The subject of consideration of this paper is the study of the purposes of punishment
enshrined in article 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn
to the similarities and differences in the approaches used to determining the purpose of
criminal punishment in the laws of different countries and historical periods, the need for
a critical assessment of the existing legislative decision.
In the course of a comparative analysis the conclusion is formulated that the current
version of the purposes of punishment in criminal law is overly broad, which creates
the illusion of its achievement and in some cases the competition of its parts among
themselves. So the first of those mentioned in article 43 of the Criminal Code of the
Russian Federation the purpose of restoring social justice is a quality that should be
inherent in punishment. The second of the purposes stated in the law – the correction
of the convict – is one of several ways to achieve it. However the very purpose of the
punishment is not to correct the convict. The third of these purposes – the prevention of
crimes – is most consistent with the purpose of punishment, but it is quite lengthy and
requires clarification. In addition it does not contain a clear focus on a person who can or
has committed a crime.
According to the results of the analysis it is proposed to carry out an adjustment of
the purposes of criminal punishment in the law. The purpose of punishment should be
one and have a common focus. In this regard it is proposed to define as the purpose of
punishment – retention persons from committing crimes. The single and understandable
purpose of punishment on the one hand will be a clear guideline in constructing the type
and size of both the main and additional punishments in the sanctions of the articles of the
Special Part, and on the other will allow the courts to choose the punishment that most
corresponds to the intended result.
Keywords: crime; punishment; purpose of punishment; restoration of social justice; correction of a convict; prevention of crimes; retention of a person
Associate Professor of the Department of Criminal Law and Criminology of the Vologda Institute of Law and Economics of the Federal Penal Service of Russia, PhD. in Law, Associate Professor
, e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org
1. Bekkaria CH. Prestuplenie i nakazanie [Crime and Punishment]. Moscow, 1939. 464 p. (In Russ.).
2. Viner N. Kibernetika i obshchestvo [Cybernetics and society]. Moscow, 1958. 200 p. (In Russ.).
3 Kurs sovetskogo ugolovnogo prava : v 5 t. / otv. red. N. A. Belyaev, M. D. SHargorodskij [The course of the Soviet criminal
law: in 5 vol. : ed. by N. A. Belyaev, M. D. Shargorodsky]. Leningrad, 1970. Vol. 2. 671 p. (In Russ.).
4. Poznyshev S. V. Osnovnye nachala nauki ugolovnogo prava [Basic principles of criminal law science]. Moscow, 1907.
129 p. (In Russ.).
5. Polubinskaya S. V. Sootnoshenie obshchego i special’nogo preduprezhdeniya kak celej nakazaniya : avtoref. dis. ...
kand. yurid. nauk [Ratio of general and special warning as punishment targets : the author’s abstract of the diss. ... PhD. in
Law]. Moscow, 1987. 23 p. (In Russ.).