Affiliation:
1. Saint Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia
2. Omsk Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia
3. Sochi Branch of the All-Russian State University of Justice
Abstract
The current legal regulation of fine enforcement, together with the clauses regulating the possibility of release from execution in cases of failure to enforce a court sentence, as well as the approaches to the interpretation of some concepts of criminal and penitentiary legislation, make it possible to free the persons who do not in fact pay the imposed fines from legal encumbrances constituting legal liability. The absence of a uniform understanding of the terms «enforcement of a sentence», «end of the enforcement of a sentence», «end of the enforcement proceedings» does not make it possible to objectively define the moment when a person can be released from punishment due to the statute of limitations for the guilty verdict. The inconsistency of the position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation regarding this issue also has a negative impact on the practice of law enforcement. The effectiveness of the criminal law systems impact is generally reduced as a result of a combination of various technical-legal, organizational and inter-branch factors. The situations of inter-branch misalignment, arising due to the absence of control at the stage of introducing amendments into criminal legislation and other normative legal acts, are unacceptable. The resulting practice of imposing this punishment is heterogeneous, which prevents the establishment of a clear and logical system of both enforcing fines and releasing from such enforcement. The existing situation is undoubtedly not normal and requires a legislative correction which, in its turn, will make it possible to ensure that the situation in this area corresponds with the ideas of justice and equality before the criminal law. The authors concept of improving the legal regulation in the analyzed sphere is based on the necessity to implement the principle of the inevitability of punishment and observe the principle of reasonable time for the enforcement of punishment. At the same time, it is necessary to recognize that indirect encouragement of the non-performance of obligations (restriction of rights) associated with punishment is unacceptable.
Subject
Law,Sociology and Political Science
Reference15 articles.
1. Kirchengast T. Proportionality in Sentencing and the Restorative Justice Paradigm: «Just Deserts» for Victims and Defendants Alike? Criminal Law and Philosophy, 2010, vol. 4, iss. 2, pp. 197–213.
2. Davidovskaya V.A. Criminal Penalty in the Form of a Fine: Problems of Law Enforcement and Prospects for Improvement. Pravo.by, 2020, no. 6, pp. 23–29. (In Russian). EDN: AADKEJ.
3. Glaser D. Profitable Penalties How To Cut Both Crimes Rates and Costs. Thousand Oaks, Pine Forge Press, 1997. 320 p.
4. Lyadov E.V. Legislative Regulation of Fine How to Criminal Penalties. Mezhdunarodnyi zhurnal prikladnykh i fundamental’nykh issledovanii = International Journal on Practical and Fundamental Research, 2016, no. 9-2, pp. 309–313. (In Russian). EDN: WJVHNR.
5. Bögelein N. «Money Rules»: Exploring Offenders’ Perceptions of the Fine as Punishment. The British Journal of Criminology, 2018, vol. 58, iss. 4, pp. 805–823. DOI: 10.1093/bjc/azx044.