Introduction. Due to the different density of population in the Russian Federation and the scale of its territory, correctional system facilities should represent a unified system, in which the institutions are interrelated and interchangeable. In the conditions of a large number of types and sub-types of correctional institutions, the possibility of interchangeability is weakened. Problems associated with the quality of ensuring the internal isolation of convicts have a significant impact on the level of crime and penitentiary security. Hence, the punishment execution practice should more flexibly use the norms on separation of convicts to achieve goals and objectives of the penal executive legislation. Methods: the research used a dialectical method for cognizing objective reality, a logical method, a modeling method, a formal legal method, a systemic method. Results and discussion: the constantly changing socio-criminological portrait of the offender and the level of crime force the legislator to revise criminal-legal and criminal-executive criteria for differentiating those sentenced to imprisonment. The mentioned reasons also affect group differentiation that occurs in the process of distributing convicts to dormitory accommodation (cells) within the correctional institution. The crime level in a separate RF subject and changes in the state criminal policy require the reassignment of correctional institutions as a whole. The system of correctional institutions should not overwhelmingly depend on the criminal-legal criteria of those sentenced to imprisonment and the changing criminal policy of the state, and at the same time, departmental regulation should not bolster the legislatively established system of correctional institutions. Conclusions: the legislator has established a wide range of types of correctional institutions for those sentenced to imprisonment. Remoteness of some of them from the place of residence of convicts, to a certain extent, has both positive and negative impact on their social ties, which ultimately affects the effectiveness of implementation of the panel enforcement legislation goals and objectives.
Keywords: panel enforcement legislation; types of correctional institutions; deprivation of liberty; subject of panel enforcement law; imperative legal regulation method; principle of differentiation and individualization of sentence enforcement; differentiation of those sentenced to imprisonment; separation of convicts; prison; panel settlement; correctional camp (colony).
Head of the Department of Penal Law and Criminology of the
Kuzbass Institute of the Federal Penal Service of Russia, PhD. in Law
, e-mail email@example.com
1. Grishko A.Ya. Personal characteristics of convicts for terrorism and extremist activities: the feasibility of taking into account in the execution of sentences of imprisonment. Penitentsiarnoe pravo: yuridicheskaya teoriya i pravoprimenitel’naya praktika=Penal Law: Legal Theory and Law Enforcement Practices, 2019, vol. 20, no. 2, pp.87–93. (In Russ.). 2. Ivanov V.D. Correctional centers or panel settlements? Ugolovno-ispolnitel’naya sistema: pravo, ekonomika, upravlenie=Criminal-Executory System: Law, Economy, Management, 2005, no 1, p. 24. (In Russ.). 3. Kimachev A.N. On the issue of staying young offenders sentences to imprisonment in education colonies coming the age of majority. Vestnik instituta: prestuplenie, nakazanie, ispravlenie=Institute Bulletin: Crime, Punishment, Correction, 2016, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 42–43. (In Russ.). 4. Laverycheva S.A. Executing punishment in pre-trial detention facilities. Voprosy rossiiskogo i mezhdunarodnogo prava=Matters of Russian and International Law, 2018, vol. 8, no. 7A, p. 182. (In Russ.). 5. On the approval of the Lists of medical preventive care and medical correctional facilities of the penal system for the provision of medical care to convicts : Order of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation as of August 16, 2006 No. 2 63. Byulleten’ Minyusta Rossii=Bulletin of the Ministry of Justice of Russia, 2006, no. 10. (In Russ.). 6. Osnovnye pokazateli deyatel’nosti ugolovno-ispolnitel’noi sistemy. Yan-var’–dekabr’ 2017 g. : informatsionnoanaliticheskii sbornik [Key indicators of the activity of the penal enforcement system. January-December 2017 : information and analytical collection]. Tver’, 2018. 7. Seliverstov V. I. On penal enforcement measures of responding to terrorism. In: Dolgova A.I. (Ed.). Kriminal’nye realii, reagirovanie na nikh i zakon [Criminal realities, response to them and law]. Moscow : Ros. kriminol. assots., 2018. P. 139. (In Russ.). 8. Seliverstov V.I. The serving imprisonment convicted of economic and official crimes with the use of their intellectual and creative potential: new research project. Ugolovno-ispolnitel’noe pravo=Penal Law, 2017, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 36. (In Russ.). 9. Skiba A.P. Ispolnenie nakazaniya v lechebno-profilakticheskikh uchrezhdeniyakh : dissertatsiya na soiskanie uchenoi stepeni. kandidata yuridicheskikh nauk [Execution of punishment in medical preventive care facilities: Candidate of Sciences (Law) dissertation abstract]. Rostov-on-Don, 2003. 35 p. 10. Utkin V.A., Kiselev M.V., Savushkin S.M. “Hybrid” and “multi-mode” penitentiary institutions: advantages and risks. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Pravo=Tomsk State University Journal of Law, 2018, no. 29, p. 103. (In Russ.). 11. Fefelov V.A. Sotsial’no-pravovye osnovy ugolovno-ispolnitel’noi tsi-vilizatsii uchrezhdenii, ispolnyayushchikh ugolovnoe nakazanie v vide lisheniya svobody [Socio-legal foundations of the penal enforcement civilization of institutions executing criminal punishment in the form of deprivation of liberty]. Ryazan’, 1992. P. 53. 12. Chornyi V.N. Peculiarities of imprisonment execution in respect of persons who have committed crimes in economy. Vestnik Samarskogo yuridicheskogo instituta=Bulletin of Samara Law Institute, 2018, no 4 (30), pp. 74–79. (In Russ.). 13. Churakov V.G. Some organizational and legal problems of serving sentences of certain categories of convicts. Vestnik Voronezhskogo instituta FSIN Rossii=Vestnik of Voronezh Institute of the Russian Federal Penitentiary Service, 2015, no. 2, pp. 77–78. (In Russ.). 14. Bard E., Knight M., Plugge E. Perinatal health care services for imprisoned pregnant women and associated outcomes: a systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2016, no. 1, vol. 16, p. 285. 15. Kirchner L. Should we rank prisoners by «risk score»? Pacific Standard, 2017. Available at: https://psmag.com/news/ should-we-rank-prisoners-by-risk-score (accessed May 1, 2021). 16. Lasosik Z., Platek M., Rzeplinska I. Abolitionism in History: on Another Way of Thinking. Warsaw: Institute of Social Prevention and Resocialization, 1991. 200 p. 17. Pepinsky H., Quinney R. Criminology as Peacemaking. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press, 1991. 339 p.