SUBJECTS EXECUTING CUSTODIAL SENTENCES: CONCEPT, CHARACTERISTICS, CLASSIFICATION

В последние десятилетия окончательно определена правовая основа служебной деятельности сотрудников уголовно-исполнительной системы и исправительных учреждений. Сотрудники исправительных учреждений помимо субъекта несения службы являются важным субъектом, на которого государством возложены полномочия по приведению в исполнение меры государственного принуждения - наказания (самостоятельно или в составе учреждения, органа). Субъекты, исполняющие наказания в виде лишения свободы, обладают определенными признаками. К ним относятся: внешняя обособленность, персонификация, способность вырабатывать, выражать и осуществлять персонифицированную волю, приобретение свойства субъекта права в силу юридических норм. Рассматриваемых субъектов следует классифицировать на три группы: 1) исправительные учреждения (территориальный орган ФСИН России); 2) коллективные субъекты, исполняющие наказания (администрация, персонал (работники) исправительных учреждений); 3) персональные субъекты, исполняющие наказания (начальник исправительного учреждения, сотрудник исправительного учреждения). Цель работы - показать роль и значение субъектов, исполняющих наказания в виде лишения свободы, определить их ключевые черты и установить виды (персональные, коллективные либо имеющие статус юридического лица). Методами исследования в научной статье явились универсальные методы (анализ и синтез, индукция и дедукция, аналогия и классификация); теоретические методы (абстрагирование, гипотетико-дедуктивный метод) и др. Выводы и результаты работы определяются достижением ее целей. In recent decades, the legal basis for the official activities of employees of the penitentiary system and correctional institutions has been finally determined. Employees of correctional institutions, in addition to the subject of service, are an important subject to whom the State has the authority to enforce a measure of state coercion - punishment (independently or as part of an institution, body). Subjects who execute sentences in the form of deprivation of liberty have certain characteristics. These include: external isolation, personification, the ability to develop, express and exercise a personalized will, the acquisition of the property of the subject of law by virtue of legal norms. The subjects under consideration should be classified into three groups: 1) correctional institutions (territorial body of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia); 2) collective subjects executing punishments (administration, staff (employees) of correctional institutions); 3) personal subjects executing punishments (the head of a correctional institution, a correctional institution employee). The purpose of the work is to show the role and significance of the subjects executing sentences in the form of imprisonment, to identify their key features and to establish types (personal, collective or having the status of a legal entity). The research methods in the scientific article were universal methods (analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, analogy and classification); theoretical methods (abstraction, hypothetical and deductive method), etc. The conclusions and results of the work are determined by the achievement of its goals.

PROBLEMS OF LEGAL REGULATION AND WAYS TO SOLVE THEM IN THE USE OF FIREARMS AS MEASURES OF STATE COERCION

В статье рассматриваются отдельные основания применения огнестрельного оружия с производством выстрела на поражение сотрудниками полиции и уголовно-исполнительной системы, вопросы правовой регламентации и проблемы правоприменения. Предлагаются обоснования и рекомендации по внесению изменений в ФЗ «О полиции», направленные на устранение существующих пробелов и нормативных неопределенностей. The article deals with certain grounds for the use of firearms with the firing of shots to kill by police officers and the penal system. Legal regulation and enforcement issues are being explored. Justification and recommendations for amending the Federal Law «On Police» are proposed, aimed at eliminating existing gaps and regulatory uncertainties.

The effects of state coercion on voting outcome in protest movements: a causal forest approach

In this research note, we examine how Hong Kong voters respond to police violence in the recent social movement. We use causal forests, a machine learning algorithm, to estimate the impact of tear gas usage specific to each constituency. Based on the 2019 District Council Election outcome, we find that there is heterogeneity in the effect of state coercion on the vote share of pro-democracy candidates, depending on many socioeconomic characteristics of the constituency. The results imply that economic concerns still matter in the struggle to obtain democracy: citizens who sense economic insecurity in social unrest show less disapproval of state violence.

TO THE QUESTION OF THE APPROVALITY OF APPLICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE ARREST UNDER PART 3 OF ARTICLE 12.8, PART 2 OF ARTICLE 12.26 AND PART 1 OF ARTICLE 20.25 OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION CODE ON ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSES

Профилактика безопасности дорожного движения является фундаментальным критерием снижения уровня аварийности на территории Российской Федерации. Предупреждение административных правонарушений среди неопределенного круга лиц путем применения соразмерного и эффективного наказания гарантирует безопасность участникам процесса. Отсутствие возможности применения надлежащих мер государственного принуждения, соответствующих тенденциям современного общества, не позволяет обеспечить неукоснительное соблюдение принципа неотвратимости наказания или достигнуть поставленных Министерством внутренних дел Российской Федерации целей. Prevention of road safety is a fundamental criterion for reducing the accident rate on the territory of the Russian Federation. The prevention of administrative offenses among an indefinite circle of persons, through the application of proportionate and effective punishment, guarantees the safety of the participants in the process. The lack of the possibility of applying appropriate measures of state coercion, corresponding to modern society, does not allow the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation to ensure strict observance of the principle of inevitability of punishment or to achieve the set goals.

On legal succession in reconciliation of criminal cases of private prosecution

The subject of this research is the criminal prosecution of cases established by the Part 2 of the Article 20 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, which is carried out in private capacity and significantly modifies the rights and responsibilities of the parties to criminal proceedings. Pursuant to the general rule, the state authorities and officials do not carry out private prosecution cases. In view of this, close attention is given the procedural activity of private prosecutor, who is vested the right in application of measures of state coercion, but entrusted with responsibility on formulating, proving, and pressing charges in court. Retrospective analysis of the Russian criminal procedure legislation reveals that modern legislation has no legal succession of the centuries-long experience of classifying a range of offences as cases of private prosecution. The author believes that the list of cases of private prosecution can be extended by taking into account the provisions of the Criminal Law and Practice Statute 1864, Regulations of Punishments Imposed by Justices of the Peace, which enables reconciliation of the parties and entails unconditional termination of proceedings in certain categories of minor offences. This would ensure the effective implementation of criminal proceedings, restoration of social and legal justice, and accessibility of justice to general public.

Freedom of Expression

Two legal systems founded from similar Enlightenment philosophical and political values use state coercion differently to regulate a core liberty: the freedom of expression. This comparative study of France and the United States proposes a novel theory of how the limits of freedom of expression are informed by different revolutionary experiences and constitutional and political arrangements. Ioanna Tourkochoriti argues that the different ways freedom of expression is balanced against other values in France and the United States can be understood in reference to the role of the government and the understanding of republicanism and liberty. This understanding affects how jurists define the content and the limits of a liberty and strike a balance between liberties in conflict. Exploring both the legal traditions of the two countries, this study sheds new light on the broader historical, social and philosophical contexts in which jurists operate.

Personality of the Convict in the Penitentiary Process

The article examines the ways of normative response to criminal behavior from the point of view of historical retrospect and the current level of empirical knowledge. The author focuses on some controversial issues of criminal motivation. It is argued that criminal behavior has not only social determinants, but is also based on the existence of psychophysiological features of the individual formed in unfavorable social conditions. The article analyzes the importance of a person-oriented penitentiary process for ensuring the effectiveness of correctional influence on convicts and state coercion. Special attention is paid to educational work in the process of implementing correction tools. It is shown that the criminal law impact has the potential to comprehensively regulate the behavior of convicts in the process of applying a sentence of imprisonment.

On the issue of the effectiveness of administrative coercion

The issues of administrative coercion are classic for the theory of administrative law, however, despite this, they do not cease to be relevant. New challenges and threats, as well as the paradigm of social and economic development, necessitate the revision of established points of view regarding the effectiveness of administrative coercion. The key issues of today are the problem of determining the balance of the combination of private and public components in the application of administrative coercion measures, as well as determining those criteria that do not allow such coercion to be excessive. The article draws attention to the functionality of administrative coercion, highlights its police and managerial aspects, and also examines the effectiveness of the implementation of this type of state coercion.

Criminal-executive characteristics and social-legal conditionality of negative duties of convicts sentenced to deprivation of liberty for a fixed term.

The article deals with criminal-executive characteristics and social-legal conditionality of negative duties of convicts sentenced to deprivation of liberty for a fixed term. It is noted that the social-legal significance of duties of convicts sentenced to deprivation of liberty for a fixed term is that they are means of forming the moral and legal consciousness of convicts, strengthening law and order, discipline and organization during serving a punishment. The essence of the legal duties of convicts is to require the necessary conduct from the point of view of the state, government and the law. This behavior of convicts is obligatory, indisputable and ensured by measures of state coercion. Such measures of state coercion include the establishment of the possibility of bringing convicts for failure to comply with their duties to legal liability of various types (disciplinary, material, criminal). The analysis of the legal nature of the legal duties of convicts testified to their two-element content (structure), namely: first, it is the need to take certain actions (positive duties); secondly, the need to refrain from performing statutory actions (negative duties). The article establishes that the activity of the colony staff to control the observance of negative duties by convicts has not only a criminal-executive, but also a criminological aspect and is aimed not only at achieving the purpose of punishment and criminal-executive legislation, but also at preventing convicts from committing offenses (including criminal ones) while serving punishments. The social-legal conditionality of the imposition of legal duties on convicts sentenced to deprivation of liberty is given, the main function of which is a special-preventing (criminological). It is noted that one of the main differences between the duties of convicts and their rights is that failure to comply the first ones has undesirable consequences for a person – the fact of bringing convicts to legal liability, which is differentiated by disciplinary, material, criminal.