Russian Federation
UDK 34 Право. Юридические науки
GRNTI 10.77 Уголовное право
In the matter of concretizing the constitutional basis of criminal law regulation, the task of building a system of criminal punishments and the rules for their appointment that is adequate to the constitutional basis is of great importance. In its decisions, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation formulated a number of legal positions, which, on the one hand, confirm the already existing criminal law decisions, and on the other hand, act as a fundamental guidance for all subsequent decisions, serve as a criterion for checking the constitutionality of criminal law regulations. Based on the generalization and analysis of the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the article presents the main requirements, the observance of which is intended to ensure the commensuration and proportionality of criminal punishment as a means of limiting the rights of a person who has committed a crime. Among these requirements, priority is given to: the prohibition of cruel, inhuman and degrading forms of punishment; limiting the punitive treatment on the person who committed the crime, exclusively within the framework of criminal responsibility; differentiation of criminal punishment and the rules for its appointment while observing the principle of legal equality; commensuration and proportionality of the punishment established by law and imposed by the court on the grounds for the application of measures of criminal responsibility; potential and real ability of punishment to ensure the achievement of the goals of criminal law impact.
constitutionalization of criminal law, criminal punishment, the principle of justice, the principle of proportionality, differentiation of responsibility, commensuration of punishment
1. Kruglikov L. L. Differenciaciya ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti: sootnoshenie so smezhnymi ponyatiyami // Pravovaya paradigma. – 2017. – T. 16. – № 3. – S. 8–13.
2. Rogova E. V. Konstitucionnye principy differenciacii ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti // Vestnik Universiteta prokuratury Rossiyskoy Federacii. – 2018. – № 6 (68). – S. 62–67.
3. Elinskiy A. V. Problemy ugolovnogo prava v konstitucionnom izmerenii. – Moskva: Yurlitinform, 2012. – 496 s.
4. Guzeeva O. S. Prestuplenie i nakazanie: konstitucionnye osnovy ugolovno-pravovoy koncepcii. – Moskva: Yurlitinform, 2020. – 272 s.
5. Dibirov M. G. Privilegii v ugolovnom prave : avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk: 12.00.08 / Dibirov Magomedrasul Galbacdibirovich. – Saratov, 2015. – 26 s.
6. Aslanyan S. G. Obespechenie gendernogo ravenstva posredstvom ugolovno-pravovyh norm : avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk: 12.00.08 / Aslanyan Suren Georgievich. – Krasnodar, 2019. – 27 s.
7. Taschilin M. T. Naznachenie nakazaniya sudom s uchastiem prisyazhnyh zasedateley po ugolovnomu pravu Rossiyskoy Federacii : avtoref. dis. … d-ra yurid. nauk: 12.00.08 / Taschilin Mihail Tihonovich. – Krasnodar, 2003. – 54 s.
8. Andrienko V. A. Ravenstvo grazhdan po priznaku pola v ugolovnom prave i ego soblyudenie pri realizacii ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti i nakazaniya zhenschin : avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk: 12.00.08 / Andrienko Vladimir Aleksandrovich. – Rostov-na-Donu, 2007. – 26 s.
9. Pereverzev A. A. Osnovaniya ogranicheniya konstitucionnyh prav i svobod cheloveka i grazhdanina v Rossiyskoy Federacii : avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk: 12.00.02 / Pereverzev Andrey Aleksandrovich. – Stavropol', 2006. – 23 s.
10. Gurin D. V. Koncepciya «ugolovnoy sfery» v noveyshey praktike Evropeyskogo suda po pravam cheloveka // Biblioteka kriminalista. Nauchnyy zhurnal. – 2016. – № 4 (27). – S. 257–262.
11. Esakov G. A. Ot administrativnyh pravonarusheniy k ugolovnym prostupkam, ili O suschestvovanii ugolovnogo prava v «shirokom» smysle // Biblioteka kriminalista. Nauchnyy zhurnal. – 2013. – № 1 (6). – S. 37–45.
