World and man philosophy briefly. The problem of man in modern philosophy

Naidanova Ksenia

Research work of an 11th grade student.

Download:

Preview:

Municipal educational institution

"Average secondary school No. 120"

Dzerzhinsky district of Perm

Mortalexecution: “Pros” and “Cons”

Naidanova Ksenia

Municipal educational institution secondary school No. 120, 11

Supervisor

Cheremnykh O. V.

Municipal educational institution secondary school No. 120, teacher

Perm - 2011

Abstract page 1
Introduction page 2
Chapter I The death penalty in the history of Russia pp. 3-17
Chapter II Types of the death penalty pp. 18-21
Chapter III The death penalty today pp. 22-29
Chapter IV Against the death penalty pp. 30-35
Conclusion page 36
List of used literature pp. 37-38
Appendix p.39-43

Annotation.

Until you saw the guillotine with your own

eyes, you can more or less indifferently

attitude towards the death penalty, you may not express

your opinion, you can say “yes” and “no”,

but if you had to see her - shock

too deep and you have to decide: against her

you or for her...

The scaffold is the executioner's accomplice. It devours a man

eats his flesh, drinks his blood. The scaffold is a monster created by the judge

and a carpenter, this is a ghost who lives some kind of terrible life generated by

countless deaths of his victims...

V. Hugo "Les Miserables"

Introduction

Research topic: The death penalty “for” and against.”

Among the many problems discussed in our society, there is the issue of capital punishment - the death penalty. Does it violate human rights, is it a deterrent to crime? Should it be used in the modern period of social development or should it be abandoned? Is this revenge on the criminal and if revenge, does society have the right to it? After all, it was society that gave birth to both crime and the criminal.
These and many other questions are answered differently by scientists, legal practitioners, public and political figures, writers and citizens. This is exactly what will be the goal of our work.

The objectives of this work are as follows:

Tracing the development of the death penalty
Consider the types of death penalty
Determine the attitude towards the death penalty of representatives of various categories of the population
Present points of view for and against the death penalty.

Relevance of this work:

Issues of the death penalty are relevant in present moment. There is intense debate in the State Duma about abolishing the death penalty or lifting the presidential moratorium on the death penalty.

The topic I have chosen has been studied by various scientists. Kistyakovsky A.F. in his work “Research on the Death Penalty” raised questions such as: whether the death penalty is deterrent or not, whether it reduces the number of crimes, whether the death penalty can eliminate a certain type of crime, etc. The author raises these questions as he traces the development of the death penalty issue over the centuries.

Death penalty in the history of Russia.

There has been an opinion in the literature for a long period of time that Russian legislation owes its manifestation of the death penalty to Byzantine influence. Indeed, the impact of Byzantium on Russian life in general and on Russian law in particular began with the adoption of Christianity in Rus'. However, when the Greek bishops recommended that Prince Vladimir adopt the Roman-Byzantine punitive system, which included the death penalty, declaring “it is worthy for you, princess, to execute the robbers,” Prince Vladimir reacted to their advice with doubt and displeasure. “I'm afraid of sin! “- the Russian prince answered them.

However, in pre-state society, the prototype of the death penalty, as well as other types of criminal punishment, was blood feud.

But at the same time, many rulers of Rus' resorted to the death penalty in the 11th and 14th centuries. Thus, Dmitry Donskoy in 1379 subjected the boyar Velyaminov to death for treason, and in 1383 the Surzh guest Nekomat was executed. Back in 1069, during the time of Russian Truth, which did not provide for the death penalty at all, Prince Izyaslav took possession of Kiev, sent his son, who put to death 70 people who participated in the expulsion of Izyaslav from Kyiv.

For the first time in the history of the Russian state, the death penalty was legally enshrined in 1398 in the Dvina charter, which legally formalized the entry of the Dvina land into the Moscow state. This document was compiled by the Grand Duke of Moscow Vasily Dmitrievich.

In Art. 5 of the Dvina Charter provides for the imposition of the death penalty only in one case - for theft committed for the third time.

The death penalty was imposed for sacrilege and intrusion into the altar at night in order to steal sacred offerings to God, as well as for the manufacture of poisonous substances that kill people . It is easy to see that the death penalty was established primarily for state and religious crimes.

The Pskov Charter of 1467 significantly expands the use of the death penalty compared to the Dvina Charter. The death penalty is established here for:

church theft;
horse stealing;
high treason;
arson;
theft committed in Posad for the third time.

Apparently, the Pskov Charter, establishing the death penalty for the listed crimes, set the task of getting rid of the most dangerous elements for society. This legislation is silent on the death penalty for murder.

Due to the preservation of customs in Rus', the death penalty was also applied in cases not provided for by law. So the Kiev prince Rostislav, angry with Gregory the Wonderworker, ordered his hands to be tied, a heavy stone hung around his neck and the offender thrown into the water.

The tendency towards expanding the public nature of criminal punishment that emerged in the first half of the 15th century was completed in the Code of Laws of 1497, adopted under the Grand Duke of Moscow Ivan III.

This code of law expanded the scope of application of the death penalty compared to the Dvina and Pskov charters. The following were punishable by death: robbery, murder, theft, slander, murder of one's master, treason, sacrilege, theft of slaves, arson, state and religious crimes.

During the reign of Ivan the Terrible mass executions were carried out in Moscow at Lobnoye Mesto.

Monstrous torture was applied to the convicts, which became a kind of symbol of the tyranny of Tsar Ivan. Boyars suspected of plotting against the tsar were executed. Their “guilt” was established on the basis of denunciations, false testimony, and often as a result of their own confessions, extracted through severe torture.

From the point of view of G.Z. Anashkin, one should not exaggerate the number of people executed under Ivan the Terrible, as is sometimes done. Without citing a source, he claimed that, according to the chronicler, during the defeat of the Novgorod freemen, up to 60 thousand people were subjected to the death penalty by the guardsmen. . These data are exaggerated by 20 times. According to the calculations of the “Soviet” historian R.G. Skrynnikov, three to four thousand people became victims of the “tsarist terror”.

If we compare the number of executions carried out in Russia of that period with the number of executions in the West in the 16th century, we can be convinced that Europe was significantly ahead of Russia in its cruelty. For example, in Germany under Charles V, about 100 thousand people were executed. Judge von Karptsov alone had to impose about 20 thousand death sentences. In England, under Henry VIII, 70 thousand stubborn beggars were hanged “out of a total population” of 4.5 million people. Under Elizabeth I, 19 thousand people were executed in England. The viceroy of the Spanish king Philip II in the Netherlands, the Duke of Alba, executed 18 thousand people .

The Council Code of 1649, which was a set of laws of feudal Russia that reflected and consolidated feudal-landowner relations, also did not bypass the death penalty.

The death penalty was the main type of criminal punishment and was established for many crimes. The Code was literally full of sanctions providing for the death penalty.

Particular attention was paid to crimes against the sovereign. This is confirmed by Article 1 of Chapter II: “If someone, with some intention, begins to think of an evil deed against the sovereign’s health, and someone informs about that evil intent of his, and from that information about that evil intent of his it will be revealed that he was thinking of an evil deed against the Tsar’s Majesty.” , and he wanted to do it, and according to the investigation, he would be executed by death.” . Thus, it is necessary to cancel that not only the murder or attempted murder of the sovereign was punishable by death, but also preparation for such an act, and even the discovery of intent to take the life of the king entailed the death penalty.

The death penalty also punished treason and rebellion, arson for the purpose of treason, false denunciation of state crimes, coming en masse to the Tsar and plotting against the Tsar, his close people, boyars, falconers, and governors.

Religious crimes were also punished with the death penalty, i.e. crimes against the church. These included, for example, blasphemy and church rebellion. The most serious religious crimes were considered to be: fights committed in a church, accompanied by murder, as well as conversion to the Basurman faith through violence and deception.

The Code of 1649 provided for five types of execution of the death penalty. The death penalty was divided into:

ordinary (simple);
qualified.

Common executions included beheading, hanging and drowning.

Qualified - burning, pouring metal into the throat, quartering, wheeling, burying in the ground up to the shoulders, impalement, etc.

Death penalty through hanging gave a connotation of the destruction of the convicted person and was applied, according to the Code, to military personnel who defected to the enemy (“for treason in military affairs”).

Drowning was used mainly in cases where execution was carried out on a large scale. This type of execution of the death penalty was known before. So, in 1607, by order of the then reigning Vasily Shuisky, up to 4 thousand captured rebels were taken out in hundreds every night and killed by hitting them on the head with a club, and the bodies were lowered under the ice into the Yauza River.

Burning was applied alive to those convicted of religious crimes. Criminals were burned either on an ordinary bonfire or in a wooden frame, sometimes previously imprisoned in a metal cage.

A qualified type of execution includedpouring molten lead into the throat. This type of death penalty was applied exclusively to counterfeiters. In 1672, this type of death penalty was replaced by cutting off both legs and the left hand of the criminal.

Quartering used for insulting the sovereign, for an attempt on his life, sometimes for treason, as well as for imposture. This was the most terrible execution. The criminal was cut off all four limbs, and then the head.

Wheeling became widespread with the introduction of the Military Regulations of Peter I. The method of wheeling was as follows: “An St. Andrew’s cross made of two logs was tied to the scaffold in a horizontal position. On each of the branches of this cross two notches were made, one foot apart from each other.”

Burying (“Digmentation”) alive into the ground, assigned for the murder of a husband. The woman convicted of murdering her husband was buried alive in the ground up to her shoulders, with her hands tied behind her back. The convict remained in this position until she died of hunger, cold and thirst.

Impalementwhich was applied, like quartering, mainly to rebels and “traitors to thieves.”

Numerous studies on the death penalty in Russia draw attention to the fact that those sentenced to death received spiritual guidance. According to the Code, they were given six days to repent, after which they

were allowed to take communion. The execution took place on the third day after communion. The condemned person was sentenced to death and read out publicly. He walked to the place of execution with a lit wax candle.

In addition, the Council Code provided for the postponement of execution of the death penalty. For example, thieves and robbers subject to the death penalty were placed in prison for six weeks for the purpose of repentance. After the expiration of this period, the death penalty was carried out. Pregnant women were also given a reprieve; they were kept in prison until the birth of the child, and after childbirth they were subject to a scheduled execution.

The legislation of the era of Peter I refers to the death penalty more often, in 56 cases. Three types of death penalty were common:

1. Arquebusing (beheading) - for military personnel it was carried out with a sword on a block or on a log, and not with an ax, as it was before Peter I. During the execution of the archers, Peter I himself served as an executioner in several cases.

2. Execution.

3. Hanging.

So only from the end of September to the end of October 1698, more than a thousand archers were executed. In February 1699, the Streltsy were again executed in the hundreds.

Only in 1744, in a Senate decree published on May 7, Elizaveta Petrovna ordered an end to executions of those sentenced to death on Russian territory, replacing this measure with other types of punishment.Elizaveta Petrovna was again embarrassed by the death penalty, which abounded in the criminal part of the project. In addition to the usual types of capital punishment - beheading and hanging, the project included burning, wheeling, pouring hot metal into the throat, hanging by the rib and, finally, previously unknown to Russian criminal law - tearing into pieces by five horses, prescribed for serious political crimes.The suspension of execution of the death penalty until a special decree of the Senate led to the fact that prisons.

turned out to be overcrowded with people sentenced to this harsh form of punishment. In 1754, a decree was issued on the final abolition of the death penalty and its replacement with scourging, tearing out of the nostrils and branding of the face.

Catherine II also opposed the death penalty. However, all of her good intentions dispersed after the start of the Pugachev rebellion. Catherine’s decree read: “Pugachev should be given the death penalty, quartered, his head impaled, body parts distributed to four parts of the city and placed on wheels.” .

The Decembrist uprising, defeated by tsarism, instead of the painful execution of quartering, Pavel Pestel, Kondraty Ryleev, Sergei Muravyov-Apostol, Mikhail Bestuzhev-Ryumin and Pyotr Kakhovsky were sentenced to hanging.

Due to the inexperience of the executioners and the inability to arrange gallows the first time, three, namely: Ryleev, Kakhovsky, Muravyov, failed, but were soon hanged again. Ryleev could not resist a sorrowful exclamation: “So, they will say that I did not succeed in anything, not even to die!” Others claim that he, in addition, exclaimed: “Cursed land, where they can neither conspire, nor judge, nor hang!" This contradicted the tradition of the inadmissibility of the second execution of the death penalty, but, on the other hand, was explained by the absence of executions in Russia over the previous several decades. The exception was the execution of participantsPugachev's uprising.

In total, 40 people were officially executed during the era of Nicholas I, but the introduction of spitzrutens and corporal punishment, undoubtedly, was a form of execution. Nikolai’s extremely cynical resolution at one of the death penalty verdicts read: “drive the guilty through 1000 people 12 times. Thank God, we never had the death penalty and it’s not for me to introduce it.” . In reality, there were both gallows and executions.

In the last two decades of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century, the death penalty in Russia was applied on the basis of the Regulations on measures to preserve public order dated September 4, 1881.

The provision gave the right to the highest administrative ranks to refer cases of armed resistance to authorities, deliberate arson, rendering military equipment unusable and some other crimes to military courts for judgment under martial law.

After the suppression of the 1905 revolution, the death penalty was used on an unprecedented scale. The extrajudicial use of the death penalty by decision of governors and commanders-in-chief is becoming a widespread phenomenon.

The number of those executed without trial and in the absence of a guilty verdict in December 1905 alone was 376 people, and in the first three months of 1906 - 679 .

On June 19, 1906, at a meeting of the First State Duma, a draft law on the abolition of the death penalty was discussed. Article I of the draft stated: “The death penalty is abolished.” The following was further written: “In all cases in which the death penalty is established by existing laws, it is replaced directly with the next most severe punishment.” .

However, the project was not approved by the State Council.

The same project on the abolition of the death penalty was approved by the Second State Duma, but again was not approved by the State Council.

But, despite strong protests from the public and well-founded arguments from scientists, the death penalty has not been abolished in Russia.

Significantly underestimating the number of people executed in Russia, assistant to the head of the prison department of Tsarist Russia M.M. Borovitinov informed the Washington Prison Congress in 1910 that 144 people were executed in Russia in 1906, 1130 in 1907, and 825 in 1908. However, Professor M.N. Gernet, in his monograph “The Death Penalty,” provided the following data on the number of those executed: 1906 - 574; 1907 - 1139; 1908 - 1340; 1909 - 717; 1910 - 129; 1911 - 73; 1912 - 126 .

After the February revolution in Russia, the Provisional Government in the first days of its existence adopted a number of bourgeois-democratic legislative acts.

However, on July 12, 1917, the death penalty was restored at the front for murder, robbery, treason, escape to the enemy, surrender, leaving the battlefield and other military crimes .

On February 21, 1918, the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR adopted the decree “The Socialist Fatherland is in Danger!”.

The decree proclaimed a transition to emergency measures and allowed for the possibility of execution on the spot for crimes committed by enemy agents, speculators, pogromists, hooligans, counter-revolutionary agitators, and German spies.

Consequently, the Cheka was given the right to extrajudicially suppress enemies of the revolution, up to and including their execution on the spot. According to one of the leaders of the Cheka, M.Ya. Latsis, in the first half of 1918, 22 people were shot, then repressions intensified, and from mid-autumn 1918 their number began to decline. In October, 641 enemies were shot Soviet power, in November - 210, in December - 302, in January 1919 - 144, and in February - 34. This was the result of the fact that the resistance of the overthrown classes in the country was largely overcome.

On September 5, 1918, the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR adopted a resolution “On the Red Terror,” which stated that “all persons involved in White Guard organizations, conspiracies and rebellions are subject to execution”; that it is necessary to “publish the names of all those executed, as well as the reasons for applying this measure to them” .

The first case of the death penalty took place on February 26, 1918, when the self-proclaimed Prince of Eboli, known for his adventures and bandit raids, and his accomplice Britt were shot.

On June 16, 1918, the People's Commissariat of Justice of the RSFSR adopted a resolution that revolutionary tribunals in choosing measures to combat counter-revolutionary sabotage and other crimes are not bound by any restrictions, except for cases where the law defines a measure in the expressions: “not lower than such and such a punishment” . Tribunals were given the right to pass sentences of death.

The first sentence to death by a revolutionary military tribunal was passed against former boss naval forces of the Baltic Fleet, Rear Admiral A.M. Shchastny, who was found guilty of preparing a counter-revolutionary coup in the Baltic Fleet.

For nine months (June 1918 - February 1919), according to the verdicts of the Cheka authorities, 5,496 people were shot in the territory of 23 provinces.

In June 1919, the rights of the Cheka were expanded in terms of the use of execution. The bodies of the All-Russian Cheka, in accordance with the Decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of June 20, 1919, retained the right to direct reprisal, up to execution in areas declared under martial law, for crimes specified in the very resolution on the introduction of martial law, namely: for high treason, espionage, concealment traitors and spies, belonging to counter-revolutionary organizations and participation in a conspiracy against Soviet power, concealing military weapons for counter-revolutionary purposes, counterfeiting banknotes, forgery for counter-revolutionary purposes in arson and explosions, deliberate destruction or damage to railway tracks, bridges and other structures, telegraph and telephone communications, military warehouses, equipment, food and fodder supplies, banditry, robbery and armed robbery, breaking into Soviet and public warehouses and stores for the purpose of illegal theft, illegal cocaine trade.

The death penalty in the form of execution was legally enshrined in the Guidelines on Criminal Law of the PSFSR of 1919 - the first legislative act that regulated in a concentrated form the main provisions and institutions of the general part of the new criminal law.

On January 17, 1920, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars decided to “abolish the use of capital punishment (execution), both according to the verdicts of the All-Russian Extraordinary Commission and its local bodies, and according to the verdicts of city, provincial, as well as the Supreme at the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of Tribunals ».

But already the Resolution of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the STO “On declaring some provinces under martial law” of May 11, 1920 granted the provincial revolutionary tribunals the rights of revolutionary military tribunals in relation to determining the measure of repression.

During the Civil War, the following were sentenced to death by the tribunals from among all those convicted: in 1919 - 14%, in 1920 - 11%, in 1921 - 5%, in 1922 - 1%.

In 1920 alone, revolutionary military tribunals sentenced 6,541 people to death.

In the process of preparing the draft Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1922, the question of the death penalty arose again.

The punishment system provided for by the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1922 did not include the death penalty. The rule on the death penalty in the form of execution was placed in a separate article. Consequently, the legislator treated execution as an extraordinary measure of criminal punishment. Article 33 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1922 stated: “In cases pending before military tribunals, until abolition by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee, in cases where the articles of this code define capital punishment, execution is applied as such.” From this we can conclude that the right to apply the death penalty was granted only to military tribunals. Ordinary courts could not impose this penalty. By Decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of June 27, 1922 Art. 33 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1922 was supplemented with the following note: “The highest measure of repression cannot be applied to persons who have not reached the age of 18 at the time of the commission of the crime.” . And the Decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of September 7, 1922 established that “the capital punishment (execution) cannot be applied to women who are pregnant, as determined by medical examination.”

In total, according to the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1922, the death penalty, as a rule, as an alternative sanction was established for 28 crimes, which amounted to 7.6% of all articles in this code.

On February 15, 1923, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee established by decree: “In cases pending in the Supreme Court, provincial courts and tribunals of all categories, in cases where the articles of this Code define capital punishment, execution is applied as such.” .

The basic principles of the criminal legislation of the USSR and the Union republics of 1924 decided that “temporarily”, as the highest measure of social protection, until its complete abolition by the Central Executive Committee of the USSR, in order to combat the most dangerous types of crimes that threaten the foundations of Soviet power and the Soviet system, it is allowed execution. Execution cannot be applied to persons under 18 years of age or to women who are pregnant.

In 1922-1925, the number of people sentenced to death was 0.1% of total number convicted, and in 1926-1930. - less than 0.1%.

Despite the fact that the Soviet state formally always regarded the death penalty as a temporary and exceptional measure of criminal punishment, this measure was not abolished either in the 20s or 30s. Moreover, the theory put forward by Stalin of intensifying the class struggle as we moved towards socialism entailed tougher repressions.

The expression “enemy of the people” became widespread both in official documents of those years and in theoretical works. However, this expression is interpreted extremely broadly.

According to the resolution of the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of August 7, 1932 “On the protection of the property of state enterprises, collective farms and cooperation and the strengthening of public (socialist) property”, “... people who encroach on public property must be considered as enemies of the people” .

The rampant Stalinist terror began after the murder of S.M. Kirov. On December 1, 1934, on the day of this murder, a resolution was adopted by the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR “On Amendments to the Current Criminal Procedure Codes of the Union Republics,” to which some changes were made on September 14, 1937.

On November 5, 1934, on the basis of a resolution of the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR, a Special Meeting was created under the NKVD of the USSR, which was given the right to extrajudicially apply such criminal penalties as exile, deportation and imprisonment in a camp to persons considered socially dangerous. In the camps, conditions were created that condemned those condemned to a slow and painful death, and only a few managed to miraculously survive.

And although it was officially announced that the most valuable capital in our country is a person, the human personality was devalued. No one could be guaranteed against unexpected reprisals.

Trying to justify the monstrous repressions of that period, A.Ya. Vyshinsky argued that in cases of counter-revolutionary crimes, the accused’s admission of guilt is the queen of evidence, and the burden of proving innocence shifts to the accused himself.

It is difficult to accurately determine the number of victims of the Stalinist regime. According to incomplete data, the number of people shot and tortured in the camps reaches 20 million people.

In the 30s and 40s, the death penalty according to the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1926 was provided for for 42 offenses.

After Patriotic War By decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of May 26, 1947, the abolition of the death penalty was proclaimed. This Decree established that for crimes punishable by death penalty under current laws, imprisonment in a forced labor camp for a period of 25 years is applied in peacetime.

Three years later, on January 12, 1950, the Decree of the Presidium of the USSR Armed Forces “On the application of the death penalty to traitors to the Motherland, spies, subversives and saboteurs” was adopted, and on April 30, 1954, the death penalty was also introduced for intentional murder.

After Stalin's death, Special Meetings and all extrajudicial forms of consideration of criminal cases were abolished.

However, criminal legislation took the path of expanding the range of acts for which the possibility of the death penalty was provided. By a decree of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Council of May 5, 1961, the death penalty was established for theft on an especially large scale, speculation in currency values, and disruption of the work of correctional labor institutions. The next Decree (February 15, 1962) provided for the death penalty for an attempt on the life of a police officer or people's vigilante, for rape and for taking a bribe. In January 1973, the Criminal Code of the RSFSR was supplemented with an article on liability for the hijacking of an aircraft, and it also provided for the possibility of the death penalty.

Legal scholars in Russia most often did not have statistical data on the use of the death penalty. The only theoretical study of this problem was the monograph of Professor G.Z. published in 1969 for official use. Anashkina “USSR legislation on the death penalty and the practice of its application.”

Thus, it is easy to see that the death penalty was an integral part of the Russian state.

Types of death penalty.

Death penalty , deprivation of life by court verdict for a criminal act. In developed countries, the death penalty is always preceded by a trial. Execution can only be carried out by an authorized representative of the state, otherwise this action is considered murder and is punishable by law.
The following are currently used around the world:types of death penalty:

Hanging;
Execution;
Decapitation (Guillotine);
Lethal injection;
Electric chair;
Stoning;
Gas chamber.

Hanging: Hanging is first mentioned in the Book of Numbers: “And the Lord said to Moses, Take all the leaders of the people and hang them before the Lord before the sun...” . They also loved to hang them in Russia. Robbers and rebels were hanged either from trees or on rafts that were lowered down the big rivers as a warning to those who live downstream. Executions by lot were also in use, when it was expensive to execute a rebel village or regiment and every tenth person was hanged. Until now, hanging as the only type of execution remains in the legislation of 50 countries. True, not all of these countries use execution. The most advanced countries, just in case, retained the death penalty in their laws, but actually abandoned it. In most cases, the death of a hanged person does not occur from suffocation, but from compression of the carotid arteries supplying blood to the brain.

Execution: Perhaps the most popular type of execution arose with the advent and widespread use of firearms. In most countries they shoot for free. True, in Nazi Germany, the prison administration sent bills to relatives for paying the costs of execution, and the Iraqi authorities, during the repressions against the Kurds, charged his relatives 300 dinars “for the service” for shooting a rebel. And in relatively civilized China, the relatives of the executed person, in order to receive the body, must pay the cost of the shot - the cartridge plus the depreciation of the weapon. There are two main forms of execution:

Decapitation (Guillotine):The task of the executioner in this type of execution is to instantly reach the spinal cord with a sharp blade, so that as a result of shock an instant loss of consciousness occurs. Much in the successful execution of this type of execution depends on the qualifications of the executioner. In Russia, from time immemorial, the head was chopped with an ax on a wooden block or a simple log, and only the great reformer Peter I ordered to replace the crude ax with a noble sword.

During the reign of terror of the Great French Revolution, executioners could no longer cope with their work and became very tired, since they had to chop up to 60 heads per shift. But progress came to the aid of the revolutionaries. Dr. Joseph Guillotin invented a machine for cutting off heads - a 160-kilogram knife fell along guides. The condemned person was tied vertically to a special feeder, which was tilted on a hinge so that the condemned person’s head was in the line of fall of the knife.

Currently, beheading is used only in Saudi Arabia. More than 100 people have been publicly beheaded in the country since the mid-1980s, when a law introducing the death penalty for drug trafficking was passed.

Lethal injection:Practiced in most US states. The condemned person is tied in a horizontal position and given a drip with a barbiturate causing loss of consciousness, paralyzing agents - muscle relaxation, cardiac arrest and paralysis of the diaphragm, which stops the functioning of the lungs. The following are entered sequentially:

sodium pentothal(sodium pentothal) - used for anesthesia and anesthesia - at least 5 g.
pavulon(pancuronium bromide) - paralyzes the respiratory muscles
potassium chloride(potassium chloride) - leads to stoppinghearts.

Electric chair:Most known method murder - the electric chair - has been used in the United States since 1890. The inventor of this murder was the same man who invented the light bulb (Edison). If you are “lucky enough” to be put in the electric chair, you will be completely shaved and tied to the chair by your arms and legs. A metal saliva cup will be attached to the head, and electrodes will be attached to the legs and skull. When the executioner turns the switch, you will be shocked by a current of 2000-3000 volts. A person dies as a result of cardiac arrest and respiratory paralysis .

Stoning:In biblical times, this was the most common, truly popular execution, in which many members of the community took part. Currently, stoning is retained in the legislation of six countries around the world. The person is tied to a pole, then the stoning begins, in which everyone can take part. Death occurs from brain damage. The Amnesty International report gives an eyewitness account of such an execution: “a lot of stones and pebbles were poured out of the truck, then two women dressed in white were brought in with bags placed over their heads... a hail of stones fell, turning the bags red. .. »

Gas chamber: The gas chamber was first invented and used not in Nazi Germany, but in the USSR. The inventor of the gas chamber was the head of the Administration of the NKVD in Moscow, I.D. Berg. His brainchild was a van with a sealed body and an exhaust pipe located inside the body. Naturally, the van had the inscription “Bread” on it. The first American gas chamber was built in 1956. The executioner throws crystals of potassium cyanide into the acid and the poisonous gas released kills the condemned man.

Death penalty today.

More than half of the states around the world have either abolished the death penalty in law or do not use it in practice.

90 states and territorial entitiescompletely canceled death penalty;
11 states abolished the death penalty for all crimes, with the exception of particularly serious casessuch as war crimes;
32 states the death penalty is not used in practice: the legislation of these states provides for a similar punishment, but the sentences have not been carried out over the past 10 years or more.

Thus, in total 133 States have either abolished the death penalty in law or do not apply it in practice.

64 more States retain and use the death penalty, but the number of countries that actually execute prisoners decreases every year.

In 2006 at 25 countries executed at least 1591 prisoners and more 3861 man was sentenced to capital punishment in 55 countries.

In 2006 91% The reported executions took place in Iraq, Iran, China, Pakistan, Sudan and the United States. During the year, China executed at least 1010 people, in reality this figure may be much higher. According to information from reliable sources, in 2006 it was carried out from 7500 to 8000 sentences. Official statistics regarding the use of the death penalty remain classified, making monitoring and analysis of the data difficult.

177 executed in Iran people in Pakistan - 82 , in Iraq and Sudan - no less than 65 Human. Executed in the USA 53 death sentences in 12 states.

It is difficult to calculate the total number of prisoners on death row. As of the end of 2006, this number is estimated to range from 19,185 to 24,646 Human. The calculation was made on the basis of information from human rights organizations, press reports, as well as meager official statistics.

As mentioned earlier, in our time there are also states that have retained the death penalty as a punishment. Among them:

China. Although China already executes several thousand people a year, they decided to slightly expand the scope of application of capital punishment: Chairman Jiang Zemin called for the execution of the most corrupt employees of the party and state apparatus.

Philippines. Here, for the first time in 20 years, the Supreme Court decided to carry out the death penalty. A 38-year-old Filipino man sentenced to death for raping a girl will die after being injected with a special poisonous solution. He was supposed to have been killed by now, but the Supreme Court postponed his execution due to the fact that Congress may be changing the laws governing the death penalty. In the meantime, demonstrations are roaming the country, either in favor or against execution.

Uganda. A Ugandan court sentenced four young men to death by hanging. They, driven by the most noble motives - the fight against witchcraft - killed 50 people clearly involved in black magic.

Iran. The leadership of this country has begun to decisively combat drug addiction, which affects about 10 percent of all Iranians. In light of this struggle, a new law was passed in the country, according to which drug addiction is not considered a disease, but a crime. And if so, then possession of at least 30 grams of opium is punishable by death.

Sierra Leone. Sierra Leone's Supreme Court sentenced to death 11 civilians accused of treason and collaboration with the ousted junta. Among them are two former ministers of the junta government, as well as three women, one of whom, 75-year-old Nancy Steele, served as mayor of Freetown.

Benin. Here, strangely for the mouthpiece of Christian forgiveness, the Catholic Church spoke out in favor of returning the death penalty to the country as the only effective means of combating armed banditry. In their message, the leadership of the local Catholic Church emphasized that only the threat of the death penalty can “stop lawless rapists and protect people’s lives.”

Opinions of representatives of various categories of the population.

IN lately There is a very interesting debate going on around the issue of the death penalty, we will present just a few opinions on this issue.

Warsaw University professor S. Budzinski, in his textbook on criminal law, spoke out against the death penalty and gave the following arguments:

Viktor Zaitsev, Senior Adviser of Justice, Investigative Committee of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation: “Do not spare the murderers.” We will be covered in blood if the death penalty is abolished! I would like to look at those humanists who are against execution, no matter how they would behave if they saw their child or grandchild torn to pieces, gutted or “sanded.” If Chikatilo or Golovkin himself, two meters tall, disassemble in time for “spare parts”, take the liver, heart, spleen, how many wonderful people would still be alive! In China they have been doing this for a long time - those sentenced to death are dismantled for “spare parts” and sold .

Anatoly Pristavkin, writer, chairman of the Commission on Pardons under the President of the Russian Federation: “The death penalty will not change anything. The debate about the death penalty is an eternal topic. And usually the arguments of the disputing parties are the same. However, with our minds we all understand that responding with murder to murder will not change anything. For about a year and a half in Russia, execution sentences have not been carried out, and there has been no increase in crimes because of this. Although almost 70% of Russians are in favor of the death penalty. We conducted a study and found out that 48% of Muscovites and St. Petersburg residents are not just in favor of the death penalty, but in favor of public executions - in the square. We must keep in mind: when we shoot a criminal, we are committing murder, not punishing.” .

Vladimir Shainsky, composer: “It is immoral to save the life of a criminal! " “Murderers should not be called animals - this is an insult to animals " “In all cases of crime, the offender initially has an advantage over the victim. And even if the court sentences the killer to death, this in no way atones for the suffering of the victim and her family. Therefore, saving the life of a criminal who has encroached on someone else’s life is inhumane. It may be objected to me that the state is not God and cannot decide the question of whether to save a person’s life or not. But the criminal is not God and also cannot decide the issue of life and death of his victim, and for this reason alone - for the sake of justice! - The death penalty must be retained. The memory of the victims is priceless, and at least out of respect for their memory and the suffering of their loved ones, it is necessary to destroy the killers. We need to once and for all clear the planet of those who dared to interrupt the lives of others.

I know one case. Ten villains aged 17-20 dragged a 15-year-old girl into an apartment, tortured her for three days, and then one of them stabbed her with a knife. The court gave most of them 4-5 years. The one who stabbed her was given 12 years, but I think he will be mowed down. Elementary justice demands that all 10 scoundrels be executed. Bad people need to be exterminated like mad rats. Killers should not be called animals - this is an insult to animals.”

Viktor Alksnis, famous Russian politician, deputy chairman of the People's Union party: “I believe that there should be the death penalty in Russia.

I would like to be wrong, but it seems to me that on the issue of using the death penalty, the liberal point of view will still prevail that there should be no death penalty in Russia, although the mood in society is opposite to this, that is, the majority of our citizens want so that there is a death penalty and that for especially serious crimes criminals receive the deserved punishment. I believe that there should be the death penalty in Russia, and it should be applied for especially serious crimes. I am convinced that if this does not happen, we will continue to slide into the abyss of lawlessness and crime. If a drug dealer kills tens of thousands of people with his so-called business, really destroys the lives of young people, then why can’t he be punished to the fullest extent, as is done in other countries where the death penalty for drug distribution is completely normal and is applied in full ? “I believe that until drug traffickers realize that they will face very severe punishment, like in Thailand or Singapore, they will not be defeated.” .

Evgenia Potapova, a 3rd year student at the VA Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, believes that the death penalty is necessary in Russia today. “The fact is that crime has simply overwhelmed Russia. Criminals, as they say, have lost their “sense of fear”, and therefore the number of serious and especially serious crimes in the country has increased significantly.” .

Sergey Stepanov, n Head of the Regional Headquarters of the Young Guard of United Russia. “In Soviet times, annually, on the territory of the Soviet Union, where more than 250 million people lived, 11-13 thousand intentional murders were recorded. Throughout the Soviet Union. Today in Russia, where about 140 million people live, more than 30 thousand intentional murders are committed annually. The terrifying difference is obvious. And this speaks in favor of the death penalty. But what about such a phenomenon as a miscarriage of justice, when an innocent person is sentenced? Just remember the case with Chikatilo, when several people were shot before his arrest, believing that they were the real maniacs.” .

According to a government spokesman, 60-70 percent of the Russian population favor maintaining the death penalty. However, crimes that citizens consider deserving of exceptional punishment - corruption, drug trafficking on an especially large scale, pedophilia - cannot actually be punished by deprivation of life, since the death penalty is imposed by the court only for crimes against life. This includes terrorism, but it is excluded from the jurisdiction of jury courts, which means that the death penalty cannot be imposed on a terrorist by law. In effect, this means that the principle of "life for life" can only be applied to murderers.

We held our own sociological research based on an anonymous diagnostic questionnaire.

The questionnaire made it possible to determine the attitude of modern youth towards the death penalty, how necessary it is in the modern world, and for what crimes it should be imposed.

The results of the survey showed that out of 62 respondents, 41 believe that the death penalty is necessary; 21 opposed the death penalty.

At the same time, 23 people who were simplified answered that the death penalty should be imposed for premeditated murder, 18 for rape, 8 for serial murder, 4 for drug addiction, 3 for terrorism, 2 for corruption, 2 for all types of crimes, 1 for relapse.

33 people noted that it is necessary to cancel the moratorium on the death penalty in Russia, 24 opposed the abolition.

Touching upon the question of the humanity of the death penalty, 32 people considered the existence of the death penalty to be a humane form of punishment, 22 people considered it not humane, and not always 3.

The death penalty frightens 36 people, does not frighten 22, and some 3.

38 respondents believe that the existence of the death penalty reduces the number of crimes, 17 noted that no, it does not reduce it.

Thus, we see that the issue of the death penalty is relevant today. According to the majority of respondents, the death penalty is necessary as an existing punishment.

No matter how inhumane the death penalty may seem, its abolition (especially in our country) is inappropriate. As history shows, such a measure of punishment is more necessary than not. The state, having this type of punishment in its arsenal, can use it extremely rarely, replacing it with life imprisonment; but there are cases when any humanist and almost any opponent of execution will say that this person does not deserve to live. And let me emphasize once again, it’s not so much a matter of punishment (you can’t eliminate crime with punishments, they only deter it to a certain extent), but rather of eliminating the sources of evil, of correcting the horrific situation that has developed in Russian society. It is time for the state to take up the implementation of the principles laid down in the 1993 Constitution. With the current policy of our government, no matter what the punishments, the situation in society, unfortunately, will not improve.

Against the death penalty.

Despite the fact that there is an opinion about the necessity of the death penalty, there is also an opposite position.

Cons: it's not humane!

Cons: It doesn't reduce crime!

Cons: judicial errors are possible!

Cons: this will not correct the criminal!

Cons: It will not repair the damage done!

Against: God gave life to man and man takes that life away!

Cons: Revenge is bad!

Cons: Even murderers have the right to life!

This is not humane!

“Human civilization at the current level of its development is called upon to establish the absolute sacredness of human life and the fundamental inadmissibility of the death penalty. Refusal of the death penalty is a manifestation of humanism.31"

In general terms: it postulates that humanism (“the absolute sacredness of human life”) is an axiom. Meanwhile, it is still necessary to prove that humanism is useful for humanity, etc.

Demagoguery: an attempt to rely on a postulate that itself needs proof.

This does not reduce the number of crimes!

“The use of the death penalty does not affect the number of crimes for which it is prescribed. No serious criminological research confirms that the death penalty (or the introduction of more severe punishments) reduces crime."

For the death penalty to have an impact on crime statistics, it must be used much more widely - for a wider range of crimes, and not as an exception, but as a rule. For example, if it is assigned for the third theft committed, then the number of thefts should decrease. And even then there will be a certain period of inertia in thinking - until the realization “you can lose your life for theft” becomes habitual. In the beginning there will be “Citizen Chief, I swear to my mother, I can’t wrap my head around why I did this, out of habit, Chief!”

Miscarriages of justice are possible!

“When applying the death penalty, judicial errors are possible. As a result, a person’s life can be cut short due to an unfavorable combination of circumstances, an accidental but irreparable human error. The consequences of an execution cannot be corrected, while miscarriages of justice occur constantly32.”

This argument is considered the strongest “against”. After all, executing an innocent person is not good! You won't argue with this, right?

Nowhere has it been possible to create a justice system that works without errors. And this, in the presence of the death penalty, means that innocent people will inevitably be executed.

Nowadays, for one murder with circumstantial evidence, the death penalty is used, let’s say, not often. Crimes for which the death penalty may be imposed are particularly serious and must be considered with appropriate care (I remind you that here and below the arguments are in general terms, and not the current situation in the Russian Federation).

The standard example is Chikatilo - they say, while he was found, so many innocent people died, executed due to a miscarriage of justice!

Well, let's see.

A dozen people were convicted in the Chikatilo case, but if I’m not confusing anything, only one of them was shot - Alexander Kravchenko, who had previously served 10 years for rape and murder. Yes, a miscarriage of justice. But I personally cannot call the murderer and rapist an innocent victim.

The investigation also had another suspect - Anatoly Grigoriev. In the tram depot, where he was an employee, Grigoriev, being very drunk, boasted to his colleagues that he allegedly stabbed and strangled a girl, about whom they “wrote in the newspapers,” and later hanged himself . The investigation established that Grigoriev learned about the murder from newspapers and committed self-incrimination, trying in such a strange way to raise his authority among his colleagues. Those. No one even executed him - he went crazy.

I don’t know why the others were convicted in the Chikatilo case, but even if they were all completely law-abiding citizens, then we are no longer talking about the death penalty.

This will not fix a criminal!

“The death penalty is not a means of resolving conflicts that have arisen in society. At the same time, the goal of punishment, correction and moral influence on the criminal is not achieved33.”

The purpose of law enforcement is to prevent crime. In different ways, and re-education is just one of them.

The death penalty is precisely the highest measure of social protection. Its educational effect is secondary here and affects other criminals. In relation to the executed person, everything is simple: the name opposes himself to society so much that society gets rid of him.

The death penalty is a tool, a means for solving problems facing the state in the field of domestic policy. Figuratively speaking, this is “social surgery”, the removal of a “cancerous tumor” that devours healthy cells.

In addition, the thesis implicitly comes from the paradigm “the criminal will be rehabilitated” - which, to put it mildly, is doubtful. Especially considering the severity of the crimes and the length of time served.

This will not repair the damage done!

The death penalty for a crime that has already been committed cannot restore the situation that existed before its commission, does not compensate for the harm caused by it, that is, does not eliminate the reasons that gave rise to the crime.

God gave life to man and man takes that life!

God gives life for a while (well, as if on loan) - which means that lives belong to God. Therefore, society cannot dispose of the life of an individual at its discretion. You can’t dispose of someone else’s property, in this case property of God. It is God himself who decides when to deprive this or that person of his gift (actually a lease). God gave, God took back. From this point of view, suicide should also not happen, because in this case, one individual person is trying to manage the life (of someone else’s property).

The first Christians extended this to war, etc., later the priests came up with all sorts of cunning sophistry to kill and rob in the name of God. But this is a completely different story.

However, in order for the argument to have at least some weight, I suggest that religious believers write a legally certified document “in the event of my death, I ask the murderer to be acquitted,” similar to humanists. It doesn’t matter what Last Judgment and all that, they'll sort it out there.

Well, besides, atheists and followers of religions who do not object to the death penalty are the same components of humanity as fans of Christianity. Why would you accept this? Christian point vision?

Revenge is bad!

“A death sentence is something like a vendetta, society’s revenge on a criminal. Everyone understands this precisely as revenge. Vendetta is known to result in an endless sequence of murders on both sides. And, most importantly, vendetta leads to a toughening of morals, because all participants in the vendetta get used to murders and to the fact that murders are something ordinary, an everyday matter. As a result, people easily commit murders, because... human life is devalued. Much the same thing happens in a society that practices the death penalty. To stop the vendetta before all the members of the warring clans kill each other, it is necessary that the members of one of the clans refuse to once again take revenge on their opponents for the next murder and come to terms with the fact that this murder will remain unavenged.35”

Even murderers have the right to life!

“Yes, he killed another person, yes, he deprived another person of the right to life, but this is not a reason to deprive the criminal himself of the right to life.”

Closely related to the "from humanism" argument. Now many are simply obsessed with human rights and are ready to take these rights to the point of absurdity. For example, there is such a strange logic: every person has the right to life, regardless of what he has done.

Some appeal to humanism, some to Christianity - they say, the Old Testament “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” has been abolished, Christ endured and commanded us, and all that.

At the same time, it is “forgotten” that the murderer, etc. he voluntarily excludes himself from society and opposes himself to it. Thus, even if within society we proceed from humanism, then sociopaths, etc. They don't belong to society! Moreover, it is voluntary.

But the main thing is different - in addition to the rights of the criminal, there are also the rights of the victim of the criminal and the rights of the loved ones of the victim of the criminal, right?

Everything is clear with the rights of a criminal - there is the right to receive three meals a day in prison, the right to have a TV in the cell, the right to go for a walk, etc. Please note that these are the specific rights of criminals. If you are not a criminal, then these are not your rights. You will die of hunger - you do not even have the right to a free sandwich.

Moscow. August 2. website - 17 years ago in Moscow, the last death sentence to date in Russian history was carried out: serial killer Sergei Golovkin was shot on August 2, 1996 for the brutal murder and abuse of 11 boys.

Since 1997, the death penalty has been banned in Russia under the Vienna Convention, which requires a signatory state to behave in accordance with the treaty before ratifying it. In 2009, the Constitutional Court recognized the impossibility of imposing the death penalty even after the introduction of jury trials in Chechnya.

However, there are 68 countries in the world that maintain and continue to apply this measure, including the USA, China, India, Saudi Arabia and Japan. There is no unanimous answer to the question of whether society needs the death penalty. The arguments of the supporters are clear: a deterrent factor, the impossibility of reoffending, the threat of a lynching, the leniency of a life sentence. We will remind you why society should abandon the death penalty.

1) Possibility of miscarriage of justice.

No matter how professional the investigators leading the case of a criminal are, no matter how convincing the evidence of the guilt of the convicted person is, and no matter how fair the trial is, there is always the possibility of an error in the judicial system of any country on our planet. Until the sentence is put into effect, the convicted person still has hope and the opportunity to collect the necessary evidence of his innocence and convince the investigation and the court of this. After the execution of the sentence, neither evidence nor rehabilitation will be able to bring the executed person back to life.

2) The death penalty is not a deterrent.

According to researchers of the issue, firstly, a person, when committing a crime, expects to avoid punishment, whatever it may be, which means there is no difference in whether he is sentenced to life imprisonment or the death penalty.

In addition, criminals who know that they will face the death penalty for their crime often commit new crimes, because they know that there will be no more terrible punishment - there is nothing to lose. For example, the death penalty does not matter for a terrorist, since he is constantly risking his own life.

3) Execution creates cruelty in society

For a long time, crowds of people gathered in squares to watch criminals being hanged, burned or beheaded. However, in more ancient times, executions were even more cruel and sophisticated - such as being poured with boiling tar or impaled on a stake. However, the methods did not scare away the spectators; on the contrary, the people wanted increasingly bloodier spectacles. In an atmosphere of cruelty and dispassion, new crimes were committed with enviable regularity. But that was then, and one could say that society has changed and ennobled. Actually, no: a 2006 UN report demonstrated that in countries where the death penalty is legal, crimes “worthy” of the death penalty occur more often.

4) The presence of an “institute of executioners.”

Academician Andrei Sakharov said: “The presence of the institution of the death penalty dehumanizes society. I spoke and continue to speak out against the death penalty (and not only in the USSR) also because this measure of punishment provides for the presence of a permanent terrible apparatus of executors, an entire institution of the death penalty.”

In countries where the death penalty is allowed, executioners are, in fact, legal murderers. The only difference between them and those whom they execute is that the former act for the benefit of their state, the constitution of which, in turn, states that the murder of a person is a criminal offense. It turns out that in this way the state justifies murder in public consciousness and undermines the fundamental principle of public morality and morality, such as the complete inviolability of human life. One contradicts the other and the result is a vicious circle.

5) Execution does not eliminate the cause of the crime

The main factors that provoke crime are poverty, lack of education, inequality, and mental disorders of a particular criminal. The death penalty cannot in any way influence these reasons.

6) Execution does not provide the possibility of correction.

A serial killer who is particularly cruel in his crimes may not deserve to be justified in the eyes of the people and the relatives of his victims, but he absolutely does not have a chance to reflect on his behavior and bring good to society - he does not have time for this. Moreover, the expectation of death often does not motivate, but demotivates the condemned person to think: nothing can be changed anyway. The same UN report states that life imprisonment and isolation from society frightens criminals much more than the death penalty.

7) Execution does not punish.

One of the most compelling arguments in support of the ban on the death penalty. Punishment is a measure of state coercion applied to a person found guilty of committing a crime, and consists of a certain narrowing of his legal status, endowing him with special rights and responsibilities. Execution involves depriving the convicted person of the right to life.

Nothing can justify the deliberate and merciless taking of a person's life in the name of the state. In addition, there are at least six arguments in favor of abolishing the death penalty.

Argument one: miscarriage of justice

The death penalty is irreversible. A miscarriage of justice in a capital case cannot be undone; An executed person cannot be brought back to life.

Argument two: executors of sentences

There are people among us who kill in the name of the state.

“None of the perpetrators for the first time can imagine how the execution of the sentence will affect their mental state. When you first participate in an execution, a “delayed time effect” and other signs of post-traumatic syndrome occur,” says Oleg Alkaev, head of pre-trial detention center No. 1 in Minsk in 1996-2001, with whose participation 134 death sentences were carried out.

Argument three: “Thou shalt not kill!”

One of the main religious commandments. “A person has no right to take the life of another person that God gave him.”

Argument four: murders of political opponents

The death penalty, which remains in Belarus, can be used not only against criminals, but also against political opponents. The crimes of communism have still not been condemned in Belarus, and the current government of the country in many ways feels like a successor to the Soviet regime, which committed mass executions of dissent.

Argument five: the suffering of the relatives of the executed

In Belarus there is a ban on transferring the body of an executed person for burial. Relatives are not even informed of the burial place.

The UN Human Rights Committee has repeatedly stated that the death penalty procedure itself in Belarus falls under the signs of torture and inhumane treatment of both the executed person and his relatives.

Argument six: the ineffectiveness of the death penalty in preventing crime

Statistics in many countries show that the abolition of the death penalty does not lead to an increase in the number of serious crimes.

According to human rights activists, over the past 20 years in Belarus. Only one of those sentenced to death during this time was pardoned by Alexander Lukashenko.

On at the moment There are four people in the “death corridor” awaiting execution: (found guilty of the brutal murder of his cohabitant), (found guilty of the murder of three neighbors) and (found guilty of the brutal murder of two women, rape and kidnapping) and (found guilty of the brutal murder of three people).

Belarusian human rights activists believe that life is the highest value, a natural and inalienable human right. They regard the death penalty as a violation of the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution of Belarus and international agreements in the field of human rights.

You can sign a petition in favor of the abolition of the death penalty in Belarus.

You can learn more about the problem of the death penalty in Belarus at

Today, the issue of using the death penalty is one of the most discussed, one of the most pressing issues not only in criminal law and jurisprudence, but in many other sciences, such as philosophy, psychology, sociology, etc. The significance of this issue is largely due to the fact that the assessment of the death penalty as a form of punishment is also given by public consciousness. This article aims to educate the reader about the current situation of the death penalty in Russian legislation, to find out for what reason and by what document the death penalty was suspended on the territory of the Russian Federation, as well as to identify and study the main arguments of supporters and opponents of the death penalty.

Peculiarities of execution of a contract for the supply of goods for state and municipal needs
Control of the property status of civil servants as a way to overcome corruption

To date issue of the death penalty is one of the most discussed, one of the most “hot” issues not only of criminal law and jurisprudence, but of many other sciences, such as philosophy, psychology, sociology, etc. The significance of this issue is largely due to the fact that the assessment of the death penalty as a form of punishment is also given by public consciousness. This article aims to educate the reader about the current situation of the death penalty in Russian legislation, to find out for what reason and by what document the death penalty was suspended on the territory of the Russian Federation, as well as to identify and study the main arguments of supporters and opponents of the death penalty.

IN Russian Federation death penalty enshrined at the legislative level in the 1993 Constitution, Part 2, Article 20 “The death penalty may be established until its abolition federal law as an exceptional measure of punishment for especially serious crimes against life, while granting the accused the right to have his case tried by a jury.” According to Article 59 of the Criminal Code of 1996, the death penalty can only be imposed for especially serious crimes that encroach on the life of this “Murder” Article 105, Article 227 “Encroachment on the life of a state or public figure", "Encroachment on the life of a person carrying out justice or preliminary investigation" Article 295, Article 317 "Encroachment on the life of a law enforcement officer" and Article 357 "Genocide" - a total of 5 articles. At the same time, the sanctions of these articles provide for alternative punishments providing for imprisonment for a certain period or for life. In addition, according to Part 2 of Article 59, the death penalty can be commuted by pardon to life imprisonment or imprisonment for a term of 25 years. According to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, women, persons under 18 years of age and men over 65 years of age are exempt from the death penalty. The only type of death penalty in the Russian Federation is execution.

Due to Russia's entry into the Council of Europe in 1996, Russia had to sign the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Also, the Russian Federation was recommended, based on the agreements, to sign and then ratify Protocol No. 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms regarding the abolition of the death penalty, and it was also recommended to establish a moratorium on the use of the death penalty. Next, the President of the Russian Federation issued a decree of May 16, 1996 “On the gradual reduction of the use of the death penalty in connection with Russia’s entry into the Council of Europe.” This was preparation before the signing of Protocol No. 6. This protocol was signed by decree of the President of the Russian Federation of February 27, 1997 No. 53-rp, but today it has no real force, since to this day it has not been ratified and, according to Russian legislation, there is no legal has no power. Although legally the death penalty could be applied, the death penalty was not actually applied, since the president stopped considering the cases of those sentenced to death.

According to paragraph 2 of Article 20 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, a sentence of death penalty can only be passed by a court with the participation of a jury. In connection with this, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation issued Resolution No. 3-P, which declared unconstitutional the imposition of a sentence with the use of capital punishment, since in the Russian Federation at that time not all regions had courts with jury participation.

In 2009, fears began to emerge that the death penalty would again be used in the Russian Federation, since in 2010 in the latter region, Chechen Republic, a jury trial will appear. In connection with this, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation addressed a request to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation with a question about the possibility of applying the death penalty.

On November 19, 2009, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation issued ruling No. 1344-O-R “On clarification of paragraph 5 of the operative part of the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of February 2, 1999 No. 3-P,” which recognized the impossibility of applying the death penalty, even though that in the Russian Federation, in all regions there are courts with jury participation. The Constitutional Court justified its decision by the long-term non-application of the death penalty, as a result of which stable guarantees for citizens not to be subjected to the death penalty were formed in the Russian Federation. It is this document that currently prohibits the use of the death penalty on the territory of the Russian Federation. As a result of the ban on the use of capital punishment, society was divided into 2 groups: people who are in favor of restoring the use of the death penalty, and against the restoration of the death penalty, each of which provides arguments in support of its position.

Arguments of opponents of the death penalty:

Miscarriage of justice

One of the most powerful arguments in the arsenal of opponents of the death penalty is the possibility of a miscarriage of justice. No one has yet managed to create a justice system that works without errors. Many scientists, government and political figures have spoken out about this position. Kalinin Yuri Ivanovich, member of the Federation Council, former director of the Federal Penitentiary Service: “Too large number mistakes in relation to the innocent, speaks for the abolition of capital punishment.” Vladimir Plagin, Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Constitutional Legislation and Construction, believes that the moratorium on the death penalty should not be abandoned at this time, since judicial errors are possible.
There is not a single example where the death penalty was mistakenly assigned to a completely innocent person. Here is one of them: on December 24, 1978, in the city of Shakhty, Rostov region, near the bridge over the Grushevka River, the body of a nine-year-old schoolgirl Olya (Name changed) was found. The girl was not only killed, but also raped. As a result of operational search activities, Alexander Kravchenko was detained. As a result of the trial, a verdict was pronounced - guilty. The death penalty by firing squad was chosen as punishment. On March 3, 1982, based on a certificate received by the court, it became known that the sentence had been carried out. In 1991, after the capture of Andrei Chikatilo, who confessed to the crime described above, as a result of a new investigation, Alexander Kravchenko was found not guilty.

The death penalty does not affect the number of crimes

A fairly convincing argument is that the death penalty does not affect the number of crimes and does not have a deterrent or deterrent factor. In the United States, a study was conducted in one of the states to find out whether the death penalty is a deterrent in the fight against crime. According to the results of the studies, it was found that the use of the death penalty does not affect the reduction of crime. The effectiveness of the death penalty was questioned as early as the third century BC by Diodotus.

Regarding the intimidating factor, Oleg Alkaev, the head of the firing squad in the pre-trial detention center in Minsk, Republic of Belarus, wrote in his book, he wrote directly about the execution and described how it happened. According to Oleg Alkaev, prisoners at the time of bringing the sentence into legal force do not quite realize what terrible punishment awaits them. Under the leadership of Oleg Alkaev, 130 people were shot, and as he claims, only 4 convicts really understood that they were going to die and were afraid of it.

Creates new crimes

In practice, there are quite a few cases where the death penalty not only did not deter, but on the contrary gave rise to new, most serious crimes. It is known that in the USSR the person who committed the murder, in an effort to evade punishment, killed not only the victim, but also the witnesses. The introduction of the death penalty for rape in 1961 affected the number of rapes, and there were fewer of them. But the number of rapes involving murder has increased, as the rapists sought to take the lives of the victims so that they would not testify against them.

Dehumanization of society

Many opponents of the death penalty argue that the death penalty leads to the dehumanization of society and, as indicated teaching staff Department of Criminal Law and Criminology of Moscow State University, who prepared training manual According to criminal law for universities, the use of the death penalty undermines such a fundamental principle of public morality and ethics as the complete inviolability of human life. At the same time, the state “justifies murder in the public consciousness, overthrowing highest value– human life - to the level of an act of will”

The famous scientist, academician, one of the creators of the hydrogen bomb and an ardent opponent of the death penalty, Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov, wrote in his letter to the organizing committee of the symposium on the problem of the death penalty. That the death penalty “undermines the moral and legal foundations of society.” Andrei Dmitrievich also believed that only “a long evolution of society, a general humanistic upsurge, instilling in people a deep admiration for life and human mind, and greater attention to the difficulties and problems of one’s neighbor can lead in the future to a decrease in crime and even its complete elimination.”

Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin shares the same opinion: “By applying the death penalty against its citizens, even criminals, the state educates its other citizens in cruelty and again and again gives rise to cruelty on the part of citizens towards each other and towards the state itself...”. It should be noted that Vladimir Vladimirovich is an opponent of the death penalty, and spoke out against the death penalty at the beginning of his presidency, and adheres to this point of view to this day. The current Prime Minister Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev is also an opponent of the death penalty.

Arguments of supporters of the death penalty

As statistics show, today there are more supporters of the death penalty than opponents. According to the All-Russian Center for the Study public opinion As of 2010, 69 percent of respondents (1,600) believe that there are crimes for which the death penalty should be applied. On February 18, 2013, a vote was held on the social network Vkontakte; the survey had three answer options: “for”, “against” and “I don’t know whether I’m for or against.” The majority of respondents are students studying at law faculties. The poll sparked a heated debate about the death penalty. Many expressed their opinions. Out of 12,869 people, 7,729 people voted “for” the death penalty, which is 60.1%, and 4,542 of them were women, 3,818 people voted “against” the death penalty, which is 29.7%, and 1,322 people were undecided on their choice of side.

Leniency of life imprisonment

Proponents of the death penalty provide some evidence that life imprisonment for murderers is too lenient a fate. One of the proofs is that prisoners can engage in creativity, create ensembles; the joy of communication replaces DVDs and game consoles for them.

Danger of life imprisonment

Opponents of life imprisonment often argue that life imprisonment does not completely eliminate the threat to public safety. Since it is possible that the prisoner may escape. In Russia, there have been cases of escape from prison; in most cases, the criminal was returned to his place, but during this time the criminal could commit new crimes.

Among the life prisoners is Alexander Yurievich Pichushkin, better known as the “Bitsevsky maniac” or “the chessboard killer.” Alexander Pichushkin killed from 48 to 60 people in the period from 1992-2006. In 2007, Pichushkinu was sentenced to life imprisonment. At the moment, Pichushkin is serving his sentence in the Polar Star colony; Nur-Pashi Aburgkashevich Kulaev, the only surviving member of the gang that seized school No. 1 in the city of Beslan in September 2004, is also in the same colony. Pichushkin does not lose hope of being released; in 2007, during a filming of Pichushkin by one of the television companies, the maniac said: “I will return to Bitsevsky Park. My hand remembers the hammer well!” On November 2, 2007, Pichushkin filed a cassation appeal. In his complaint, he asked to reduce the sentence to 25 years, but in 2008 Supreme Court rejected the cassation appeal.

The economic injustice of life imprisonment

As of March 1, 2013, there are 1,825 people in 5 correctional colonies for life prisoners, including persons for whom the death penalty has been commuted to life imprisonment by way of pardon. The state spends a large amount of money on the maintenance of life-sentence prisoners alone. It is estimated that it takes more to maintain one prisoner per month than to pay a salary school teachers. This economic injustice does not suit many victims, and many ordinary citizens, since ordinary taxpayers pay for the maintenance of these prisoners. This means that the relatives of the victims also pay for the lives of the killers of their relatives.

Impossibility of relapse

As a result of the use of the death penalty, the recurrence of crimes is completely eliminated. It is important to note that life imprisonment does not guarantee the end of relapse; moreover, it is possible that a prisoner may continue killing in prison. There are cases when murderers, after serving their sentences in a colony, committed an even more serious crime. The most striking example is Ivan Panchenko, who, after serving his sentence for the murder of his colleague, decided to kill 4 girls, and this example is not an isolated one; information about relapses by murderers appears regularly.

Intimidating factor

The deterrent factor of the death penalty remains a controversial issue. US scientists have closely studied this issue. As a result of research, scientists came to completely opposite opinions. Yet the University of Houston estimated that 150 murders would not have occurred if the death penalty existed in the state of Illinois. Professors at Emory University share the same opinion. The famous director Karen Grigorievich Shakhnazarov is convinced that the death penalty is effective method in the fight against crime: “...when I come to Singapore, and they give me a reminder on the plane that the death penalty is for any possession of drugs, and I know that in this city, in the country, there is no drug addiction problem...”

Threat of lynching

Many relatives of those killed do not agree with the court's decision to spare the lives of the killers of their relatives. As a result, they try to administer justice on their own by committing murder. Most of the victims openly declare that, without hesitation, they would avenge the death of their loved ones, so Vladimir Dobrenkov, dean of the Faculty of Sociology at Moscow State University, whose daughter and son-in-law became victims of murderers, admitted that if he had a gun, he would shoot all those suspected of killing his daughter. Information about lynchings appears quite often in the media

It is safe to say that the problem of the death penalty is unlikely to receive a clear solution in the near future. Over the entire period of use of the death penalty in Russia, attitudes towards the death penalty have changed. At least five times the death penalty has been abolished in Russia. Considering the current state of crime in our country, it can be assumed that the number of supporters of the death penalty will increase. And yet, having studied all the arguments of supporters and opponents of the death penalty, it is worth concluding that you should not resort to such a measure of punishment as the death penalty, most likely you should think about whether the death penalty is the tool that can eradicate crime in our state. Perhaps we should resort to more humane actions that would help eradicate crime, such as instilling high moral qualities in people, raising the standard of living of citizens, etc. As a result of the application of measures to combat crime and further reduce it, the issue of using the death penalty will simply become irrelevant. And yet, one cannot but rejoice at the fact that in the Russian Federation today the use of the death penalty has been suspended. But still, I would like to believe that the time is not far off when the death penalty will disappear from our legislation, disappear from the constitution and the criminal code, and for people in the future the expediency of using the death penalty was the same as for us today the expediency of using burning, quartering and other cruel punishments.

References

Constitution of the Russian Federation (adopted by popular vote on December 12, 1993) // SPS Consultant
The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation was adopted by the State Duma of the Russian Federation on June 24, 1996. // SPS Consultant
Presidential Decree of May 16, 1996 “On the gradual reduction of the use of the death penalty in connection with Russia’s entry into the Council of Europe” // SPS Consultant
Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated February 2, 1999 N 3-P "In the case of verifying the constitutionality of the provisions of Article 41 and part three of Article 42 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the resolution of the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation of July 16, 1993 "On the procedure for introducing the effect of the Law of the Russian Federation "On Amendments and Additions to the Law of the RSFSR "On the Judicial System of the RSFSR", the Criminal Procedure Code of the RSFSR, the Criminal Code of the RSFSR and the Code of the RSFSR on Administrative Offenses" in connection with the request of the Moscow City Court and complaints from a number of citizens" // ATP Consultant
Ruling of the Constitutional Court of November 19, 2009 No. 1344-O-R “On clarification of paragraph 5 of the operative part of the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of February 2, 1999 No. 3-P” // SPS Consultant
Petrukhin I. L. Once again about the death penalty // Legal world. 2002. No. 4.
Andrei Sakharov Letter on the problem of the death penalty 1977
VTsIOM, Anastasia Matveeva. “Suicide bombers in law” // “Newspaper” No. 246 of December 27, 2005.
Newspaper “Moskovsky Komsomolets” No. 24699 dated February 25, 2008
Newspaper "Kommersant", No. 217 (2586), 11/29/2002
L.L. Kruglikov “Criminal Law of Russia”
Naumov A.V. Russian criminal law. Course of lectures. - 3rd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Legal literature, 2004
Criminal Law Course. Volume 2. General part/answer. ed. AND I. Kozachenko. - 4th ed., revised. And additional - M.: Norma, 2008
Tyazhkova I.M. Criminal law course. Volume 2. General part. The Doctrine of Punishment - ed. N.F. Kuznetsova, I.M. Heavy/recycled and additional - M.-2007
Official website of the President of the Russian Federation http://archive.kremlin.ru
Official website of the FSIN http://www.fsin.su/
Program: “Duel”: Mikhail Weller vs. Irina Khakamada
Program: “Special Correspondent” “Punishment”
Social network “Vkontakte”, statistics of supporters and opponents of the death penalty http://vk.com/student_yurist
News: Medvedev D.A. “It is not possible to return the death penalty” 04/02/2010 http://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=350887
News: New Jersey will become the first state to abandon the death penalty 12/07/2007 http://www.newsru.com/crime/07dec2007/usa_kazn.html
Information about relapse http://www.newsfiber.com/p/s/h?v=E2uMbSLSr6RY%3D+wUuDz2cFSGQ%3D
Information about relapse http://lenta.ru/news/2012/10/02/maksimov/
Information about relapse http://www.tvtula.ru/news/peoples/2012/08/29/18733/
News: US scientists: “a moratorium on the death penalty stimulates an increase in murders” http://top.rbc.ru/society/11/06/2007/106200.shtml

IS THE DEATH PENALTY NEEDED IN RUSSIA?

Arguments for the death penalty

Let's look at the arguments for the death penalty and possible objections to them. We are primarily interested in ethical arguments, by virtue of which the death penalty is considered justified, not just forced, acceptable, “beneficial,” etc., but morally justified, i.e. necessary from the point of view of public good, justice, humanism. “The death penalty,” wrote L.N. Tolstoy, “as it was and remains for me one of those human actions, information about the commission of which does not actually destroy in me the consciousness of the impossibility of their commission” http://nkozlov.ru/ library/s45/d4168/?resultpage=16#.UrfbtuFeJ8M. The point is not about whether such actions are committed or not, but about whether people who have committed such actions remain at the height of their human calling, whether these actions can be justified as morally necessary or at least acceptable.

Its ideologists give the following main arguments in favor of the death penalty.

1. The death penalty is a moral act as a just retribution, since it is a punishment for murder.

This argument is the most widespread, rooted in everyday consciousness, and has become a kind of public prejudice. It looks especially strong and convincing, since justice is indeed based on the principle of equality, equivalence. But it is precisely the principle of equivalent that is not observed in this case.

The death penalty is superior to other forms of murder on a psychological basis. Prior knowledge of death, its anticipation, separation from relatives, disgust for the executioner and much more make murder as a result of the death penalty psychologically more difficult than in the vast majority of other cases. The very fact that a person sentenced to death knows exactly when he will be killed makes his situation completely unique. Even the analogy with a hopelessly ill person is weak, since this one was sentenced by nature, and that one by people.

Equivalence in retribution is not observed when the forces of the executioner and the victim are obviously unequal. Everyone will agree that an adult who kills a child whom he could disarm and punish in some other way commits an unjust act, even if that child has already done bloody deeds. A murderer, no matter how terrible he may be, is even weaker in the face of society and the state than a child in front of an adult.

Finally, the death penalty cannot be considered an equivalent punishment when it is applied for crimes other than murder. But even in the case of murder, it is not equivalent, since it does not take into account the different shades of guilt.

The decisive argument for the justice of the death penalty is that it is in fact carried out with the consent of the criminal. Hegel believed that “the criminal gives this consent already by his act”1; even earlier, I. Kant wrote about the same thing, making an accurate observation: “There has never been a case when someone sentenced to death for murder complained that the punishment was too high for him and, therefore, unfair"2. But even if we agree that the murderer asked for the death penalty and the latter is quite fair as an assessment that he gives to himself, that by committing murder, the criminal, if we comprehend his behavior according to the criteria of the law of retribution, chose the same fate for himself and, as it were, wished to be killed, that, therefore, the death penalty is a fair response to a criminal act, the question remains open as to whether it can be considered fair as a decision of society, and not of the criminal, as a challenge, and not an answer. Doesn't the death penalty actually mean the legal legitimation of the corresponding crimes, a call to commit them as long as the criminal agrees to suffer a well-deserved fair punishment?!

2. The death penalty is justified by its preventive value - by the fact that its deterrent effect prevents others from committing the same crimes. This argument, based on the deterrent effect of the death penalty, like this deterrent effect itself, seems solid only at first impression. With a deeper approach, it is easily refuted.

The death of a criminal, in terms of deterrence, is less effective than his long, hopelessly painful existence outside freedom. She really makes a strong impression, but this impression does not last long in memory. Further, if the death penalty were practiced because of its preventive value, for the sake of intimidating others, then they would not abandon its qualified forms and publicity.

In the case of the death penalty, as in all other cases, punishment does not become a reason that prevents a crime, since the criminal commits a crime not because he agrees with the punishment due for it and is ready to suffer it, but only because he hopes to avoid punishment .

Finally, the most important thing: the question of how the presence and abolition of the death penalty affects the criminal situation in society has been studied sociologically. Particularly valuable in this regard is the experience of countries in which, like ours, from time to time it was abolished and reintroduced. It turned out that the use of the death penalty does not reduce in society the crimes for which it is used, just as its abolition does not increase them. This is especially true in relation to murders in society - the presence or absence of the death penalty does not significantly affect their quantity or quality.

The following textbook example given by domestic researcher M.H. Geret in the book "The Death Penalty" (1913), is very revealing. It casts doubt on whether the death penalty has a disciplinary effect on others and deters them from committing relevant crimes. In 1894, during the public execution in France of a certain Mr. Sh., one of the spectators climbed a tree in front of the guillotine in order to better observe the spectacle; they wanted to film it and therefore remembered it well. A year later, this curious spectator was executed in the same place for the same crime that Mr. Sh committed.

The severity of punishments does not lead to a reduction in crime. Punishment has a deterrent effect due to its inevitability. “The impression is made not so much by the severity of the punishment as by its inevitability,”1 wrote C. Becarria. Since then, this idea has received experimental confirmation and has become an important argument against the death penalty.

3. The death penalty benefits society by freeing it from particularly dangerous criminals.

Even leaving aside the question of whether there are incorrigible (“zoological”) criminals, which, of course, is in itself doubtful, it should be noted that society could protect itself from them through lifelong prison isolation. If we are to talk about the good of society, it should consist of redressing the damage caused by the criminal. And the death penalty does not compensate for anything.

4. The death penalty can be justified by humane considerations in relation to the criminal himself, because lifelong, hopeless, unbearably difficult imprisonment in solitary confinement is worse than instant death. This argument is far-fetched, to say the least.

First, the terms of life imprisonment could be made more acceptable; secondly, if we're talking about about a humane attitude towards a criminal, then it would be logical to give the right of choice to the criminal himself. In general, an action cannot be considered humane (moral) if the consent of the person concerned is not obtained.

5. The death penalty is a simple and cheap way to get rid of a criminal. Russian lawyer A.F. Kistyakovsky, who himself was an opponent of the death penalty, wrote very accurately: “Its only advantage in the eyes of the people is that it is a very simple, cheap and not a puzzling punishment.”1 This argument is rarely stated openly, but it perhaps captures one of the very real motives that underlies the death penalty. Through the death penalty, the state gets rid of the criminal, demonstrating visible strength with its actual weakness. But this only proves that moral considerations are tenfold here, used only as a cover.

death penalty journalism Stolypinsky