Probation: legal nature and institutional role

Probation occupies a special place in the system of criminal law and requires a precise definition of its role. In Russia, the introduction of probation pursues goals of preventing recidivism and integrating convicted persons into society. Defining the institutional affiliation of probation ensures uniform application of the law, facilitates legislative drafting, and stimulates scholarly research. Probation originated in the Anglo-American system in the mid-19th century as a response to rising recidivism among juvenile offenders. Initially, it represented a postponement of the execution of punishment and an experimental period under the supervision of the probation service. The successful adoption of probation in Europe gave rise to several models. In English-speaking countries, probation services operate as state or autonomous entities, interact with courts and law enforcement bodies, implement court decisions, and offer individualized supervision and support programs. Their task is to connect the criminal justice system with social support: assistance in employment, treatment for addictions, restoration of social ties, and the rehabilitation of offenders in society. Probation preserves autonomy in the choice of methods and programs, ensuring a balance between supervision and humanitarianism. Legislative enshrinement of probation in Russia defined it as the object of interdisciplinary analysis in jurisprudence, pedagogy, and social sciences. Russian scholars A.P. Skiba, P.V. Teplishin, E.V. Ermasov, and P.V. Golodov formulate theoretical foundations, compare international experience, and justify the introduction of new types of probation and the improvement of existing ones, confirming its humanitarian nature and treating probation as part of the penal execution system, performing functions of control and support for persons who have committed offenses, linking the court, the penal enforcement authorities, and social services. An in-depth theoretical and legal analysis of fundamental legal categories led to the conclusion that probation occupies a distinctive place in the system of criminal executive law, functioning as an autonomous functional sub-institution. It satisfies key institutional characteristics and operates as an autonomous element of criminal executive law. The aim of probation is the correction of offenders’ behavior and their preparation for life in society after serving the sentence, as well as the realization of functions of supervision, accompaniment, and provision of comprehensive social assistance. The principles underlying probation’s activities are legality, individualization, humanitarianism, and respect for the rights of the individual; to achieve its goals, diverse methodologies are employed, including personalized resocialization programs. Recognition of probation as an autonomous sub-institution of criminal executive law has practical significance: it contributes to a deeper understanding of its role and functions within the system, simplifies the process of formulating and refining the normative-legal framework, and facilitates the development of effective instruments for its implementation. The author declares no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References