«NON BIS IN IDEM» AS AN INDEPENDENT PRINCIPLE OF CRIMINAL LAW IN RUSSIA

The article argues for the independent role of the principle “non bis in idem” (not twice for the same thing) in Russian criminal law. According to the position of the legislator, the requirement of inadmissibility of repeated criminal liability for the same crime is part of the principle of justice. At the same time, in the opinion of the author, this does not correspond to the actual role of the principle “non bis in idem”, which is confirmed in the article by a number of arguments. Thus, the international legal and constitutional legal origin of the principle under consideration is emphasized. Its relationship with the principle of justice is also made. In particular, it points out the discrepancies between the latter and “non bis in idem”, arising in the case of a court sentencing that does not achieve the goal of correcting the convicted person. In addition, the role of the principle of inadmissibility of repeated criminal liability for the same crime as a general (static) criminal law principle is shown. It is the basis for the principles and rules of qualification of criminal acts, sentencing, criminal law-making, as well as other aspects of the implementation of criminal law policy. The final part of the article examines the embodiment of the principle “non bis in idem” in the rules on sentencing and sanctions of criminal law norms, which the author assesses as not always consistent. The author takes the position that when assigning a primary and additional punishment to a guilty person for one crime, there will be no contradiction to the principle under study only if the assigned punishments affect different spheres of human rights and freedoms, even if they are not covered by a common time period. However, a contradiction is seen in the case of assigning consecutive punishments that affect the same benefit for a person - his freedom. Measures to eliminate this contradiction contained in the articles of the Especial part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are offered.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
LEGAL ORDER History Theory Practice
Published
2024-12-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.47475/2311-696x-2024-43-4-113-117
Primary Topic
Legal and Policy Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

«NON BIS IN IDEM» AS AN INDEPENDENT PRINCIPLE OF CRIMINAL LAW IN RUSSIA

Timur Sabitov
LEGAL ORDER History Theory Practice
Legal and Policy Issues
article

«NON BIS IN IDEM» AS AN INDEPENDENT PRINCIPLE OF CRIMINAL LAW IN RUSSIA

Timur Sabitov
article en

Abstract

The article argues for the independent role of the principle “non bis in idem” (not twice for the same thing) in Russian criminal law. According to the position of the legislator, the requirement of inadmissibility of repeated criminal liability for the same crime is part of the principle of justice. At the same time, in the opinion of the author, this does not correspond to the actual role of the principle “non bis in idem”, which is confirmed in the article by a number of arguments. Thus, the international legal and constitutional legal origin of the principle under consideration is emphasized. Its relationship with the principle of justice is also made. In particular, it points out the discrepancies between the latter and “non bis in idem”, arising in the case of a court sentencing that does not achieve the goal of correcting the convicted person. In addition, the role of the principle of inadmissibility of repeated criminal liability for the same crime as a general (static) criminal law principle is shown. It is the basis for the principles and rules of qualification of criminal acts, sentencing, criminal law-making, as well as other aspects of the implementation of criminal law policy. The final part of the article examines the embodiment of the principle “non bis in idem” in the rules on sentencing and sanctions of criminal law norms, which the author assesses as not always consistent. The author takes the position that when assigning a primary and additional punishment to a guilty person for one crime, there will be no contradiction to the principle under study only if the assigned punishments affect different spheres of human rights and freedoms, even if they are not covered by a common time period. However, a contradiction is seen in the case of assigning consecutive punishments that affect the same benefit for a person - his freedom. Measures to eliminate this contradiction contained in the articles of the Especial part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are offered.

LEGAL ORDER History Theory PracticeVol. 43(4)
Ural State Law University (RU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 52%
Legal and Policy Issues
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.