when employees are forced to use physical force or special means, namely, the facts of committing crimes against them under article 321 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Statistical data analysis as well as criminal cases, scientific literature, law enforcement practice is allowed to present the main determinants of unlawful use of physical force and special means by the staff of the Penal System and summarize the main measures of prevention. Both organizational and managerial solutions to the problem under consideration were proposed, as well as measures aimed at improving the mechanism for implementing existing legal norms that regulate the grounds and procedure for the use of physical force and special means.

scholarly journals Regulation and organization of convicts’ work in places of deprivation of liberty: some challenges

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 112-116
Author(s):  
Elena Shamshilova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Regulatory Control ◽  
Correctional Institutions ◽  
Labor Legislation ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Compliance With The Law ◽  
High Level

The article is devoted to the process of convicts attracting to work as a means of their correction. The main goals of convicts’ employment are outlined, as well as the problems of regulatory control of this process. The data of the Prosecutor’s office on compliance with the law in correctional institutions in the sphere of attracting convicts to work are analyzed. The study of legislation in the field of convicts’ employment revealed fragmentary regulation of this process, which is explained by the consolidation of norms on attracting this category of persons to work in both the Penal and Labor Codes of the Russian Federation. Taking into account the fact that the basis for regulating issues in the sphere of execution of punishments is the Penal Code of the Russian Federation. The author concludes that it is necessary to make changes to the Penal legislation of Russia in the part concerning the organization of convicts attracting to work, as well as by adding rules on their dismissal. In addition, such problems in the sphere of employment of convicts as the lack of jobs, which entails a high level of non-working convicts, and the organization of remuneration that does not correspond to the stated in the labor legislation, were considered. Possible ways to solve these problems are suggested.

scholarly journals Theoretical analysis of legislative definition of the regime in correctional institutions: problems and ways to solve them

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-75
Author(s):  
V. E. Juzhanin ◽  
D. V. Gorban'
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Model ◽  
Theoretical Analysis ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Penal System ◽  
Correctional Institutions ◽  
Scientific Thought ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of

The article provides a theoretical analysis of Part 1 of Article 82 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which defines the regime in correctional institutions of the Russian penal system. It is noted that this definition does not correspond to the achievements of modern penitentiary scientific thought about the regime. In particular, it is emphasized that the regime cannot provide conditions for serving a sentence, since it includes these conditions. Also, the regime cannot ensure the protection of convicts, supervision over them and separate maintenance of different categories of convicts, since, on the contrary, the latter are the means of ensuring the regime. According to the authors of the article, the legislator incorrectly uses the phrase regime of detention of convicts, meaning regime of serving a sentence, since they are different legal phenomena. It is noted that the most optimal definition of the regime is presented in the theoretical model of the general part of the new Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, prepared by a group of authors, but the authors also subjected this definition to some adjustments.

scholarly journals PREVENTION OF OFFENSES AMONG PERSONS HELD IN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS AS A MEASURE TO ENSURE THE PERSONAL SAFETY OF CONVICTED PERSONS

2021 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-139
Author(s):  
O.V. Pronina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Penal System ◽  
Correctional Institution ◽  
Correctional Institutions ◽  
Personal Safety ◽  
Law And Order ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Concept Of Law ◽  
Concept Of Law

The article considers the concept of "law and order in a correctional institution". The connection of the concept of "law and order" with the concept of "personal security of convicts"is analyzed. The author proposed changes and additions to the Instructions for the Prevention of Offenses among persons held in institutions of the penal system «approved by the order of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation of May 20, 2013. No. 72, which, in his opinion, will have a positive impact on the measures for the prevention of offenses in correctional institutions carried out by employees of the penitentiary system in order to ensure an appropriate level of law and order and ensure the personal safety of convicts.

Reasons to escape from a place of detention by convicts with the right of movement without convoy

2021 ◽  
pp. 525-526
Author(s):  
Nikita V. Cheremin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Correctional Institutions ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Official Statistics ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Large Material ◽  
The Right ◽  
Criminological Analysis

Dedicated to a topical topic for the penitentiary system of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the PS of the Russian Federation) – increasing the level of security, which is considered in the framework of a criminological analysis of the reasons for escaping from places of detention by a particularly considered category of convicts who are granted the right to travel without an convoy or escort. The commission of such a crime as es-cape not only disorganizes the activities of institutions executing punishment in the form of imprisonment, but also endangers public safety. The actions of the penitentiary system to organize a special operation to search for and arrest escaped criminals requires large material and physical costs. All this speaks of the relevance of the study, which can help in organizing preventive measures to prevent escapes. The purpose of the study was achieved by analyzing the criminal and penal legislation of the Russian Federation, analyzing official statistics, questioning and interviewing the heads of correctional institutions of the PS of the Russian Federation, as well as the special contingent; analysis of some decisions in criminal cases related to Article 313 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for the period 2010–2020. As a result of the study, the characteristic reasons (objective and subjective) of the escapes of the investigated group of convicts were revealed, features are identified, which will allow in the future to organize preventive measures aimed at preventing and preventing escapes among convicts, who were allowed by the administration of the institution to have the right to leave the correctional institutions in order to economic service.

Problems of realization of the rights of convicted persons serving a sentence of imprisonment and transferred to a pre-trial detention center as a witness or victim

2020 ◽  
pp. 7-13
Author(s):  
Арби Русланович Акиев ◽  
Васильевич Фокин Фокин
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Correctional Facility ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Correctional Institution ◽  
Detention Center ◽  
The Russian Federation

Статья посвящена анализу юридических коллизий норм уголовно-исполнительного законодательства, возникающих при переводе осужденного, отбывающего наказание в виде лишения свободы, из исправительного учреждения в следственный изолятор в новом процессуальном статусе свидетеля или потерпевшего. Учитывая отличия в режиме и условиях содержания в ИУ и СИЗО, авторы поднимают проблемы реализации осужденным частных прав, закрепленных в УИК РФ, в период нахождения в СИЗО, предлагают пути решения. The article is devoted to the analysis of legal conflicts of the norms of the criminal Executive legislation that arise when a convicted person serving a sentence of imprisonment is transferred from a correctional institution to a pre-trial detention center in the new procedural status of a witness or victim. Given the differences in the regime and conditions of detention in a correctional facility and the detention center, the authors raise the problem of implementation of a convicted individual rights enshrined in the Penal Code of the Russian Federation in the period of detention, propose solutions.

EFFECTIVENESS OF PUBLIC MONITORING COMMISSIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE EPIDEMIC: SOME LEGAL AND TECHNICAL ASPECTS

2021 ◽  
pp. 52-56
Author(s):  
Наталья Сергеевна Малолеткина
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Correctional Institutions ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
Penal Institutions ◽  
Emergency Group ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Public Monitoring

Автором рассматривается проблема эффективности деятельности членов общественных наблюдательных комиссий в период эпидемии. Особое внимание уделяется правовой основе деятельности членов общественных наблюдательных комиссий в учреждениях уголовно-исполнительной системы с учетом имеющихся ограничений, связанных с эпидемией. Согласно ст. 85 УИК РФ возможно введение режима особых условий в исправительных учреждениях для противодействия и нейтрализации негативных последствий от стихийных бедствий, различных оснований введения чрезвычайного положения, указанных в ст. 3 ФКЗ Российской Федерации «О чрезвычайном положении», групповых неповиновений осужденных и пр. Режим особых условий предусматривает возможность введения дополнительных ограничений в отношении осужденных к лишению свободы и корректировку организации деятельности подразделений администрации исправительного учреждения (ч. 2 ст. 85 УИК РФ). В статье предлагается повторно изучить уже имеющийся опыт ряда пилотных проектов, которые реализовывались в исправительных учреждениях, и по мере необходимости внедрить их для повышения эффективности общественного пенитенциарного контроля за обеспечением прав осужденных. Формулируются также предложения по совершенствованию уголовно-исполнительного и иного законодательства в этой сфере. The article deals with the problem of the effectiveness activity of public monitoring commission members during the epidemic. Special attention is paid to the legal basis of the activities of public monitoring commissions members in the penal institutions, taking into account the existing restrictions associated with the epidemic. According to Article 85 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is possible to introduce a regime of special conditions in correctional institutions to counteract and neutralize the negative consequences of natural disasters, various grounds for the introduction of a state of emergency specified in Article 3 of the Federal Criminal Code of the Russian Federation «On the State of Emergency», group disobedience of convicts, etc. The regime of special conditions provides for the possibility of introducing additional restrictions on persons sentenced to imprisonment and adjusting the organization of the departments activities of the penal administration (Part 2 of Article 85 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The article proposes to re-examine the existing experience of a number of pilot reform that were implemented in correctional institutions and, if necessary, to implement them to improve the effectiveness of public penitentiary control over the rights of convicts. Proposals are also formulated to improve the penal enforcement and other legislation in this area.

On the issue of creating integrated correctional institutions in the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
pp. 58-63
Author(s):  
Ирина Николаевна Коробова
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Penal System ◽  
Correctional Institution ◽  
Correctional Institutions ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Multi Mode

В настоящее время происходит процесс активного реформирования уголовно-исполнительной системы, кроме того, параллельно проводится работа по изменению уголовно-исполнительного законодательства. Количество осужденных, содержащихся в местах лишения свободы, неизменно снижается, причем прослеживается определенная тенденция, когда исправительные учреждения одного вида режима переполнены, другие заполнены не в полном объеме, в связи с чем их количество уменьшается, в частности, на всей территории Российской Федерации имеется только 22 колонии для несовершеннолетних. В уголовно-исполнительном законодательстве РФ содержится норма, предусматривающая отбывание наказания в исправительном учреждении, расположенном в пределах территории субъекта Российской Федерации, в котором осужденный проживал или был осужден. Однако в настоящее время соблюдение данного принципа достаточно проблематично, и выходом из сложившейся ситуации может быть создание комплексных (мультирежимных) исправительных учреждений. Данное положение не противоречит и положениям международных стандартов исполнения наказаний, подобные положения имеются и в Минимальных стандартных правилах в отношении обращения с заключенными 2015 г., и в Европейских пенитенциарных правилах. Все это обосновывает актуальность изучаемой темы. Currently, there is a process of active reform of the penal system, in addition, work is being carried out in parallel to change the penal legislation. The number of convicts held in places of deprivation of liberty is constantly decreasing, and there is a certain trend when correctional institutions of one type of regime are overcrowded, while others are not filled in full, which is why their number is decreasing, in particular, there are only 22 juvenile colonies throughout the Russian Federation. Among the principles of deprivation of liberty, the penal legislation of the Russian Federation singles out the principle of serving a sentence in a correctional institution located within the territory of the subject of the Russian Federation where the convicted person lived or was convicted. However, at present, compliance with this principle is quite problematic, so the solution to this situation may be the creation of complex (multi-mode) correctional institutions. This provision does not contradict the provisions of international standards for the execution of sentences, such provisions are found in the standard Minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners of 2015, and in the European prison rules. All this justifies the relevance of the topic under study.

scholarly journals Recidivism as Legal Background for the Differentiation of Criminal Liability: Conceptual Approaches of Russian and Foreign Legislators

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-371
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Zharkikh ◽  
Afet Maksimov ◽  
Leonid Prokhorov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Correctional Institution ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
General Role ◽  
The World ◽  
The Russian Federation

The authors examine key stages of the development of theoretical views and concepts of the essence of recidivism lying at the basis of the emergence of professional and organized crime, whose genesis trends pose a special danger for the global community in the 20th and the 21st centuries. It is noted that the problems of counteracting repeat offences were discussed by scholars of different periods of the development of criminological and criminal law doctrines. Besides, the authors state that in contemporary lawmaking practice in the world there are several radically different approaches to the assessment of repeat offences in terms of the differentiation of criminal liability and individualization of punishment. A heightened danger of repeat offences dictates special approaches of lawmakers to the differentiation of criminal liability, to determining its limits in the norms of the Special Parts of criminal legislation in cases of recidivism. The authors describe key stages of the development of the institute of repeat offences and its influence on the differentiation of criminal liability and individualization of punishment in the Russian legislation. They examine key functional roles of the institute of repeat offences: ensuring the differentiation of criminal liability depending on recidivism, determining the limits of its use and the conditions of release; regulation of the algorithm of the individualization of punishment for repeat offences; determining the type of correctional institution to which the offender is allocated in cases of recidivism; execution of punishment. There are two key approaches to assessing repeat offences in terms of the differentiation of criminal liability and the individualization of punishment in the lawmaking practice in the world. The first approach to determining the limits of punishment in case of a repeat offence is based on assessing the personality of the offender, while the second presupposes shifting the emphasis from the personality of the offender to the committed crimes, to recidivism. The authors specifically stress that while the general role of the institute of repeat offences is positive, there are some contradictions in the system of the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation regarding the lawmakers’ approach to its regulation that have an impact on the differentiation of criminal liability. These contradictions are connected with considerable changes in the contents of Part 2, Art. 68 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation introduced by the Federal Law of Dec. 8, 2003 № 162-ФЗ. It states that the term of punishment of any type of repeat offence cannot be under one third of the maximum term for the strictest type of punishment, and it should be restricted by the limits of the sanction in the corresponding article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Consequently, the introduction of this criminal law norm in the legislative system neutralized the requirement of Part 5, Art. 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, according to which repeat offences lead to stricter punishments on the basis and within the limits provided in the Code, while the preventive role of the analyzed criminal law norm that it played in the previous version is lost. In this connection, the authors formulate recommendations on improving the contents of Part 2, Art. 68 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and present its version.

scholarly journals TO THE QUESTION OF DISPOSITIONS OF ARTICLES OF A SPECIAL PART OF RHE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2020 ◽  
pp. 29-34
Author(s):  
Диана Викторовна Голенко
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Discretion ◽  
Structural Element ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

В работе исследуется структурный элемент статьи Особенной части Уголовного кодекса Российской Федерации - диспозиция. Затрагивается вопрос о соотношении диспозиции статьи, диспозиции нормы и состава преступления. Уделено внимание существующим в современной доктрине уголовного права представлениям о диспозиции статьи уголовного закона, ее видах, структуре. Обращено внимание на простые, описательные, бланкетные, ссылочные диспозиции, а также на особенности их использования. Исследуются абстрактный, казуистический приемы изложения нормативного материала. Обозначены преимущества и недостатки применения законодателем тех или иных приемов, а также влияние способа изложения диспозиции на пределы судейского усмотрения при применении статей. В работе обращено внимание на тенденции, характерные для современного законодателя. The article investigates the structural element of the article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - disposition. The question is raised about the ratio of the disposition of the article, the disposition of the norm and the corpus delicti. Attention is paid to the ideas exiting in the modern doctrine of criminal law on the disposition of an article of the criminal law, its types, structure. Attention is drawn to simple, descriptive, blank, reference dispositions, as well as to the features of their use. Abstract, casuistic techniques of presentation of normative material are investigated. The advantages and disadvantages of the use of these or those methods by the legislator, as well as the influence of the method of presentation of the disposition on the limits of judicial discretion when applying the articles are indicated. The article draws attention to the trends characteristic of the modern legislator.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document