System of anti-crime measures

Legal basis for combating crime: international and domestic regulations. Characteristics of the current state program to combat crime in Ukraine

System of anti-crime measures:

By the nature of social determination of crimepreventive measures are divided into are common And special(criminological). The difference between them is that general measures aimed at positive development of the socio-economic system as a whole and thereby contribute to reducing crime rates, and special(criminological) directly influence the causes and conditions of the existing state of crime and its individual types with the aim of eliminating, neutralizing or limiting them.

By specific contentdistinguish the following preventive measures: economic, social, ideological, technical, organizational, legal. Note that with this classification, preventive measures are divided into are common And special .

Economic measurescrime prevention is aimed at neutralizing the criminogenic consequences of the functioning of the economic sphere and is of great importance not only for macro level (For example, improvement of the country’s economy as a whole, economic protection of the least affluent segments of the population through the introduction of a scientifically based level of living wage), and on micro level (For example, benefits and assistance to specific individuals who are in a critical situation).

Social prevention measureshave a positive effect on various social institutions (family, teams, public organizations, etc.). For example, significant preventive potential contains measures that promote the creation of the cult of family and the development of the social foundations of local self-government.

Ideological measuresprevention should form moral consciousness among members of society based on social values; limit the negative impact of mass culture standards on the behavior of individuals (limiting the time of showing films with erotic content and scenes of violence); correct moral deformations in persons with law-breaking behavior with the help of individual educational work (psychological, pedagogical and legal-related activities).

IN technical preventive measures include various technologies, rules, means and devices that prevent socially dangerous consequences in the process of people’s social activities, as well as the commission of crimes and other offenses (for example, technologies that eliminate accidents at work, traffic rules, security and fire alarm locking devices).

Organizational crime prevention measuresshould help neutralize or minimize the criminogenic consequences of unprofessional organizational and managerial activities (for example, measures to improve the processes of controlled population migration; development of an effective mechanism for ensuring social adaptation of persons released from prison, formation of criteria for the effectiveness of law enforcement agencies).

Legal measures to prevent crimeaccording to content they are divided into:

• helping to neutralize conditions that facilitate the commission of crimes (norms of various branches of legislation that limit the legal capacity of alcoholics, deprive parental rights that regulate the procedure for acquiring and storing firearms, etc.);
• stimulating actions that prevent or stop the commission of crimes (rules of criminal law on voluntary renunciation of a crime, necessary defense, detention of the criminal);
• regulating the crime prevention process.

Legal basis for preventioncrimes are made up of the following documents:

• certain provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine;
• laws of Ukraine and by-laws (for example, laws of Ukraine “On the Police”, “On Operational Investigative Activities”, “On Administrative Supervision of Persons Released from Prison”, “On the Prosecutor’s Office”, acts of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine on issues of combat with crime);
• certain norms of industry legislation of Ukraine (For example,Art. 23 Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine, Art. 6 KAP of Ukraine);
• departmental and interdepartmental regulations (orders of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, the Prosecutor General of Ukraine, the State Department of Ukraine on issues of execution of punishments, etc.).

Let us note that the process of crime prevention in Ukraine still does not have an independent legal basis. Back in 1995 A draft Law of Ukraine “On Crime Prevention” was developed, the preamble of which stated: “The Ukrainian state provides its citizens with protection from attacks on their life, health, freedom, dignity, property and other rights.” However, unfortunately, this law has not yet been adopted. Existing legal norms on this issue, as a rule, are contained in various branches of law, are often fragmented and are not consistent with each other, which does not contribute to the effectiveness of preventive activities.

A. Zelinsky separates one more criterion for classifying measures crime prevention - the scale of their implementation:

• among the country's population;
• within a certain department or for certain segments of the population (for example, among minors, the unemployed; by employees of internal affairs bodies, the prosecutor's office, the State Department of Ukraine for the Execution of Punishments);
• in small social groups (in enterprises, institutions, organizations, families, informal groups);
• by individual person.

General social and special criminological crime prevention:

Depending on the hierarchy of causes and conditions of crimeThere are three main levels of prevention: general social, socio-criminological and individual.

General social level(general prevention) covers the activities of the state, society and their institutions aimed at resolving contradictions in the field of economics, social life, in the moral sphere, and the like. This activity is carried out by various government and administrative bodies, public organizations for which the function of crime prevention is not the main or professional one. Prevention is successful due to effective socio-economic policies in general.

General social preventioncrime is associated with the most significant and long-term types of social activities and is carried out in the process of solving large-scale social problems. The solution to the contradictions of social development, its problems and difficulties, errors in social management is simultaneously an economic, political, ideological, socio-psychological and legal basis for eliminating, weakening and neutralizing the processes and phenomena that determine crime.

General social crime prevention measures include:changes in the socio-economic sphere aimed at increasing the living standards of members of society and improving their living conditions. Process stabilization in the economy and in the consumer market, increasing the solvency of the general population are collectively prerequisites for preventing economic and other types of crime.

Reduction Domestic, violent and other crime is facilitated by measures to solve the housing problem, strengthening the family, improving the working and living conditions of women, protecting motherhood and childhood, organizing leisure time, and the like.

General social prevention is being implementedthrough government economic and social development plans. Such plans are drawn up both at the state and regional levels. The preventive value of such a plan is that it provides for the strategy and tactics of the socio-economic development of the country (region), taking into account the possible criminal consequences of the implementation of the measures included in it. With this plan unity of influence on the general social causes of crime of all measures is achieved: economic, social, ideological, cultural, technological, etc.

Special criminological level(criminological prevention) consists of a targeted impact on criminogenic factors associated with certain types and groups of criminal behavior, for example, violent or economic crime. Such complexes of specific causes and conditions of criminal behavior are eliminated or neutralized in the process of the activities of the relevant subjects, for whom the preventive function is the fulfillment of their main professional tasks.

Special criminological warningaims to prevent real possible crimes from occurring, and if they begin to occur, then to stop them at an early stage. An important area of ​​preventive activity is the identification and elimination of so-called criminogenic factors. In this case, as a rule, not only organizational, legal and operational investigative measures are used, but also economic, pedagogical and medical, and the like.

At the level of special prevention crime control goal, certain types and specific crimes are defined as a single or main one for the corresponding measures of social control, social rehabilitation and law enforcement activities. Development and implementation of special prevention measures directly determined by the presence of crime, its level and nature.

Special criminological prevention is carried outin the form of departmental and interdepartmental plans or programs to strengthen the fight against crime. They assume a system of measures aimed at preventing specific types and groups of crime, crime in general, crime in a certain territory (state, region). The proposed activity programs are being implemented through interaction and mutual coordination of the activities of prevention subjects. Of course, the effectiveness of crime prevention depends on the consistency of the crime control program with the concept of the state plan for the economic and social development of the country.

Individual level(individual crime prevention) covers activities in relation to specific individuals whose behavior conflicts with legal norms.

Depending on the stage of genesis of the criminal’s personalityindividual crime prevention is divided into four types .

First view concerns objects that are at the initial stage of criminalization of the individual. During this period, they commit various non-criminal offenses, forming a certain type of antisocial activity. Conventionally, this type of individual crime prevention is called early individual crime prevention.

Second type individual crime prevention concerns persons who have committed or are committing crimes. Subjects of this type of prevention there may be investigators, operatives and other employees of internal affairs bodies, judges. Preventative work is to persuade a person to refuse to commit a crime, to stop it at the preparation stage, and in the event of a crime being committed, to help the person develop a feeling of remorse and a desire to help solve the crime. Conventionally, this type of prevention is called forensic investigative .

Third type individual crime prevention covers persons who have committed crimes against whom the court has decided to apply various measures of criminal law. This type of prevention Firstly, is implemented in the activities of penal institutions, whose task is to correct and resocialize the convicted person; Secondly, is carried out by relevant state and public organizations when a person is released from the actual execution of a criminal sentence (suspended sentence, deferred execution of a sentence, compulsory educational measures). This type of prevention is conventionally called penitentiary.

Fourth type individual crime prevention applies to persons who have served a criminal sentence, but are subject to supervision in order to prevent relapse. Conventionally, this type of prevention is called post-penitentiary .

Victimological crime prevention.

An independent direction of criminological prevention is victimological. In criminology, the behavior of the victim is considered from the perspective of her role in the commission of a crime, that is, as a criminogenic object. Criminological significance not every behavior of the victim has, but only such that contributes to the emergence of criminal determination or implementation or the formation of a criminological situation (victimization of the victim). Victimization manifests itself at the individual and mass level. On individual level Victimization is defined as the potential “ability” of an individual, under certain conditions, to become a victim of a crime. Victimization as a social phenomenon in mass level - this is the totality of all acts of harm to individuals and the potential vulnerability of the population as a whole and its individual groups. Thus, there is a need for specific measures aimed at reducing victimization behavior of the population.

The victimization method involves:

A) preventive and educational measures to prevent victimization;

b) training the population in methods of protection and self-defense (advisory, educational events on personal safety and property protection, training courses on self-defense, distribution of leaflets, booklets, essays, articles that provide advice on how to avoid becoming a victim of a crime - technical means),

V) organizational and managerial measures (proper lighting of cities, equipment with means of immediate communication between the population and the police);

G) restrictive direction of measures (identifying latent victims and preventing their risky, frivolous behavior;

d) regulatory measures (legislation on assistance to crime victims, etc.);

e) increasing the level of legal knowledge.

Legal basis for combating crime: international and domestic regulations. Characteristics of the current state program to combat crime in Ukraine

Under legal support imply effective regulatory support for special criminological counteraction and crime prevention activities. It provides the presence of laws, decrees, programs, concepts for the prevention of crime and its individual types. Fighting crime requires reliable legal regulation various branches of law: constitutional, criminal, civil, administrative, etc. Therefore, the legal basis for combating crime has complex structure.

Base valuefor activities to combat and prevent crime has Constitution of Ukraine. This means that activities to combat crime must be carried out in compliance with the rights and freedoms of man and citizen determined by the Constitution of Ukraine. The Constitution of Ukraine does not contain a norm that would directly define the responsibility of the state and its bodies to implement measures aimed at combating and preventing crime. However, it contains a number of articles, the analysis of which allows us to determine the main directions of the state and society’s efforts to combat crime, as well as the constitutional basis for its implementation.

First of all in Art. 1 The Basic Law of Ukraine is proclaimed as a legal state. And crime prevention is an integral function of the rule of law. A number of articles of the Constitution of Ukraine define duties of the state, the implementation of which can be complete and comprehensive only in the case of combating and preventing crime. It is the responsibility of the state ensuring the implementation of constitutional rights and freedoms of man and citizen (Articles C, 13, 41, 14, 27, 29, 30, 50, 21, 23, etc.). The Constitution also contains articles defining the fundamental criteria for possible restrictions on the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, and are protected by the Criminal Code of Ukraine (CC of Ukraine).

A number of articles of the Constitution define the responsibilities of the state, the implementation of which can be complete and comprehensive only if crime prevention activities are carried out. This concerns the state’s responsibilities to affirm and ensure human rights and freedoms (Article 3), protect the rights of all subjects of property rights (Articles 13, 41), special protection of land as the main national wealth and ensure the right of ownership of land (Article 14), protection of human life (Article 27), his freedom and personal integrity (Article 29), inviolability of home (Article 30), privacy of correspondence, telephone conversations, telegraph and other correspondence (Article 31), ensuring the right to a safe life and health (environment and compensation for harm caused by violation of this right (Article 50).

It should be noted that provided for in Section II of the Constitution of Ukraine rights and freedoms of man and citizen, including freedom and equality of all people in their dignity and rights (Article 21), the right of every person to the free development of their personality (Article 23), the right to freedom and personal integrity (Article 29), to the inviolability of their home ( Art. 30), non-interference in his personal life, prevention of the collection, storage, use and dissemination of confidential information about him without consent (Art. 32), began to be interpreted by some officials, individual deputies, as well as state supervisory authorities as excluding the possibility carry out activities to individually prevent crime, including crimes that exclude legislative definition of the obligation to carry it out.

The next link after the Constitution of Ukraine in the system of legal regulation of crime prevention activities is constitutional laws and codified statutes .

First let's note the role The Criminal Code of Ukraine and criminal law in general in regulating crime prevention. It defines a range of acts, the commission of which is prohibited under the threat of criminal liability, and has extra-preventive significance. The norms of criminal law about the system of punishments, the procedure and conditions for their appointment, exemption from punishment, etc. a certain legal regime is established for those convicted, as well as those released from criminal liability and punishment, which is important for preventing relapse on their part. Immediate warning value have specific rules and responsibilities for these persons, supervision and control over them by law enforcement agencies and the public. Legal basis to apply measures for individual prevention of relapse of crimes, creates the criminal law institution of a criminal record. A number of criminal legislation provisions provide for specific legal means of influencing criminal circumstances. These are, in particular, incentive norms, voluntary refusal to commit a crime, norms that stimulate behavior that creates obstacles to the commission of crimes (about necessary defense, detention of a criminal), provide for the use of compulsory medical measures for alcoholics and drug addicts, norms aimed at eliminating the consequences crimes committed (compensation for harm), etc. A systematic analysis of criminal legal means of crime prevention, their classification and determination of the mechanisms of enforcement measures was carried out relatively recently under the guidance of Professor V. A. Tulyakova young Odessa scientist M. Sorochinskaya .

Norms of the Criminal Executive Code of Ukraine,adopted in 2003, define the legal basis for preventing recidivism by means of execution of punishment. These are the rules governing the preventive and educational process in penal institutions, the grounds and procedure for release from these institutions, the labor and living arrangements of those released, the goals, grounds and procedure for supervision of parolees, administrative supervision of persons of certain categories of persons released from penal institutions, etc.

Before criminal procedure legislation sets the task of crime prevention primarily through the criminal process and legal proceedings. A number of specific procedural measures of a preventive nature have been established, including the obligation of the inquiry body, investigator, and prosecutor to identify the causes and conditions for the commission of crimes. The identification of the latter is included in the range of issues subject to proof; the presence of such evidence must be checked by the prosecutor when approving the indictment. The specified participants in the process and the court must respond with procedural documents (representation, separate resolution, resolution) to the identified causes and conditions for the commission of a crime and put in these documents a requirement to the heads of the relevant enterprises, institutions, organizations to take measures to eliminate these causes and conditions. Criminal procedural legislation contains norms that, together with the norms of substantive law, regulate the grounds and procedure for exemption from criminal liability and punishment due to changes in the situation, repentance for committing a crime, in connection with reconciliation with the victim, the application of compulsory educational measures to a minor, etc. All of these and other norms criminal procedural law and the practice of their application have a protective value.

A number of norms that have a precautionary value are contained in civil law. For example, restriction of legal capacity of citizens who abuse alcohol or drugs. The same can be said about norms. family law regarding the grounds and procedure for deprivation of parental rights, a number of norms labor, budget, land, economic legislation.

It is also important norms of international law, ratified by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. These standards stipulate basic principles of anti-crime activities: justice, humanism, legality. These are such legal acts as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948 p.); International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966); Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1975 p.); Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984 p.), As well as the Optional Protocol to the Convention of December 18, 2002 and others.

The next link in the system of legal support for crime prevention activities is considered acts of legislation, comprehensively regulating the status, tasks, functions, powers, responsibilities and rights of law enforcement agencies, for which crime prevention is one of the main tasks. These usually include Laws of Ukraine “On the Prosecutor’s Office”, “On the Police”, “On the Security Service of Ukraine”, “On the State Border Service of Ukraine”, “On the State Tax Service in Ukraine”. It should be noted that in the indicated, so to speak, “status” acts of legislation, the tasks and responsibilities of the relevant government bodies, institutions and services (with the possible exception of the Law of Ukraine “On the Police”) for crime prevention are set out, as a rule, schematically, in general form, the powers, legal means, and forms of carrying out preventive activities are not substantively regulated. This approach is not conducive to its proper functioning. IN Law of Ukraine “On the Prosecutor’s Office” prevention of violations of the law is not provided for as a type of activity of the prosecutor’s office, and the term “prevention” is not even indicated. Several laws have been adopted in Ukraine in certain areas of crime prevention. These are the laws of Ukraine “On administrative supervision of persons released from places of deprivation of liberty” (dated 12/01/1994), “On bodies and services for minors and special institutions for minors (dated 01/24/1995), “On prevention of domestic violence" (dated November 15, 2001), etc.

The system of legal support for crime prevention also includes legislative acts regulating the activities of central and local executive authorities, local governments, as well as regulatory legal acts of these bodies. They are designed to create a legal basis for the regulation of preventive activities, organization, order, forms and means of its implementation at all levels of the government apparatus at the state and local levels. However, these acts mainly define these issues only in a general form.

To counteract various forms antisocial criminal behavior Administrative legislation has also been addressed. This includes The Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses, regulations aimed at combating corruption, drunkenness, drug addiction, prostitution and other negative phenomena that are closely related to crime. Thus, the country has created a fairly extensive legislative framework aimed at combating and preventing crimes.

1. Basic paradigms for crime prevention.

2. The concept and goals of crime prevention.

3. Prospects for crime prevention.

1. Basic paradigms for crime prevention

There is a need to find the optimal way (paradigm) of the state’s response to crime as the property of society to reproduce crimes. In order to find this path, you can use the model of interaction between people in the family, where, as in a large society, there are also organizers and those being organized, who do not always want to behave in an appropriate manner consistent with common interests.

In a situation where a child is capricious, does not heed comments, say, asks to go out at the wrong time, the reaction of parents varies. A child can be punished: spanked or, say, limited in freedom of movement, for example, deprived of a walk, which makes it possible to resolve a specific momentary conflict situation, but can negatively affect the further development of the punished person, giving rise to resentment, negative feelings towards the adults who punished him, and also teach him a lesson in using aggression as a means of overcoming obstacles. There are other, more labor-intensive ways: to organize the child’s life activities in such a way that his needs are resolved properly and in a timely manner, or to accustom him to self-restraint in the name of common interests, to participate in work, for example, at home, of adults. “Non-repressive” means are the most correct and in most cases lead to smoothing out problems that arise between the child and parents.

All methods of responding to behavior that violates family stability encountered in practice, although they deserve different moral assessments and have unequal effectiveness, nevertheless, theoretically, can be used to combat crime. This is, firstly, instilling in people a system of self-restraint (psychological and educational paradigm); secondly, the consistent resolution of criminogenic contradictions in society (social paradigm); thirdly, repression against persons who have committed a crime (repressive paradigm). To these should also be added the provision of restoration of the position of the victim (restorative paradigm).

Unfortunately, in the policy of the state's response to crime, despite the progressive declarations made from time to time, mainly the worst of these means are used, which are focused only on tactical, and not on strategic tasks, solving, and more often only creating the appearance of solving momentary issues, such as the isolation of a person who causes the indignation of others because he committed a crime, but they do not remove, but “drive deeper” the solution to the real problems of crime.

Repression as a way of responding to crime in most cases turns out to be ineffective. Thus, depriving a person who has committed a crime of freedom prevents him from committing new crimes for the period of his isolation from others, but does not correct his behavior in the future. The best minds of humanity are disgusted with punishment, considering it unethical. Montesquieu famously said that “a good legislator is not so much concerned with punishing crimes as with preventing crimes; he will try not only to punish, but also to improve morals.” Nevertheless, for Russia, addiction to punishment remains, alas, a typical feature. In addition to deep historical reasons, this is reflected in the influence of brutal repressive communist policies (Red Terror against millions of innocent people, Lenin’s slogans about a “harsh hand”, “inevitability of punishment”, etc.), as well as Russia’s forced participation in the Great Patriotic War. Patriotic War, and in recent decades - the Afghan War, armed conflicts in the North Caucasus, etc.

In Russia, there is an extremely large proportion of the population (15% of adults) who have been subjected to criminal punishment in the form of imprisonment. Russia, according to the coefficient of people in prison calculated in 1996 per 100 thousand population (558), was noticeably superior even to the United States, known for its harshness (515), not to mention the countries of Western Europe (49-93). In the Soviet Union, the predilection for such a form of punishment as imprisonment (which was extremely often, especially in Lenin-Stalin times, used illegally) was dictated not only by the Bolshevik policy of fear-mongering, but also by considerations of economic expediency, since prisoners served as the cheap force which made it possible to successfully resolve issues of large “socialist construction projects”. The tragic past, harsh and at times unimaginably cruel policies could not but affect public psychology. Judging by mass polls, it seems that the majority of the population in Russia perceives information about punishment and the suffering of the punished person with satisfaction, if not pleasure.

The policy of responding to crime in Russia does not yet actually include care for the victim (in terms of compensating him for the damage caused by the criminal, providing psychological and other assistance); preventive support by the state for persons released from prison, as well as marginalized segments of the population, is very weak who are in difficult life situations, the law-abiding way out of which without help from society is very difficult.

It should be noted that the latest criminological research is increasingly aimed at the mechanism of adherence to rules, and not deviations from them, that is, at studying not so much the causes of offenses, but the reasons for refraining from committing them. Empirical research suggests that compliance with social norms is facilitated by four types of social bonds: attachment, commitment, participation, and faith. Relationships of affection, and above all love in the family, are the main factors deterring people from criminal activity. Along with the reluctance arising from love for loved ones to cause them grief, the desire to complete the obligations assumed, participation in any activity and the idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe sinfulness of this or that behavior - these are the most important elements of the mechanism of restraining from the temptation to break the law, which is found confirmation in the results of special studies. Therefore, the most reliable way to control crime is to strengthen such social institutions as the family, school, and labor organization in a specific workplace.

A prominent representative of German criminal-legal sociology of the 90s, F. Filser, substantiates the idea that social policy can take the path of real crime reduction provided that it is oriented towards preserving traditional spiritual and humanistic values, supporting their development among the population as opposed to dubious values, including wealth and power. This path means “ethically connected development of the individual and society as a process of influence of one on the other.”

Based on the semantic meaning of the term “mechanism”, when defining the concept of “mechanism for combating crime”, it seems correct, first of all, to talk about the unity of naturally located and interconnected elements that determine the order of activity of the state and non-state structures to counter such a negative social and legal phenomenon as crime.

An analysis of the terms used in the theory of criminology to denote the activities of the state aimed at neutralizing crime, a study of the content of the term “fight against crime” in the context of both its positive perception and critical analysis by criminologists, lead to the conclusion that the “fight” against in its essence reflects the process of conflict between warring parties, in which certain aspects of it should be highlighted.

First of all, this is: the practical side in the form of the activities of a special circle of criminal justice bodies authorized by the state to identify, disclose, prevent and suppress illegal acts, as well as the theoretical aspect, which consists in generalizing the practice of law enforcement agencies and formulating theoretical provisions and practical recommendations.

The practice of fighting crime and its scientific basis allow us to draw a conclusion about the acceptability of using, along with the term “fighting crime”, the phrase “mechanism to combat crime,” which indicates both the possibility of using various means and methods to influence crime, and their interrelationship between themselves. In addition, he emphasizes the consistent course of their application in a manner that is quite adequate both to crime in general and to its individual types.

In relation to mechanisms for countering specific types of crimes, this will mean that its components will be appropriate means and methods that are implemented within the framework of strictly defined law enforcement functions: operational search activities, inquiry, preliminary investigation, activities for compliance with criminal legislation, etc.

This counteraction mechanism, for example, in relation to crimes related to illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, will cover, firstly, the cycle of functions of criminal justice; secondly, a set of law enforcement activities that ensure control over the legal circulation of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, and pre-trial proceedings in cases of crimes and law violations initiated as a result of this control, if there are legal reasons and grounds for this and, thirdly , a group of preventive measures.

The mechanism model will function effectively subject to the implementation of organizational measures that define the subjects of these functions, as well as legal measures that provide them with appropriate powers. With the help of organizational and legal measures, the mechanism in question is first of all formed and then functioning. If certain conditions are met, mechanisms for combating crime are modernized.

When considering nationwide measures to combat crime and their relationship with the mechanism for combating crime, one should recognize their basic nature for the functioning of the corresponding mechanism, since nationwide measures affect crime as a whole. This is achieved through the proper implementation of political, economic, social measures that exclude a crisis state of society, as well as through targeted influence on organizational and legal measures with the help of which a mechanism for combating crime is formed.

In general, the mechanisms of combating crime, as we see it, should be understood as a set of interrelated law enforcement functions, the content of which is the appropriate means and methods of influencing this socially negative phenomenon. The subjects of these functions are determined in the organizational and legal order. As a result, this creates and modernizes the model of the corresponding mechanism, the effectiveness of which depends on measures that are of a nationwide nature.

Mechanisms to combat crime are formed through organizational measures related to the definition, modernization or creation of fundamentally new government bodies designed to combat crime. At the same time, it is especially important to determine their goals and objectives, and then the corresponding systemic and structural structure, form of organization, ensuring interaction with other law enforcement and other bodies whose activities are aimed primarily at carrying out anti-criminal activities.

No less important for optimal counteraction to crime are legal measures that create a legitimate basis for the fight against crime. Their result is effective legislation in the field of combating crime.

Thus, criminal and criminal procedural legislation is considered only in relation to the task of combating crime, representing only one of the counteraction tools. This is a mechanism for distinguishing social states, relationships, and activities into two classes: permissible, not requiring influence from the state, and those that are defined by this law as unacceptable, i.e. requiring government coercion.

In fact, the role of criminal legislation is not limited to the tasks of combating crime. It also has a significant impact on processes beyond the criminal sphere. Solving problems of optimizing the system of legal relations shows that law serves as a kind of connecting link between criminal and other processes in society.

On the one hand, the impact on criminal processes changes the system of social relations. Thus, assessments of activities change, behavioral activities change, and social processes change. On the other hand, the legal space itself is determined by states and processes in the entire diversity of social relations. Changes in social relations outside of crime cause changes in this area, forcing changes and adjustments to the system of combating crime.

Any changes in social relations, including in areas far from crime, lead to the fact that not the previously optimal, but a slightly different legal space becomes the best and most profitable. As long as deviations of the law from the optimal state are relatively small and acceptable, the legal space can remain unchanged, but as soon as deviations from the optimal level begin to exceed certain established threshold values, a change in individual provisions of the law or even a restructuring of the system of legal relations is required. The greater this non-stationary nature of society, the more often the restructuring of law is required and the more significant the required changes.

Today it is absolutely clear that what is needed is not only the fight against crime, but also the organization of social relations, which will allow optimizing crime, putting it in such conditions under which the costs of combating crime and losses from crime in total will be minimal.

Organizational and legal measures create the prerequisites for the direct activities of law enforcement agencies to identify, disclose and investigate, prevent and suppress illegal acts. The applied aspect is important here, since through criminal law, criminal procedure, and operational investigative activities, the process of implementing criminal policy to combat crime occurs.

Some scientists associate organizational measures aimed at creating a mechanism to combat crime in criminology, first of all, with structural support for the fight against crime. Others consider organizational measures to combat crime in a broader sense, believing that they are designed to help neutralize or minimize the criminogenic consequences of unprofessional organizational and managerial activities. In particular, according to V. N. Burlakov, organizational measures will include measures to improve processes managing the migration of the country's population, developing an effective and financially secure mechanism for the social adaptation of persons released from prison, etc. .

There is also a point of view according to which organizational measures to combat crime are criminological forecasting and programming to combat crime, ensuring interaction between law enforcement agencies, increasing the efficiency of management activities in the field of combating crime, etc. .

It seems to us more appropriate to share the point of view of S.V. Borodin, as well as such criminologists as V.D. Malkov, S.A. Maslov, V.A. Pleshakov, A.F. Tokarev, who believe that the elements of the organizational foundations of crime prevention are the appropriate functional-structural and information-analytical support for the preventive activities of a law enforcement agency, criminological forecasting, planning and programming, as well as the organization of internal and external interaction in the field of preventive work. .

The foregoing indicates that the fight against crime and manifestations of social pathology is based on a system of interconnected organizational elements. At the same time, the organization of combating crime can have both a national and regional character, and also develop accordingly within the framework of the activities of government bodies and public organizations.

Literature

Burlakov V.N. Crime Prevention // Criminology: Textbook for universities. - St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, 2003. Maksimov S., Matskevich I.M., Ovchinsky V.S., Eminov V.E. Criminology: Textbook. M.: INFRA Publishing Group. M. -NORMA, 1999. Organization of the activities of internal affairs bodies to prevent crimes. Textbook. - M.: Academy of Management of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 2000.

There are 2 main directions of the state’s response to crime:

1. Repressive (punitive) influence (criminal law)

2. Preventive impact – consistent resolution of various contradictions in society

There is a need to find the optimal way for the state to respond to crime. Which of these areas should be given priority, what impact is most effective. The direction and content of the state’s criminal policy depends on the solution to this problem.

Historically, the first form of social control over crime was blood feud. Such a response to a crime was spontaneous in nature and entailed a chain of atrocities that could not stop without outside intervention. States, partly to stop the bloodshed and partly for other reasons, undertake crime control activities. But first, the state borrows the character of combating crime from clans and tribes. The fight against crime is based on the principle of retribution, punishment, revenge. Thus, state control over crime appears initially as a punitive institution. Only since the time of the classical school of criminal law, and in particular since the time of Caesar Becarius’s book “On Crimes and Punishments,” has the idea of ​​a non-punitive warning been developed in jurisprudence.

In the Russian Federation, criminal legal measures to influence crime have played and continue to play a major role in criminal policy. It is for their implementation, and not for preventive social programs, that the state allocates most of the money. Previously, the predilection for the repressive effect on crime was dictated by:

1. The policy of fear-mongering, which was an integral feature of state policy

2. Considerations of economic feasibility - prisoners served as cheap labor with the help of which they solved the problems of socialist construction projects and other problems of the socialist economy

Currently, they are trying to explain the addiction to the punitive direction:

1. Deterioration of the criminological situation in the country

2. Public opinion, which stands for the application of strict punishments to criminals

In many foreign countries, until a certain period of time, the criminal law influence on crime also prevailed. However, already in the 70-80s of the last century, a crisis in the system of punishments and criminal policy was stated. It manifested itself in the fact that, despite all the efforts of the police and criminal justice, crime in the world is growing, the recidivism rate in all countries is stable, humanity has tried all possible types of repression without visible results. It has been proven that being in prison for more than 5-7 years leads to irreversible changes in the human psyche, i.e. Punishment does not correct, but destroys the personality. The criminal policy of most foreign countries began to change in the following directions:

1. Complete abolition of the death penalty

2. Imprisonment has come to be considered the ultimate punishment, which is applied only in extreme cases when committing violent crimes and only in relation to adults. For example, in England only 20% of convicts are sentenced to imprisonment, in Germany - 11%, in Japan - 3.5%. In the Russian Federation, 88-89% are sentenced to imprisonment, 35% are to actually serve the sentence.

3. The use of other alternative imprisonments and penalties is expanding: restriction of freedom (including the use of electronic tracking), community service

4. In Western European countries (Australia, Canada, Japan), short-term imprisonment prevails. For example, in Germany 85% of sentences are up to 2 years in prison. In the Russian Federation - less than 40%, more than 15% - more than 5 years in prison

5. To prevent personality degradation, places of deprivation of liberty humanize the conditions for serving this sentence

For many years, the Russian Federation has shared 1st and 2nd place with the United States in terms of the prisoner ratio. At the end of the 90s in the Russian Federation the coefficient was 730, in the USA - 680, in Western European countries - from 40 to 90. In 2005 in the Russian Federation - 530, in the USA - 710.

Russia's criminal policy began to change in 1993. The terms of imprisonment are being reduced and restrictions are being introduced on the use of imprisonment for minors.

It is typical for specialized crime prevention bodies to:

1) are intended for crime prevention, this is one of them main, priority functions(law enforcement and judicial authorities)

2) their powers are determined by law

3) these entities (their employees) carry out powers of a government representative, incl. right of application state coercive measures

4) tendency to specialization of preventive activities among specialized entities (in resource, organizational, personnel support)

5) availability of mechanism interdepartmental coordination