Making changes in Art. 72 of the Criminal Code

In Art. определяются правила исчисления сроков наказаний, вмененных осужденным. 72 of the Criminal Code defines the rules for calculating the terms of punishment imputed to the convict. In particular, we are talking about the length of the prohibitions to conduct activities and replace the positions determined by the court, the terms of forced labor, correctional labor, restrictions on military service, arrest, stay in a disciplinary unit, imprisonment. Periods are calculated in years and months. The duration of compulsory work is calculated in hours.

Replacement / addition of punishments

In such situations, as well as in case of offset, the duration of sanctions can be calculated in days. When applying this provision art. необходимо учитывать правила ч. 1 71 статьи. 72 of the Criminal Code should take into account the rules of Part 1 of Article 71. Taking them into account, the period of compulsory work, which is 240 hours, is:

• Three months of restrictions on military service or fix. Works.
• Two months of restraint of freedom.
• One month of forced labor or imprisonment.

Time of stay in custody

Paragraph 3 of Art. устанавливает, что данный период засчитывается в сроки: 72 of the Criminal Code establishes that this period is set off in time:

1. Stay in the disciplinary part.
2. Imprisonment.
3. Forced works.
4. Arrest.

In this case, the inclusion of time is carried out at a rate of 1 day for 1 day. The counting of detention is also included in the period of restriction of freedom (1: 2), correctional labor and restrictions on military service (1: 3). In the period of imputed compulsory work this time is included at the rate of 1 day for 8 hours.

Additionally

In part 4 of Art. предусматривается, что период нахождения субъекта под стражей до обретения приговором юридической силы и время тюремного заключения, назначенного за деяние, совершенное за пределами России, при выдаче виновного по правилам ст. 72 of the Criminal Code provides that the period of the detention of a person in custody pending the acquisition of legal force and the time of imprisonment appointed for an act committed outside of Russia, with the issuance of the perpetrator under the rules of Art. 13, is also subject to offset. In this case, the calculation is carried out from the calculation of 1 day for 1 day. In part 5 of Art. устанавливается, что при вменении виновному, находившемуся под стражей до начала разбирательства, штрафа, запретов на осуществление определенного вида деятельности или замещение постов как основного наказания, суд, принимая во внимание указанный период, может изменить меру пресечения. 72 of the Criminal Code establishes that if a fine is imposed on a guilty person who was in custody prior to the commencement of the proceedings, prohibitions on the performance of a certain type of activity or substitution of posts as the main punishment, the court, taking into account the specified period, may change the measure of restraint. In particular, the sanction defined by the sentence can be mitigated or withdrawn from the subject.

Making changes in Art. 72 of the Criminal Code

Adjustments to the norm have been discussed for a long time. They are related to the recalculation of the terms of punishment set out in Art. 72 of the Criminal Code. The second reading is expected in the fall of 2017. The FSIN became the initiator of the adjustments. активно продвигалась еще в 2008-2009 г. В то время у инициаторов была возможность получить одобрение ВС и правительства. It is worth noting that the idea to adopt the bill (Article 72 of the Criminal Code to subject to some changes, to be more precise) was actively promoted back in 2008-2009. At that time, the initiators had the opportunity to receive the approval of the Armed Forces and the government. However, at present, the question of recalculating terms has become quite acute. Many experts note that the State Duma art. не примет с предполагаемыми корректировками. 72 of the Criminal Code will not accept the estimated corrections. The authors explain their opinion by the fact that the new version significantly violates the principle of equality.

Difficulties

Why was the second reading postponed ? Amendments to Art. , как выше отмечалось, нарушают принцип равенства. 72 of the Criminal Code , as noted above, violate the principle of equality. Let's consider an example. Suppose, two citizens - A. and B. - committed a murder. They are entitled to the same punishment for the crime. However, for some reason, the investigation of Citizen A.'s case took longer. If the period under art. то выходит, что второй злоумышленник, производство по преступлению которого велось без задержек, будет отбывать больший срок. 72 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "a day and a half," it turns out that the second intruder, whose criminal proceedings were conducted without delay, will serve a longer term. The reason for this is the use of a new calculation algorithm. If the adjustments are accepted, then the subjects will be more tempted to remain in the SIZO. This, experts believe, can contribute to the increase in cases of corruption.

The opinion of law enforcers

Many ATS staff in the field are against the adoption of the bill. Justify their opinion law enforcers in that with the new algorithm may appear "excess time." For example, citizen V. committed a crime and was taken into custody. The conduct was difficult, and the investigation took a year. All this time, Citizen V. was in jail. As a result, according to the verdict of the court, the guilty person received the year of the colony. If we count according to the new algorithm, it turns out that the citizen has left unnecessary six months.

Time Scheme

The proposed version of the norm defines the following algorithm. Day in jail is equivalent to:

• One day of arrest (as in the current article).
• 1 day in the disciplinary unit.
• 1.5 days In the colony commonly. Mode.
• 1.5 days In an educational colony.
• 2 days Restrictions of freedom.
• 2 days In the colony-settlement.
• 3 days Corrected. Works.
• 3 days Restrictions in military service.
• 8 hours of compulsory work.

The importance of adjustments

Meanwhile, the opinion on the need for amendments is being actively promoted. These authors explain their position by the fact that the corrections will not affect those who are serving their sentence in the strict / special regime colonies. The State Duma Committee on Procedural, Arbitration, Civil and Criminal Legislation recommended deputies to adopt a new version of the article.

Human rights defenders, in turn, draw the attention of rule-makers to malfunctions in the functioning of the UDO mechanism. According to some experts, parole for many became inaccessible privilege. The Council of Europe Committee of Ministers expressed its opinion. He insisted on the need to move away from the use of "coefficient 1", since the existing criminal practice does not ensure the protection of human rights to the extent necessary. Moreover, a number of specialists pay attention to the serving of punishments by women. In their opinion, it requires humanization, because in the SIZO the conditions of detention are tougher than in the general-regime colonies.

Controversial issue

In practice, there may be a situation where a citizen was fined, and he was in jail during the trial. In this case, the court can mitigate the penalty. However, you can not change the penalty by staying in the detention center. A similar provision applies to punishments related to the prohibition of certain types of activities or stay in positions established by the court. For example, a citizen was accused of abuse of office to satisfy his own selfish intentions. The investigation was conducted, say, 2 months. All this time the citizen stayed in the detention center. The court pronounced the verdict, imputing to the person the prohibition to occupy certain positions for 3 years. The authority has the right to take into account the length of stay of the citizen in the SIZO and to mitigate the punishment.

What are the terms included in the recalculation?

As the period of the stay of a citizen in custody prior to the trial are:

1. Time of administrative arrest and detention. The questions connected with them are regulated by the Administrative Code. Suppose the subject was detained for hooliganism. Punishment for him is provided for in the Code of Administrative Offenses, and in the Criminal Code and depends on the gravity of the act. In this regard, a citizen is first detained for an administrative offense. Subsequently, the qualification changes.
2. Time of detention of a citizen suspected of a crime. The issues related to this measure are regulated in the CPC.
3. Time spent in custody.
4. Period of application of compulsory medical measures to the subject (Article 72.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
5. Term of disciplinary arrest. This measure is applied to military personnel. For example, the subject made a violation of the rules of the border service. In the first place, his behavior is seen as a disciplinary offense. Subsequently, the qualification is changed to an encroachment on the order of military service.

It does not take into account the time spent under a written undertaking not to leave the place.

An Important Moment

During the stay in the detention center, all days during which the citizen was under investigation before the effective date of the sentence are included. It should be noted that the deadline will continue after the meeting. It will end when the period for appeal of the sentence expires.

Examples

Suppose a citizen was convicted for a year and 3 months. Stay in the colony commonly. Regime, served 8 months, is now in jail. In this case, the status of the subject should be differentiated. Article 72 applies to cases that occur before the entry into force of the sentence. In this example, the person has already been convicted, so another rule is applicable. It is art. 76 PECs. It provides for the maintenance of citizens in the CCI (transit-transit points). Thus, in the initial data, an indication of the citizen's stay in the SIZO can be called somewhat incorrect. The placement in transit-transit points is carried out according to the same rules as the direction to the places of direct serving of the punishment imputed to the person by the court.

Let's consider another example. The investigator is under investigation in relation to the subject, he is in jail. In this case, the calculation of the period is made day by day. Another algorithm is possible only if a restriction of liberty is imposed or other measures not related to imprisonment are applied.

The maximum period of stay in SIZO

If the bill of Art. 72, then rule-makers will have to establish the periods of stay of citizens in detention facilities. Otherwise there will be a temptation to "stretch" the preliminary investigation for the subsequent reduction of the term of direct serving of punishment. The minimum time spent in a SIZO is not determined. The term of placing a person in an isolator is directly dependent on the interests of the investigation. Accordingly, experts believe that a corruption loophole may form in this matter. If the citizen has nothing to hide, and the investigators have no grounds for detention, release can be made in a short time. As for the maximum period of stay in the SIZO, it depends on the type of crime committed, the specifics of the investigation and a number of other factors.

If we talk about the features of the maximum period, then we should note the following. The standard period should not exceed two months. Such a requirement is established by Article 109 of the CPC (in paragraph 1). If the investigators do not have time to find out all the circumstances of the incident during these two months, then the extension of the period to six months (paragraph 2 of this rule) is allowed. In this case, it is necessary to take into account the probability that a citizen after leaving the SIZO can conceal the traces of an act, commit another crime. If the investigation is complicated by various circumstances, the head of the department or directly the investigator makes an application for an extension of the term of the person in the SIZO for a year and a half. All this time will be included in the period of serving the sentence in accordance with the established rules.