State response to criminal self-destruction in Russia: historical and legal research

Based on the analysis of historical sources of law and literature on the ethno-cultural development of Russian society, the article presents a historical and legal study of the state's response to criminal lynching in Russia. It is noted that the lynching of the inflictor of harm, carried out in socially dangerous ways, has deep historical "roots" in Russia. The nature of the public response to these lynchings directly depended on the degree of formation of the state and its power institutions. At the ini- tial stage of the formation of the Russian state, lynching reprisals against offenders were not perceived as something harmful and requiring a ban at the official level. In this connection, they were not persecuted by the authorities under the threat of punishment. The most striking manifestations of criminal lynching in the history of Russia were peasant (communal) lynching, duels and murders based on "blood" revenge. That is why in the history of the Russian state there are enough facts that justify and heroize lynch reprisals, setting them up as an example to follow. An example of this is the lynching committed by Princess Olga (X century) and V.I. Zasulich (1878). In the process of strengthening the power of the Russian state and strengthening its institutions, in particular forcible purpose, the development of law as a public regulator of the existing social relations, the state power has completely arrogated to itself the "right to violence" and the implementation of law enforcement. In this regard, the state began to take targeted measures to limit the lynching activity of its citizens, up to the establishment of the most severe (criminal) responsibility for it. Despite the efforts undertaken by the authorities over the entire historical period of the development of Russian statehood, it was impossible to completely eradicate these lynchings. This was significantly influenced by such factors as: the territory of the state; the development of law and the nature of the state's response to lynching by legal (criminal) means; peculiarities of administration of justice; social “upheavals” of a nationwide scale (revolutions, changes in political regimes), activating anarchist sentiments in society; a Russian ethno-cultural paradigm that presupposes a strong position of customary law and a distrustful attitude towards public law and justice. In this regard, criminal lynching of the tortfeasor is resorted to at the present time, which is a serious socio-criminological problem for modern Russia, which requires its solution, primarily by legal means and improvement of law enforcement practice aimed at eradicating the desire of Russian citizens to independently deal with the inflictor of harm in the field of criminal law relations.

Keywords

Authors

References