The Subject of the Prosecutor's Activity in Court Proceedings on Cases Involving Changing a Convict’s Type of Correctional Institution

The relevance of the work consists in the clearest definition of the subject of Prosecutor's supervision when the court considers materials on changing a convict’s type of correctional institution. The Prosecutor's office's supervision of the execution of sentences in places of deprivation of liberty should be aimed at unconditionally observing the rights and legitimate interests of persons serving criminal sentences, however, there are still serious problems in correctional institutions that negatively affect the implementation of the tasks and goals of criminal punishment. The reason for this is still cases of “superficial” and non-professional approach to the study of the personality of convicts who are subjects of legal relations that occur when their behavior changes (in a positive or negative direction) in places of deprivation of liberty. The Prosecutor's supervision and its activities in this regard are considered as one of the guarantees of the rights of convicts to improve their legal status, which fully implements the constitutional principle of respect for the dignity of the individual, humanism, justice and the rule of law. The materials of Prosecutor's checks, judicial practice, analysis of statistical materials, materials of dissertations, monographs and journals included in the international global scientific databases studied in the course of the research allowed us to determine the most effective ways to solve the problems considered. These include the need for direct, timely and step-by-step participation of prosecutors in this process, as well as high requirements for their professional and personal qualities. The selection and analysis of these factors allowed the authors to determine in detail the subject of the Prosecutor's activity in the mentioned study – it is an active and qualified activity of the Prosecutor (Prosecutor's supervision) in the field of criminal enforcement legislation, aimed at identifying, preventing (preventing) and eliminating violations of the rights and legitimate interests of convicted persons serving a sentence of imprisonment. The main research methods used were: analysis of theoretical and regulatory sources; comparison; generalization and analysis of documents. Their application allowed the author to analyze the subject in question in the relationship and interdependence of its constituent elements, their integrity, comprehensiveness and objectivity.

1. Grinenko A. V., Gudzhabidze G. A., Potapov V. D., Zheleznyak N. S. Kategorii prav i zakonnykh interesov lichnosti i ikh ispol’zovanie v sfere ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva [Categories of Rights and Lawful Interests of Individuals and Their Use in the Sphere of Criminal Justice]. Vserossiiskii kriminologicheskii zhurnal – Russian Journal of Criminology, 2020, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 139–147. DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2020.14(1).139-147.

2. Mikhlin A. S., Seliverstov V. I. (Eds.). Kommentarii k Ugolovno-ispolnitel’nomu kodeksu Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Commentary to the Penal Enforcement Code of the Russian Federation]. 2nd ed. Moscow, Yurait Publ., 2009. 587 p.

3. Magomedrasulov M. M., Chobanyan A. G. Osobennosti prokurorskogo nadzora za zakonnost’yu ispolneniya ugolovnykh nakazanii [Features of the Prosecutor’s Supervision Over the Legality of the Execution of Criminal Sentences]. Prokuror – Procurator, 2016, no. 2, pp. 55–59.

4. Lebedev V. M. (Ed.). Nauchno-prakticheskii kommentarii k Ugolovno-protsessual’nomu kodeksu Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Scientific-Practical Commentary to the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation]. Moscow, Yurait Publ., 2014. 851 p.

5. Putzke H., Tarbagaev A.N., Nazarov А.D., Maiorova L.V. Rol’ prokurora v preduprezhdenii i ustranenii sledstvennykh oshibok: rossiiskii i nemetskii opyt [The Role of the Prosecutor in the Prevention and Elimination of Investigative Errors: Russian and German Experience]. Vserossiiskii kriminologicheskii zhurnal – Russian Journal of Criminology, 2018, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 424–430. DOI: 10.17150/2500-4255.2018.12(3).424-430.

6. Sokolov A. F. Uchastie prokurora v sudebnom zasedanii v dosudebnom proizvodstve [Participating of Public Prosecutor in the Judicial Meeting in a Pre-Trial Production]. Zakonnost’ – Zakonnost Journal, 2010, no. 12 (914), pp. 6–8.

7. Eminov V. E., Orlov V. N. (Eds.). Ugolovno-ispolnitel’noe pravo Rossii T. 1: Obshchaya chast’ [Penal Law of Russia. Vol. 1: General Part]. Moscow, Yurait Publ., 2015. 287 p.

8. Brennan T., Breitenbach M., Dieterich W. Towards an Explanatory Taxonomy of Adolescent Delinquents: Identifying Several Social-Psychological Profiles. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 2008, vol. 24, iss. 2, pp. 179–203. DOI: 10.1007/s10940-008-9045-7.

9. Lum C., Kennedy L. W., Sherley A. Are Counter-Terrorism Strategies Effective? The Results of the Campbell Systematic Review on Counter-Terrorism Evaluation Research. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2006, vol. 2, iss. 4, pp. 489–516. DOI: 10.1007/s11292-006-9020-y.

10. Perry A. E., Johnson M. D. Applying the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) to Studies of Mental Health Provision for Juvenile Offenders: a Research Note. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2008, vol. 4, iss. 2, pp. 165–185. DOI: 10.1007/s11292-008-9051-7.