Везде
National Priorities and International Standards in the Field of Execution of Criminal Penalties
Table of contents
Abstract Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
National Priorities and International Standards in the Field of Execution of Criminal Penalties
Abstract
PII
S1991-32220000622-3-1
DOI
10.61205/jzsp.2023.052
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Sergei Ovchinnikov 
ORCID: 0000-0001-8942-0244
Occupation: Leading Researcher, Center of Criminal, Criminal Procedure Legislation and Judicial Practice
Affiliation: Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation
Address: Moscow, Russia
Edition
Volume 19 No. 4
Pages
76-84
Abstract

Harmonization of international legal standards with national priorities is a multi-vector process of dialogue between national and supranational legal systems. The universal rules for the execution of criminal penalties were the result of the joint work of more than one generation of scientists, penitentiary experts and politicians. They are based on the humanistic ideas of the enlightenment philosophers about the inviolability of natural human rights and the rule of law.

The article provides a periodization of the formation of international standards for the treatment of prisoners. This process has gone through three stages from scientific congresses of scientists and practitioners to the institutionalization of these initiatives at the global and regional levels. The role of Russian representatives in different periods of the formation of generally recognized rules for the treatment of persons in places of detention was different and depended on the direction of the foreign policy.

The last quarter of the century has been characterized by activity on the implementation of the international law norms in national legal system. The improvement of the system of criminal execution is attributed to national priorities and consolidated in many strategic planning documents. However, this process did not occur linearly. Compliance with international standards has led to both positive changes in the penal enforcement system and revealed vulnerabilities in the way of implementation. The denunciation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides for withdrawal from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights, actualizes the need to comprehend the experience of integration into the European space and to find ways to improve the human rights mechanism that meets the national priorities of the development of society and the state.

Keywords
penitentiary policy, international standards, national priorities, implementation, deprivation of liberty, detention, protection of human rights
Date of publication
11.09.2023
Number of purchasers
12
Views
82
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf
1

References



Additional sources and materials

1. Belyaeva L. I. International penitentiary congresses and the development of education on the education of juvenile offenders. Vestnik instituta: prestuplenie, nakazanie, ispravlenie, 2012, no. 1(17), pp. 69—81. (In Russ. ) 
2. Lazarev V. V. (ed. ). Implementation of decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in the Russian legal system. Moscow, 2019. 416 p. (In Russ. ) 
3. Kashepov V. P. (ed. ). Criminalization and decriminalization as forms of reforming legislation. Moscow, 2018. 280 p. (In. Russ. ) 
4. Lazarev V. V. Philosophical Foundations of Implementation Activities. Journal of Russian Law, 2020, no. 9, pp. 5—18. (In Russ. ) DOI: 10. 12737/jrl. 2020. 102. 
5. Kashepov V. P. (ed. ). International legal standards in the criminal justice of the Russian Federation. Moscow, 2012. 312 p. (In Russ. ) 
6. Petrenko N. I. The influence of international prison congresses on the penitentiary system of the Russian Empire. Fundamental’nye i prikladnye issledovaniya kooperativnogo sektora ekonomiki, 2012, no. 5, pp. 123—125. (In Russ. ) 
7. Seliverstov V. I. Reducing the number of convicts in places of deprivation of liberty: achieving or challenging the penitentiary system. Collection of abstracts and reports of participants in the V International Penitentiary Forum “Crime, Punishment, Correction”. Vol. 1. Ryazan’, 2021. Pp. 17—23. (In Russ. ) 
8. Seliverstov V. I. Criminal and penitentiary policy in the field of execution of deprivation of liberty: innovations in 2015. Lex russica, 2016, no. 9(118), pp. 188—204. (In Russ. ) 
9. Tikhomirov Yu. A. Law: A Moment of Stillness or Anticipatory Impact on Social Processes. Journal of Russian Law, 2020, no. 4, pp. 5—16. (In Russ. ) DOI: 10. 12737/jrl. 2020. 038. 
10. Truntsevskiy Yu. V. IX International Penitentiary Congress of 1925: world practice and the work of the State Institute for the Study of Crime and the Criminal. Mezhdunarodnoe publichnoe i chastnoe pravo, 2022, no. 3, pp. 29—32. (In Russ. ) 
11. Utkin V. A. Alternative Sanctions in Russia: Status, Problems, Prospects. Moscow, 2013. 67 p. (In Russ. ) 
12. Utkin V. A. European Prison Rules and Problems of their Implementation. Tomsk, 1996. 64 p. (In Russ. )

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate