Introduction: the article is devoted to the study of issues related to the seemingly inevitable process of digital transformation of both criminal sentencing and its execution, the need for which is pushed by both consistently adopted relevant national and international legal acts and positive foreign practice. The purpose of the study is to substantiate the need to introduce capabilities of artificial intelligence as the most important tool for crime prevention, improve effectiveness of the execution of sentences, as well as discuss feasibility and readiness of modern reality for actual replacement of judges with artificial intelligence in sentencing. Methods: comparative legal, empirical methods of description, interpretation; theoretical methods of formal and dialectical logic; private scientific methods: legal-dogmatic and method of interpretation of legal norms. Conclusions: generalization of scientific stances and consideration of foreign practice allows us to conclude that, in our opinion, there is currently no urgent need to use artificial intelligence in sentencing. The arguments regarding expediency of such a decision in terms of limiting judicial discretion do not seem so convincing in order to abandon the human factor in sentencing. It seems advisable to further improve the legislation regarding the rules of sentencing and develop a more formalized approach. At the same time, we find positive the subsequent development of the penal policy focused on active introduction of artificial intelligence capabilities as an effective means of predicting criminal behavior, profiling (modeling) the personality of the criminal, identifying his/her distinctive features in order to further prevent crime.
Keywords: digitalization; punishment; artificial intelligence; prevention; sentencing; correctional institutions; Internet.
PhD in Law, Lecturer of the Department of Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure Law of the Institute of Law and Politics of the Russian-Armenian University, Yerevan, Republic of Armenia
, e-mail email@example.com
1. Alikperov Kh.D. Elektronnaya tekhnologiya opredeleniya mery nakazaniya [Electronic technology for determining the measure of punishment]. Saint Petersburg: Yuridicheskii tsentr, 2020. 170 p. ISBN 978-5-94201-806-1.
2. Alpeeva O.I., Bushueva A.V. Use of digital technologies and artificial intelligence in crime prevention. Vestnik Penzenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta=Bulletin of the Penza State University, 2021, no. 3 (35), pp. 54–62. (In Russ.).
3. Russian prisons are to introduce a neural network. Lenta.ru: sait [Lenta.ru: website]. Available at: https://lenta-ru. turbopages.org/turbo/lenta.ru/s/news/2021/11/02/cifra/ (In Russ.). (Accessed April 15, 2022).
4. The video surveillance system consisting of more than 400 video cameras was installed in the penal executive facility “Armavir”. Ugolovno-ispolnitel’naya sluzhba Ministerstva yustitsii Respubliki Armeniya: ofitsial’nyi sait [Compulsory Enforcement Service of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Armenia: official website]. Available at: https:// penitentiary.am/ru/novosti/V-UIU-“Armavir”-ustanovlena-sistema-videonablyudeniya,-sostoyashchaya-iz-bolee-chem400-videokamer(In Russ.). (Accessed April 15, 2022).
5. Valeev M.T. A typical sanction as a criterion of the categorization of crimes. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Pravo=Tomsk State University Journal of Law, 2013, no. 2 (8), pp. 29–34. (In Russ.).
6. Inogamova-Khegai L.V. Qualification of crimes using computer technologies. In: Ugolovnoe pravo: strategiya razvitiya v XXI veke: materialy XVI Mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii [Criminal law: development strategy in the 21st century: materials of the 16th International scientific and practical conference]. Moscow: RG-Press, 2019. Pp. 51–55. (In Russ.).
7. Kozlov A.P. Ponyatie prestupleniya [The concept of crime]. Saint Petersburg: Yuridicheskii tsentr Press, 2004. 819 p. ISBN 5-94201-263-6.
8. Christie N. Predely nakazaniya [Limits of punishment]. Moscow: Progress, 1985. 176 p.
9. Oranzhireev N. D. Prestuplenie i nakazanie v matematicheskoi zavisimosti (ideya i skhema primeneniya) [Crime and punishment in mathematical dependence (idea and scheme of application)]. Moscow: Tipo-lit. t-va I.N. Kushnerov i Co, 1916. 69 p.
10. Kazakova V A. et al. Ugolovnoe pravo Rossiiskoi Federatsii. Obshchaya chast’: uchebnik [Criminal law of the Russian Federation. General part: textbook]. Moscow: Yustitsinform, 2004. 575 p. ISBN 5-7205-0561-X.
11. Ugolovnoe pravo Rossiiskoi Federatsii. Obshchaya chast’: uchebnik [Criminal law of the Russian Federation. General part: textbook]. Ed. by L.V. Inogamova-Khegai, AI. Rarog, A.I. Chuchaev. Moscow: Infra-M, 2005. 560 p. ISBN 978-598209-032-4.
12. Ugolovnyi kodeks Ispanii [The Criminal Code of Spain]. Ed. by N.F. Kuznetsova, F.M. Reshetnikova. Moscow: Zertsalo, 1998. 218 p. ISBN 5-8078-0012-5.
13. Federal sentencing guidelines manual 1994. United States Sentencing Commission: website. Available at: https://www. ussc.gov/guidelines/archive/1994-federal-sentencing-guidelines-manual (accessed April 15, 2022).
14. Loomis v. Wisconsin. SCOTUSblog: website. Available at: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/loomis-vwisconsin (accessed April 15, 2022).