Judicial Discretion and Issues of Its Implementation at the Application of Punishments Alternative to Confinement
- 10.2991/assehr.k.200321.081How to use a DOI?
- imposition of punishment, sentence enforcement, alternative to confinement, criminal sanction, judicial discretion
Criminal sentencing for the completed offence and the related judicial discretion at the selection of type and amount of penalty to a liable person is not a new practice for criminal legislation, including Russian. On the one part, judicial discretion is a necessary condition for differentiation and individualization of punishment to a perpetrator; on the other part, it has a propensity for corruption. It should be noted that the list of the judicial discretion grounds includes ambiguous rules set forth in the legislation; discrepancies between standards of different sector profile; misregulating of relations that became the judicial matter; legal provisions; evaluative legislative notions and other circumstances, objectively causing judicial discretion. The grounds specified are present both at the application of punishments both in whole, and at the application of punishments alternative to confinement, in particular.
- © 2020, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press.
- Open Access
- This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).
Cite this article
TY - CONF AU - E.V. Lyadov PY - 2020 DA - 2020/03/24 TI - Judicial Discretion and Issues of Its Implementation at the Application of Punishments Alternative to Confinement BT - Proceedings of the XVII International Research-to-Practice Conference dedicated to the memory of M.I. Kovalyov (ICK 2020) PB - Atlantis Press SP - 42 EP - 46 SN - 2352-5398 UR - https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200321.081 DO - 10.2991/assehr.k.200321.081 ID - Lyadov2020 ER -