The present work is devoted to the consideration of the possibility of introducing various mathematical algorithms and computer programs into the current justice system that would determine the types of sentences in specific criminal cases as well as their terms or length. This problem was discussed at a meeting of the St. Petersburg International Criminological Club on February 15, 2019 on the topic: “Crime and the problems of adequate punishment”. In general the study is a critical analysis of the scientific and practical component of the arguments brought forward supporters of the introduction of an electronic system for assignment sentences, the most relevant of the committed act to public danger and the identity of the offender. Based on the results of the study of the judgments presented on this subject, conclusions are drawn about the insolvency and (or) apparent exaggeration of the possibilities of electronic means of sentencing in comparison with the intellectuallysensual capabilities of a person. Particular attention is drawn to the fact that in modern representations of mankind there are no universally recognized criteria of fairness, proportionality, mercy, etc. that are not amenable to automatic digital determination, but are established due to exclusively sensory perception by a person in the process of carrying out intellectual activity. At the end of the work an argument is given and a conclusion is formulated about the possibility of assignment criminal punishment only by a person, without participation in this process of computer programs and other high-tech means of electronic information processing. Only the perception by the person (judge) of the real social danger of the crime committed and the identity of the offender based on the provisions of the criminal law can ensure a high degree of justice and humanism of the punishment imposed and executed in each case.
Keywords: criminal punishment assignment; definition of a measure of criminal legal influence; digital means of determining criminal penalties; innovations in criminal and criminal procedure law; “Electronic scales of justice”
Head of the Department of Criminal
Law of the Academy of the Federal Penal Service of Russia,
Ryazan, Russian Federation, Professor of the Department
of Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure of the Ugra State
University, Khanty-Mansiysk, Russian Federation, Dsc. in
Law, Associate Professor
, e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org
1. Vojshvillo E. K., Degtyarev M. G. Logika [Logics]. Moscow, 2001. 528 p. (In Russ.).
2. VCIOM: 70 % rossiyan ne ponimayut suti iskusstvennogo intellekta [Russian Public Opinion Research Center: 70 %
of Russians do not understand the essence of artificial intelligence]. Available at: https://naked--science-ru.turbopages.
org/s/naked-science.ru/article/hi-tech (accessed 23.05.2020). (In Russ.).
3. Gilinskij YA. I. «Elektronnye vesy pravosudiya» – vymysel ili real’nost’? [«Electronic scales of justice» – fiction or reality?].
Kriminologiya: vchera, segodnya, zavtra – Criminology: yesterday, today, tomorrow, 2019, no. 1, pp. 18–20. (In Russ.).
4. Gorshenkov G. N. O «vesah Alikperova» [About «Alikperov’s Scales»]. Kriminologiya: vchera, segodnya, zavtra –
Criminology: yesterday, today, tomorrow, 2019, no. 1, pp. 16–17. (In Russ.).
5. Naumov A. V. Rossijskoe ugolovnoe pravo. V 2 tomah. Tom 1: Obshchaya chast’ [Russian criminal law. In 2 vol. Vol. 1:
General part]. Moscow, 2004. 496 p. (In Russ.).
6. Prestuplenie i problemy adekvatnogo nakazaniya [Crime and problems of adequate punishment]. Available at: https://
www.criminologyclub.ru/home/3-last-sessions/356-2019-02-26-20-10-22.html (accessed 23.05.2020). (In Russ.).