The European Penitentiary Compliance: Problem Statement, Actualization Factors and Strategic Risks for the Penitentiary System of the Russian Federation
The aim of the article is to clear up the phenomenon of European penitentiary compliance and its possible effect on the penal policy of the Russian Federation. The research is based on the analysis of decisions, including pilot ones, of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The basic method of research consists in the content analysis of legal positions of the European human rights bodies and provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The article gives the concept of penitentiary compliance. Within the context of realization of the penal policy of the Russian Federation, some facts of actualization of European penitentiary compliance are presented. It is pointed out that Russia's accession to the European Council resulted in a radical change in the character of convicts' and detained people's treatment. However, the harmonization of Russian legislation with the recommendations of international and European penitentiary standards largely reflects the inconsistent realization of Part 1 of Article 3 of the Penal Executive Code of the Russian Federation. The essence of this part lies in the strict observance of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, generally accepted norms of the international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation. The dynamically spreading social legal tendency of greater court control over correctional institutions and various rights of convicts on the side of the ECHR is noted. The process of harmonization of Russian legislation with the recommendations of international and European standards and rules in the sphere of convicts' treatment is critically evaluated. The article deals with problems of application of the reductionist approach of the ECHR to the rehabilitation and early release of people serving a life sentence, to the protection of opportunities for convicts to have the right to speech, i.e. to express a free opinion of a political nature. The strategic risks for the penitentiary system of the Russian Federation is considered against the background of the practical broadening of the phenomenon of European penitentiary compliance. The article draws the conclusion on the clear lack of the mechanism of implementation of norms and principles of the international penitentiary law which is scientifically worked out and adopted to the current tasks of optimization of the Russian penitentiary system.
Keywords
концепция реабилитации,
международный договор,
национальное законодательство,
пенология,
пожизненное тюремное заключение,
пилотное решение,
правовые позиции,
Совет Европы,
concept of rehabilitation,
international treaty,
national legislation,
penology,
life imprisonment,
pilot decision,
legal positions,
Council of EuropeAuthors
| Teplyashin Pavel V. | Siberian Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia; Law Institute of the Siberian Federal University | pavlushat@mail.ru |
Всего: 1
References
Селиверстов В.И. Перспективы тюремного содержания осужденных в свете национальных интересов России, зарубежного опыта и меж дународных стандартов // Вестник МГЛУ. Образование и педагогические науки. 2018. №. 3. С. 229-238.
Oldenburg C.E., Perez-Brumer A.G., Reisner S.L., Mayer K.H., Mimiaga M.J., Hatzenbuehler M.L., Barnighausen T. Human rights protections and HIV prevalence among MSM who sell sex: Cross-country comparisons from a systematic review and meta-analysis // Global Public Health. 2018. Vol. 13, is. 4. P. 414-425.
Privatising Punishment in Europe? / ed. Tom Daems, Tom Vander Beken. London : Imprint Routledge, 2018. 200 p.
Monitoring Penal Policy in Europe / ed. Gaetan Cliquennois, Hugues de Suremain. London : Imprint Routledge, 2017. 202 p.
Reyes-Quilodran C., Labrenz C.A., Donoso-Morales G. Comparative juvenile criminal justice systems: Contrasts between Chile and Western Eu rope // Politica Criminal. 2018. Vol. 13, is. 25. P. 626-649.
Hamilton C. The European Union: Sword or shield? Comparing counterterrorism law in the EU and the USA after 9/11 // Theoretical Criminology. 2018. Vol. 22, is. 2. P. 206-225.
Junod V., Wolff H., Scholten W., Novet B., Greifinger R., Dickson C., Simon O. Methadone versus torture: The perspective of the European court of Human Rights // Heroin Addiction and Related Clinical Problems. 2018. Vol. 20, is. 1. P. 31-36.
Rogan M. Human rights and correctional health policy: A view from Europe // International Journal of Prisoner Health. 2017. Vol. 13, is. 1. P. 3-9.
Opioid agonist treatment - Guiding principles for legislation and regulations. International Drug Policy Consortium. A global network promoting objective and open debate on drug policy. URL: https://idpc.net/publications/2018/08/opioid-agonist-treatment-guiding-principles-for-legislation-and-regulations (дата обращения: 24.02.2019).
Opioid agonist treatment Guiding principles for legislation and regulations. URL: https://rm.coe.int/2017-ppg-15-oat-guidingprinciples-final-eng/16808b6d9e (дата обращения: 24.02.2019).
Temperman J. Freedom of Religion or Belief in Prison: A Critical Analysis of the European Court of Human Rights' Jurisprudence // Oxford Journal of Law and Religion. 2017. Vol. 6, is. 1. P. 48-92.
Cuenca E.C. Social rights of assistance and positive obligations of the state in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights // Revista de Derecho Politico. 2017. Is. 100. P. 1209-1238.
Rogan M. Discerning penal values and judicial decision making: The case of whole life sentencing in Europe and the United States of America // Howard Journal of Crime and Justice. 2018. Vol. 57, is. 3. P. 321-338.
European Court of Human Rights. CASE OF VINTER V. UNITED KINGDOM. URL: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre-press#{"itemid":["001- 122664"]} (дата обращения: 27.02.2019).
European Court of Human Rights. CASE OF HARAKCHIEV AND TOLUMOV V. BULGARIA. URL: https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Index_1999-2014_ENG. pdf (дата обращения: 22.01.2019).
European Court of Human Rights. CASE OF MURRAY V. THE NETHERLANDS. URL: https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/CP_Netherlands_ENG.pdf (дата обращения: 22.01.2019).
European Court of Human Rights. CASE OF KHOROSHENKO V. RUSSIA. URL: https://www.echr.coe.int/sites/search_eng/pages/search.aspx#{"fulltext":["Khoroshenko%20v.%20Russia"]} (дата обращения: 22.01.2019).
Boman J.H., Mowen T.J. The role of turning points in establishing baseline differences between people in developmental and life-course criminology // Oriminology. 2018. Vol. 56, № 1. P. 191-224.
Meijer S. Rehabilitation as a Positive Obligation // European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice. 2017. Vol. 25, is. 2. P. 145 162.
Conway G. Prospects and problems for European legal cooperation concerning prisoners // European Journal of Probation. 2018. Vol. 10, is. 2. P. 136-159.
European Court of Human Rights. CASE OF HIRST V. UNITED KINGDOM. URL: https://www.echr.coe.int/sites/search_eng/pages/ search.aspx#{"fulltext":["Hirst%20v.%20United%20Kingdom"]} (дата обращения: 25.01.2019).
Gallez E. Foreigners and Refugees Behind Bars: How Flemish Prisons Tackle Linguistic Barriers // The European Legacy. 2018. Vol. 23, № 7-8. P. 738-756.
Уткин В.А. Концепция модернизации уголовно-исполнительной системы как доктринальный политико-правовой акт // Вестник Томского государственного университета. 2018. № 431. С. 210-214.
