Replacing one criminal punishment with another during its execution. Criminal Code on the replacement of punishment Replacement of punishment with a more lenient type of punishment terms

The fact that the law has provided for convicts a pleasant opportunity to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient form, as well as the right to parole, expresses the principle of humanism.

In this way, the authorities want to show that they trust the convict, who has distinguished himself by impeccable behavior. This right acts as an incentive for the prisoner to subsequently behave correctly.

In this article we will look at the features of replacing the unserved part of the sentence with a milder type of punishment (Article 80 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) in 2020.

So, what does Art. 80 say? Criminal Code of the Russian Federation? It is worth noting that the original version of the article under discussion indicated that the possibility of replacing the unserved part of the sentence with another, mild one, was available only to those prisoners who were imprisoned due to minor offenses or misdemeanors moderate severity.

Fortunately, already in the spring of 2001, changes were made to Art. 80. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Thanks to this, a figurative “door” was opened for all prisoners for absolutely any offense to receive a replacement of the term of imprisonment with another one - a mild one.

The possibility being discussed for convicts is one of the methods of parole.

Replacing the unserved part of a sentence with a more lenient one is simply a right, but not a direct obligation of the court, as some people think.

Of course, the court is obliged to provide compelling reasons for refusing to accept the petition. And on the contrary, if the court made a decision on mitigation, then in this case it is irreversible.

Experts admit this right objective, since during the entire period of imprisonment the worldview of the convicted person may undergo some changes.

Practice shows that in some cases the sentence imposed has a positive effect on him, due to which the views of the convicted person undergo changes, which means that he no longer poses such a danger to society.

In this case, the convicted person can exercise his legal right to petition for a commutation of the sentence to a lenient one.

According to Article 80 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, replacing an unserved term of imprisonment with a more lenient punishment is applicable in the following cases:

in case of restriction of freedom or deprivation of it;
If guilty person serves his sentence directly in a specialized military unit;
by doing compulsory work.

A prisoner who has been given a life sentence does not have the right to change the imprisonment to a more lenient penalty, but he can petition to change the imprisonment regime directly to another, more lenient type.

Replacing the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient one is applicable when the prisoner has already served for:

average offense or light weight-1/3 of the total term;
serious offenses - ½ part;
crimes of special gravity - 2/3 parts;
sexual offenses against minors - ¾ parts;
sexual crimes against minors (under 14 years of age) - 4/5 parts.

If a prisoner has already served his sentence and demonstrates good behavior, what commutation is he entitled to?

Then the punishment awarded to him can be changed to:

Judicial practice shows that, as a rule, the punishment imposed by the court can be replaced by either correctional labor, or restriction of freedom, since other methods of imposing punishment of even milder types are considered inappropriate.

It is worth noting that when replacing the unserved part of a sentence with correctional labor, a maximum number of hours can be assigned: 240, while it is allowed to work no more than four hours a day, which means six months of forced labor.

If the convicted person deliberately avoids performing compulsory work in every possible way, the punishment may be changed to imprisonment. In this case, 8 hours of forced labor equals one day of imprisonment.

Thus, the maximum punishment for correctional labor (240 hours) is equal to only 1 month of imprisonment.

So, we come to a logical conclusion: changing prison sentences to forced labor inappropriate, since the last penalty is disproportionately lenient.

It is also rare to replace the unserved part of a sentence with a fine.. As a rule, this is justified by the fact that the vast majority of prisoners are not rich. They simply will not be able to immediately pay off the entire fine immediately after their release.

It is worth noting that the very fact that a prisoner has served the established part of the prison term does not in itself entail a replacement with a more lenient punishment. The main factor for a convicted person to be able to exercise this right is his good behavior.

At the same time, modern legislation has not established specific criteria by which behavior is recognized as exemplary.

However, practice shows that there are factors that contribute to the speedy replacement of punishment with a more lenient one:

In this case, the behavior of the convicted person during the entire period of serving the sentence is taken into account..

In addition, they take into account both the behavior in the present and the attitude of the prisoner to the crime that he previously committed (this may be evidenced by the fact of full or even partial compensation for losses).

Thus, a convict who does not want to work or study, refuses to compensate for the damage that he himself caused, cannot count on replacing the punishment with a more lenient form.

If a prisoner commits something illegal while serving a lesser sentence, then total term the punishment that was assigned for the last crime will be added to the unserved part of the mild punishment (in whole or in part).

This application must be submitted directly to the court itself.. It can be sent by a lawyer or another legal representative convicted person in the place of deprivation of liberty in which the latter is serving his sentence.

Like parole, a petition to replace imprisonment with a more lenient form must be submitted exclusively through the administration of a given correctional institution.

What must be included in the application? It should contain the following:

information about the exemplary behavior of the convicted person, confirming that he does not need to further serve his sentence;
documentary evidence of compensation for damage caused;
other information that indicates that the prisoner does not need to further serve his sentence.

If a prisoner cannot repair all the damage he has caused with his illegal actions(as a result of disability or congenital diseases, so he cannot work), then the court cannot refuse to accept the petition.

Directly to the petition itself should be attached a description of the prisoner, which is issued by the administration of the correctional institution. If they have not issued it, then the lawyer can file a petition without a reference.

In addition to the application itself, you must send any documents confirming the need to file the application. The court is obliged to facilitate the collection of such documents.

A petition to replace imprisonment with a more lenient punishment can be filed even when the court previously rejected a petition for parole.

Therefore, the following documents must be attached to the application:

If the court has denied a prisoner's petition for a commutation of sentence, he can try again to send the petition 6 months after the first attempt.

So, prisoners should be aware of their right to reduce their sentence. However, this is only possible when such a person has corrected his behavior and also sincerely repented of his committed crime. Much also depends on the type of offense and its severity.

At the same time, it is worth noting that the practice of applying Article 80 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is unimaginably small. So, in lately the total number of cases of replacement of punishment with a more lenient one is approximately 0.5% - 2%.

So, let's take a closer look at Art. 80 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It reads:

For a person serving imprisonment for a crime of minor or medium gravity, the court, taking into account his behavior during the period of serving the sentence, may replace the remaining unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment. In this case, the person may be fully or partially released from serving an additional type of punishment.

The unserved part of the sentence may be replaced by a more lenient punishment after the convicted person has actually served at least one third of the sentence.

When replacing the unserved part of the sentence, the court may choose any milder type of punishment in accordance with the types of punishments specified in Article 44 of this Code within the limits provided for by this Code for each type of punishment.

Substitution can be applied only for one type of punishment - imprisonment and only to persons convicted of crimes of minor or moderate gravity, i.e. crimes for which the punishment by law does not exceed five years in prison. These may be persons convicted of property crimes in the absence of qualifying criteria, for hooliganism (under Part 1 and Part 2 of Article 213), many crimes of an economic nature, etc. The law does not allow the replacement of punishment with a more lenient measure for serious crimes, since in this case, in order to replace it, the court would have to apply such a light measure that does not correspond to the nature and degree public danger committed by the person crimes.

When replacing the unserved part of the sentence, the court may choose any milder type of punishment in accordance with the types of punishments specified in Art. 44 of the Criminal Code, within the limits provided by law for each type of punishment.

This means, for example, that if the unserved four years of imprisonment are replaced by correctional labor, then the term of their serving, as a more lenient punishment, cannot exceed two years, because in accordance with Art. 50 of the Criminal Code, correctional labor is prescribed from two months to two years. A milder punishment compared to imprisonment is confinement in a disciplinary military unit. In accordance with Art. 55 of the Criminal Code, confinement in a disciplinary military unit is assigned to military personnel undergoing military service on conscription, as well as military servicemen undergoing military service under a contract for the positions of privates and sergeants, if they have not served at the time of sentencing established by law conscription service period. This punishment is established for a period of three months to two years in cases provided for in the relevant articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code for committing crimes against military service, as well as in cases where the nature of the crime and the identity of the perpetrator indicate the possibility of replacing imprisonment for a term of not more than two years by keeping the convicted person in a disciplinary military unit for the same period. When being held in a disciplinary military unit instead of imprisonment, the period of detention in a disciplinary military unit is determined on the basis of one day of imprisonment for one day of detention in a disciplinary military unit. From the above it is clear that the replacement of imprisonment with detention in a disciplinary military unit is carried out when sentencing military personnel specified in the law.

Therefore, it seems that if a person has already been in prison, i.e. has already lost the status of a military serviceman or did not have it at all, then replace his imprisonment with a more lenient punishment in the form of referral to a disciplinary military unit it is forbidden Criminal law. a common part. M., 1994. P.498..

In the previous legislation in Art. 34 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR it was directly stated that assignment to a disciplinary battalion instead of imprisonment cannot be applied to persons who had previously served a sentence in prison. And although this provision concerned primarily the replacement of punishments when sentencing, it is logical to assume that the application of this provision is also lawful when releasing from serving imprisonment in order to replace it with a more lenient punishment.

The basis for replacing imprisonment with a more lenient punishment is the completion of at least one third of the term of imprisonment imposed by the court and the positive behavior of the person, assessed by Part 1 of Art. 80 of the Criminal Code does not connect with any formal instructions, but transfers it to the discretion of the court. Let us note that the criminal code does not directly answer the question of the grounds for replacing the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient type of punishment, limiting itself to a reference to the fact that it resolves this issue taking into account the behavior of the convicted person during the period of serving the sentence. Comparison of the contents of Art. 80 about what is said about the grounds for the application of conditional early release in Art. 79, leads to the conclusion that replacing the unserved part of the sentence with a milder type of punishment requires a lesser degree of correction of the convicted person than when applying conditional early release. The degree of correction in this case is such that the further re-education of the convicted person does not require the use of imprisonment. The process of his correction can be completed with the help of other, milder types of punishment.

The Criminal Code does not indicate criteria by which one can answer the question of whether, given a particular behavior of a convicted person, it is possible to replace the remaining unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment. Obviously, when deciding this issue, the court will need to take into account the nature and degree of public danger of the crime, the identity of the perpetrator and other circumstances of the case. If a positive decision is made on the issue of replacing the remaining, unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient one, the court may release this person in whole or in part from additional punishment, for example, from deprivation of the right to practice his profession.

Great freedom is given to the court applying the replacement in choosing a more lenient measure: it can impose any penalty from the list of Art. 44 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. This means that the court can replace the remaining term of imprisonment with restriction of liberty, correctional labor or a fine. Previous legislation did not allow the replacement of imprisonment with a fine.

The amount of the new punishment is determined taking into account the rules established by Art. 71 and 72 of the Criminal Code, and within maximum terms established for these types of punishments.

In contrast to conditional early release from punishment, the replacement of the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment is unconditional. The court's decision on replacement is legal fact terminating the existence of protective criminal law legal relationship and indicating the full implementation of the rights and obligations of its subjects. And if such a person, while serving a more lenient sentence, commits a new crime, then, firstly, this circumstance does not entail the reversal of the court decision to replace the sentence, and secondly, when imposing a sentence based on the totality of sentences in this case, to punishment, assigned for a new crime, the unserved part of the not originally imposed punishment, replaced by a more lenient one, is added in whole or in part, namely this more lenient punishment.

Lawyer Antonov A.P.

Replacing the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient type of punishment is one of the grounds for exemption from punishment. Replacing the unserved part of a sentence with a more lenient type of punishment is applied to convicted persons much less frequently than parole.

Replacing the unserved part of the sentence with a milder type of punishment applies to those sentenced to imprisonment for crimes of any gravity, as well as to those serving a sentence in a disciplinary military unit or forced labor.

Conditions for replacing the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient one

In accordance with Part 2 of Article 80 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the replacement of the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient type of punishment can be carried out only if the convicted person has already served certain period punishments, namely:

at least 1/3 of the punishment imposed for crimes of minor or medium gravity;
at least ½ of the punishment imposed by the court for committing a serious crime;
at least 2/3 of the punishment imposed for committing a particularly serious crime;
at least ¾ of the punishment for a crime against the sexual integrity of minors, those convicted under Article 210 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - for organizing a criminal community;
at least 3/5 of the punishment for a crime against the sexual integrity of minors.

A petition or submission to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment is considered by the court at the place where the convicted person is serving the sentence.

Who can file a petition to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment?

This basis for release from punishment is used by the administration of places of deprivation of liberty as an incentive measure for good behavior, which is expressly provided for in Part 4 of Article 113 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation.

At the same time, the following persons have the right to apply to the court to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment:

convicted;
lawyer of the convicted person;
legal representative of the convicted person.

The lawyer and the legal representative of the convicted person submit a petition to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment directly to the court. The convicted person submits a petition such as a petition for parole through the administration of the colony. The administration of the colony sends the petition of the convicted person and its character reference to the court within 10 days.

Petition to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment

The petition to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment must contain the following information:

information indicating that further correction does not require the convicted person to fully serve the assigned sentence;
information about compensation for damage from the crime;
other information that, in the opinion of the author of the petition, indicates that the correction of the convicted person does not require the full serving of the imposed sentence.

The petition of the convicted person, his legal representative and lawyer may be accompanied by documents substantiating their petition. The absence of characteristics and other documents that must be provided by the administration of places of deprivation of liberty is not a basis for the return of the convicted person’s application. In this case, the court sends a copy of the petition to the institution executing the sentence for subsequent submission of the necessary documents to the court.

At the request of the persons filing the petition, the court may provide assistance in collecting the necessary documents.

In its form and content, the introductory and motivational part of this petition is actually no different from a petition for parole.

It should be remembered that if the court refuses parole, the convicted person has the right to petition the court to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment.

The procedure for submitting a petition to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment to the court

The administration of places of deprivation of liberty within 10 days from the date of receipt of the petition is obliged to send it to the court, attaching its characteristics to it. The specification must include the following information:

information about the behavior of the convicted person while serving his sentence;
information about the attitude of the convicted person to work, study, and the crime he committed;
information about the convict making amends for the damage caused by the crime;
in relation to persons convicted of crimes of a sexual nature against minors, his attitude towards the prescribed compulsory treatment is indicated. The characteristics of those convicted of these crimes are accompanied by the conclusion of the attending physician.

In practice, judges require the colony administration to attach to the convict’s petition, in addition to the characteristics, copies of the following documents:

1. Petition of the convicted person

2. Sentence and others court orders on business,

3. Court decisions made on a petition for parole, deferment of execution of a sentence, change of regime, if the convicted person previously filed such petitions.

4. A certificate of existing penalties and incentives while serving the sentence.

5. Information about compensation for damage. In accordance with the law, this information is provided by the convicted person himself. However, the administration must compensate for the damage penal colony. Evidence may be a copy writ of execution, other official document. a receipt from the victim, with his notarized signature.

6. Medical certificate indicating that the convicted person due to health reasons can serve certain type punishments. For example, correctional work.

7. Documents confirming that the convicted person has a place of residence and work in the event of his release. For example, a letter of guarantee from the administration of an enterprise about the employment of a convicted person in the event of his release, a certificate from the police department at the place of residence of the convicted person about his intended place of registration, title documents for residential premises.

Judicial practice in considering petitions to replace the unserved part of a sentence with a more lenient punishment

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in its resolution dated 04/21/2009 N 8 (as amended on 02/09/2012) “On judicial practice parole from serving a sentence, replacement of the unserved part of the sentence with a milder type of punishment” explained to the courts that the courts should not unreasonably refuse parole and replacement of the unserved part of the sentence, especially on grounds that are not contained in the law. In particular, the Supreme Court noted that a criminal record, the leniency of the sentence imposed, denial of guilt, or a short stay in a penal colony are not grounds for refusing to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment.

Penalties that were imposed on the convicted person while serving his sentence must be assessed by the court, taking into account their nature and in conjunction with other data characterizing the personality of the convicted person, after the court has sentenced him.

The presence of penalties imposed on a convicted person cannot serve as an obstacle to parole or replacement of the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient type of punishment.

Chief, the court also explained that when resolving a petition to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment, it should be clarified for what reason it was not compensated material damage caused by a crime. If the damage from the crime was not compensated for reasons beyond the control of the convicted person, for example, the convicted person has a disability, an illness that prevents work, or the inability to find a job in a colony, the court does not have the right to refuse the petition on the grounds that the damage has not been compensated.

The presence of facts indicating the deliberate evasion of the convicted person from compensation for harm entails refusal to satisfy the petition of the convicted person.

If the court decides to satisfy the stated petition, it must also decide the issue of the possibility of releasing the convicted person from the imposed additional punishment. o replace it with any punishment provided for by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In practice, imprisonment can be replaced by: restriction of freedom, correctional labor and sometimes a fine.

The replacement of punishment in the form of imprisonment with correctional labor is not assigned to disabled people of group I, pregnant women, and women with children under three years of age.

Although formally, the unserved part of a prison sentence can be replaced by a fine, in judicial practice, such a replacement is not widespread, since most convicts do not know whether they will be able to pay it after release.

In addition, the procedure for such a replacement and the amount of the fine in case of replacement are not defined by law.

Previously, the court decision on the petition of convicts to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment depended entirely on the characteristics of the colony represented and the position of this institution in court. Let's hope that new edition said resolution Supreme Court, will change judicial practice for the better.

Sincerely, lawyer Anatoly Antonov, managing partner of the law firm Antonov and Partners.

Replacement of the unserved part of the punishment with a more lenient form- is a type of parole, in which a more severe type of punishment ceases to be executed and is replaced by a more lenient one.

Need for replacement

In the process of executing criminal sentences, as a result of the correctional action carried out, the degree of public danger to the individual of the convicted person may change. As a rule, changes occur in the direction of reducing it, that is, correcting the convicted person. If correction is practically achieved before the expiration of the sentence imposed by the court, so that there is no need to apply punitive measures at all, the convicted person is subject to parole. However, often, even in the absence of such almost completed correction, there is no need to apply the most severe types of punishment to the convicted person, especially imprisonment: his further correction becomes possible under conditions of less serious restrictions on rights and freedoms characteristic of milder types of punishment. In such cases, the sentence for the convicted person may be replaced with a more lenient one.

Replacing punishment with a more lenient form is essential integral part the so-called progressive system of serving criminal sentences, in which legal status the convicted person and the degree of seriousness of the applied measures depend on his behavior on the path to correction.

Except material basis replacement, which is the establishment of the convicted person on the path of correction, also requires the actual serving of a certain part of the sentence imposed by the court.

In Russian criminal law

For the first time, such a measure as replacing the unserved part of a sentence with a milder form appeared in Russian criminal law with the adoption of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR in 1960. In the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation it is regulated in Art. 80. In addition, some problematic issues the application of this measure is explained in the Resolution of the Plenum Supreme Court RF dated 04/21/2009 No. 8 “On the judicial practice of parole from serving a sentence, replacing the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient type of punishment.”

Such types of punishment as deprivation of liberty, forced labor or detention in a disciplinary military unit are subject to replacement by a milder form. Life imprisonment freedom cannot be replaced by a more lenient form of punishment. Substitute punishments may include a fine, deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities, compulsory labor, correctional labor, restriction on military service, restriction of freedom or arrest. It is impossible to replace real imprisonment with suspended sentence to this measure.

Replacing punishment with a more lenient form is applied to convicts who have embarked on the path of correction, but have not yet fully reformed. The criteria by which this condition of a convicted person is established are not defined in the law. In the literature, these include the absence of penalties for violation of discipline, a conscientious attitude to work and study, the desire of the convicted person to live in freedom and the presence of appropriate social skills. The behavior of the person during the entire period of serving the sentence is taken into account. An obstacle to the application of this measure may be facts of deliberate evasion of the convicted person from compensation for damage caused by the crime (by concealing property, income, avoiding work, etc.).

In practice, deprivation of liberty is usually replaced by correctional labor or restriction of freedom (in the future, replacement with forced labor is also possible), since replacement with other types of punishment is either impossible due to the limited circle of persons to whom they can be applied, or is inappropriate.

Clear criteria The law does not establish the duration or amount of a new type of punishment. On the one hand, the court proceeds from the sufficiency of the new punishment to correct the convicted person. On the other hand, the term of the substituted sentence usually does not exceed the remaining part of the substituted sentence. In addition, the maximum and minimum terms or amounts of the new type of punishment are taken into account.

The unserved part of the sentence may be replaced by a more lenient punishment after the person sentenced to imprisonment has actually served:

crimes of minor or moderate gravity - at least one third of the sentence;
serious crime - at least half of the sentence;
especially serious crime - at least two-thirds of the sentence;
crimes against the sexual integrity of minors, as well as organizing a criminal community or participating in it - at least three quarters of the sentence;
crimes against the sexual integrity of minors under fourteen years of age - no less than four-fifths of the sentence.

These shares are calculated based on the full term of punishment assigned to the convicted person, taking into account the addition of punishments for the totality of crimes or sentences. In addition, if the convicted person’s sentence was previously commuted, the portion of the term served is calculated based on the newly assigned reduced sentence.

When replacing the punishment with a more lenient form, the convicted person may be fully or partially released from additional punishments, if they have not yet been executed.

A petition to replace the punishment with a more lenient form may be submitted by the convicted person himself. In addition, correctional institutions may submit applications for the application of this type of exemption from punishment. Petitions and representations are considered by the district (city) court at the location of the correctional institution, or by the garrison military court.

When considering a petition or presentation to replace the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient punishment for a person convicted of a crime against the sexual integrity of a minor under fourteen years of age, the court takes into account the results of a forensic psychiatric examination in relation to such a convict.

This type of exemption from punishment is unconditional and cannot be cancelled.

Currently, the replacement of punishment with a more lenient form is used quite rarely: the proportion of convicts to whom it was applied was 0.5-2% in different years.

In some situations, a citizen serving a sentence for offenses he has committed shows good behavior during his departure.

In such a situation, the court, on the basis 44 articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, may consider changing the type of method of liability for violating the law.

Article 44 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation lists all forms of penalties in accordance with the principle of transferring from softer to more stringent options.

The unserved part of the punishment in this case becomes precisely that temporary measure that can be used as an element of encouragement for someone who consistently proves their readiness to take the path of correction.

In criminal practice, this concept belongs to the category of types of exemption from punishment.

Reasons for using which becomes:

the absence of the need to fully serve the sentence to fully reform the convicted person;
stable good behavior proven by representatives of the institution’s administration;
the health status of the convicted person, including the woman’s pregnancy; this list item also includes the presence of young children of the convicted person;
the basis becomes the expiration of the statute of limitations imposed court decision;
the impossibility of imposing punishment for various reasons and its inappropriateness.

When considering this possibility courtstake into account a wide list of parameters.

Including participation in public life correctional institution, additional classes, self-education, stable exemplary behavior and some other factors.

An important element of the possibility of using a replacement for the unserved part of the sentence becomes fait accompli of actual departure prisoners of a certain part of the sentence.

Based on the second part Article 80 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation such period is determined as follows:

when committing crimes of minor and medium gravity, it is necessary to serve at least 1/3 of the term;
in the case of a sentence for a serious crime, the possibility of replacement is considered after the expiration of at least ½ of the term;
in situations of conviction for special serious crimes such a prospect is considered after at least 2/3 of the awarded period has passed.

Decision-making

Such a request is submitted exclusively directly to court.

They have the right to direct him advocate or legal representative, the convicted person for whom such a prospect is considered and only in the institution where this prisoner is serving his sentence.

Like a petition for parole, such a petition is submitted only through the administration of the correctional institution.

Such a request includes the following mandatory items:

information that confirms that the prisoner has fully realized his guilt and further serving of his sentence is not necessary;
information confirming the fact of compensation for damage caused during the crime;
any other information that can confirm that further serving of the sentence is no longer necessary.

In case if correctional facility did not include a description of the convicted person when sending, the court has no right refuse consideration.

Such a description in this case, as well as other documents confirming or refuting the transmitted information, are requested by the court separately.

Moreover, at the request of those representing the prisoner authorized persons, the court has the right to assist in the collection of such documents.

Such a petition can also be filed in cases where the court has previously refused in an application for parole.

The procedure for making a decision

After sending the application to the administration of the correctional institution, the last submits it to court within ten days.

By law, the correctional institution must immediately draw up and send in addition to the characteristics.

In the package of documents that must be included in the list of materials submitted for consideration enter the court:

All these materials are sent to that court, which has jurisdiction location correctional facility.

The court has the right to immediately consider the possibility of replacement and transfer the court decision to the administration of the correctional institution.

A more lenient punishment option is considered based on Article 39 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

If a positive decision is made by the court to replace the type of punishment, it becomes irrevocable.

This means that there will be no reversal after it is taken out.

In other words, the court no longer has the right to return to the original type of punishment.

Even in a situation where, while serving a more lenient sentence, another crime was committed, the court decision when imposing a new sentence Only a reduced sentence can be taken into account.

In a situation of refusal in court, re-petition replacement or parole can be sent no earlier than six months after the court decision.

Kinds

Currently there are several most common replacement options:

compulsory work;
correctional work;
softer options for restricting freedom;
prohibition on the opportunity to hold certain positions.

For military personnel, a punishment option may be direction to a disciplinary military unit or restrictions on military service.

Separately, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is considering the possibility substitution of punishment with restriction of freedom and a fine.

When assigning such mitigation, it is important to take into account that the fine can be imposed at the request of the prisoner with payment in installments of up to three years.

In the event that a decision is made to lump sum paymentassigned financial penalty, the entire amount must be paid within thirty days.

Failure to pay a fine is equivalent to malicious evasion of its payment, which can lead to the replacement of punishment in the form of a fine. other type of punishment.

The possibility of replacing the unserved part of the sentence with a more lenient one, for example, with a fine, becomes the most convenient type of maximum mitigation of the sentence.

The only downside is that it is used in legal practice much less often than parole.