THE HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INSTITUTION OF CRIMINAL PUNISHMENT IN RUSSIAN CRIMINAL LAW

ABSTRACT

This article examines the history of the development of the institution of criminal punishment in the domestic criminal legislation from the time of Kievan Rus to the modernity. The accent is placed on the fact that in each historical period of the existence of the Russian state, the concept of punishment acquires different meanings. This is connected with the criminal policy pursued by the state and the presence of certain social needs.

Keywords: punishment, types of criminal punishment, criminal policy, purpose of punishment, criminal law.

The problem of criminal punishment is one of the most complex and multifaceted in criminal law science. Its significance is determined by the fact that criminal law revealed its essence mainly by means of the threat and application of punishment. The purpose of punishment consists in the fact that throughout its existence it is considered to be the most effective means of combating crime, aimed at suppressing illegal human activities, as well as a specific and very strict regulator of the behavior of those people who come into conflict with criminal law. Nowadays, this direction is the main one in the Russian criminal policy.

Let us turn to the national history of the development of the institution of criminal punishment. In the Old Russian period, such a type of punishment as a monetary fine prevailed. When committing a more serious encroachment on a representative of the authorities, enslavement, loot, self-mutilation or capital punishment were inflicted [1, p. 217]. In Russian Pravda, the death penalty was mentioned, but any physical influence on a person was denied [2, p. 235]. In this historical period, punishment was thought to be revenge, retribution for what had been done [3, p. 85].

During the period of feudal division, a system of punishments based on the subjects of crimes was formed, in which the degree of responsibility for the encroachment depended on a perpetrator’s wealth and nobility. The Dvina Statutory Charter of 1397 provided for the death penalty for theft committed by a person for the third time [2, p. 235]. According to the Novgorod Judicial Charter of 1456 and the Pskov Judicial Charter of 1462-1467 such penalties as capital punishment and fine [1, p. 217-218] were available. The punishment had a compensatory aim, not a punitive one.

In the Moscow state, penalties became more severe in order to intimidate the population. In the Sudebnik of 1497, the commercial execution was listed as the most frequently used punishment. In the Sudebnik of 1550, new types of punishments appeared, such as imprisonment, removal from office [1, p. 218]. In the Cathedral Code of 1649, such forms of guilt as intent and negligence were fixed, depending on which the degree of responsibility was differentiated. As an additional measure of punishment, this code provided for exile and disgrace for feudal lords and officials [1, p. 218]. At that time the punishment was considered as monetary compensation for the damage caused to the victim, as well as the extraction of material benefits for the authorities [3, p. 85].

During the period of the Russian Empire, the severity of punishments increased initially, but then a general trend of humanization of criminal punishments began to be observed. The Military and Naval Statutes of Peter I regulated the criminal liability of military personnel and persons serving the army. These legal acts contained a list of military crimes and established appropriate punishments for their commission [3, p. 85]. They also described punishments for other types of crimes (for instance, running the gauntlet was prescribed for the theft committed for the first and second times, cutting ears or exile for the third theft and capital punishment for the fourth theft) [2, p. 235]. These acts did not cancel the effect of the Cathedral Code of 1649, but were applied simultaneously with it [3, p. 85]. The Code of Criminal and Correctional Punishments of 1845 already contained a certain system of punishments, consisting of the main and correctional parts. The Criminal Code of 1903 mitigated the severity of a number of punishments and liability measures and defined the legal status of convicts in a clearer form [3, p. 86].

At different stages of the Soviet period, aspects of criminal punishment were interpreted in different ways. It depended on the state policy in the field of criminal law, responding the needs of the society of that time. At first, there was no list of types of punishment with their specific characteristics in criminal law. Later, the Guidelines on the criminal law of the RSFSR of 1919 included such types of punishment as public censure, fine, confiscation of property, deprivation of rights, forced labor, expulsion, arrest, imprisonment, public enemy declaration and shooting [1, p. 219]. In this period, punishment was a measure of coercive influence, additionally regulated in the process of law enforcement practice by the court or its substitute bodies (for example, revolutionary tribunals) [5, p. 115]. The Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1922 established preventive, repressive and correctional purposes for criminals [3, p. 86]. Thus, this law interpreted punishment as a protective measure [5, p. 116]. The Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1960 regulated such purposes of punishment as correction and re-education of convicts. The idea of retribution for the crime was implied in the concept of punishment in this act. [4, p. 93; 5, p. 116].

The processes of reforming the institution of criminal punishment are clearly manifested in the post-Soviet period. The Fundamentals of the Criminal Legislation of the USSR and the Union Republics of 1991 and then the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of 1996 defined punishment as the measure of state coercion imposed by a court verdict [5, p. 116].

Studying the historical development of the institution of criminal punishment, it is possible to trace the transformation of its purposes connected with socio-economic and political factors. The modern period is characterized by a tendency towards the humanization of criminal punishment, where the priority areas are the re-education of the criminal's personality and his resocialization, and not the idea of retribution.

References:

1. Vorobyova A. V. Institute of punishment in Russian criminal law: essence, history of formation // Actual problems of the state and law. – 2019. – No. 10. – P. 215–223.
2. Gumerov T. A. Development of the punishments system in criminal law // Actual problems of economics and law. – 2015. – No. 1. – P. 233–237.
3. Kandabarova T. S. Criminal punishment: history and modernity // Bulletin of the St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. – 2021. – No. 4 (92). – P. 84–88.
4. Mulyukov F. B. Punishment in the criminal law of Russia // Bulletin of the Tatar State Humanitarian Pedagogical University. – 2007. – No. 1 (8). – P. 90–96.
5. Temirhanov M. A. The concept of criminal punishment // Human: crime and punishment. – 2014. – No. 1 (84). – P. 115–118.