Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the latest edition:
Article 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Principle of justice
1. Punishment and other measures of a criminal legal nature applied to a person who has committed a crime must be fair, that is, correspond to the nature and degree of public danger of the crime, the circumstances of its commission and the identity of the perpetrator.
2. No one can be criminally liable twice for the same crime.
Return to the table of contents of the document: Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the latest edition
Commentary to Art. 6 of the Criminal Code
1. Justice is a category of ethical, moral and socio-legal nature. In criminal law, the principle of justice is addressed equally to the legislator and the law enforcer. Accordingly, in order for a court considering a particular case to impose a fair punishment, the legislator must determine a fair sanction for an act that is prohibited by law.
2. The legislator, establishing a sanction, gives the court the opportunity to individualize the punishment within the boundaries assigned to it. Therefore, in the Criminal Code, most sanctions are alternative and relatively specific, which gives the right to choose one or another type of punishment, and within the framework of one punishment, upper and lower limits are indicated.
3. The measure of fairness of punishment in each specific case is chosen by the court, taking into account the severity of the act committed, circumstances mitigating and aggravating the punishment (Articles 61, 63 of the Criminal Code), positive and negative qualities of the personality of the perpetrator.
4. Given in Part 2 of Art. 6 of the Criminal Code, the provision is based on Part 1 of Art. 50 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Citizens of the Russian Federation and stateless persons permanently residing in the Russian Federation who have committed a crime outside the Russian Federation are not subject to criminal liability if in relation to these persons there is a court decision of a foreign state regarding this crime (Part 1 of Article 12 of the Criminal Code).
Another commentary on Article 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation
1. Justice is not only and not so much a moral and ethical category that characterizes the relationship between the measure of good and evil, the citizen’s value judgment about this measure. Justice is a universal category, one might say, comprehensive, permeating all aspects of social relations. In law in general and in criminal law in particular, it finds a peculiar refraction, since all its norms must correspond to the principles of justice and morality. A norm of law devoid of these principles is no longer a legal norm in its very essence. Such a “norm” can no longer fulfill any of its inherent functions. Justice is inherent in the normative material from the very beginning; it seems to be “spread” throughout its entire content. That is why the elevation of justice to the principle of criminal law and its enshrinement in Art. 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is an expression in the law itself of one of the guiding principles that together form the foundation on which the entire edifice of Russian criminal legislation is based.
2. Part 1 art. 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, in essence, reduces the principle of justice to the appointment of a person found guilty of committing a crime, a fair punishment or other measures of a criminal law nature that would correspond to the nature and degree of public danger of the act, the circumstances of its commission and the identity of the perpetrator. Undoubtedly, imposing a proportionate punishment or other measures of a criminal legal nature on a citizen, i.e. such compulsory measures of state legal coercion, which are fully consistent with the gravity of the crime, is the most typical and, apparently, the most important form of manifestation of the principle of justice in criminal law and the practice of applying its norms. However, this is far from the only such form. An analysis of the new criminal legislation regarding the manifestation of the principle of justice in it allows us to identify and outline other forms, without touching on what is enshrined in Part 2 of Art. 6 of the Criminal Code stipulates that no one can be held criminally liable twice for the same crime. This rule is known to Roman law (“non bis in idem”).
3. Along with the principles commented above, the principle of fairness in criminal law, enshrined in Art. 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, has other forms of manifestation. These, in particular, include: the determination by the legislator of the minimum necessary range of socially dangerous acts classified as crimes (the process of criminalization); timely and justified exclusion from it of acts that can be combated by other measures and means (decriminalization process); establishing in the sanctions the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code regarding the exact correspondence between the severity (nature and degree of public danger) of the crime and the degree of severity of the punitive sanction; designing the type of sanctions themselves, while giving preference to alternative, relatively specific sanctions, taking into account the reasonable establishment of the limits of the discretionary powers of the court when imposing punishment on the perpetrator; implementation of the principle of saving criminal repression into legislation; imposing a more lenient punishment than provided for by law for this crime (Article 64); imposition of punishment upon the jury's verdict of leniency (Article 65); suspended sentence (Article 73); the institution of exemption from criminal liability (Chapter 11, Art. 75 - 78); institution of exemption from punishment (Chapter 12, Art. 79 - 83).
The mentioned and many other provisions of the new Criminal Code of the Russian Federation significantly strengthen the principles of justice of the criminal law, raised by the legislator to the highest level as one of the basic principles of this branch of Russian law.
Second commentary to Art. 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation
1. There are two aspects to justice: egalitarian (equalizing justice) and differentiating (distributive justice). The first presupposes the initial equality of all citizens before the law, the second - the individualization of punishment. The distributive aspect of justice is reinforced in the article under comment.
2. The Criminal Code contains a number of provisions aimed at ensuring fair punishment. First of all, these are the general principles of sentencing enshrined in the criminal law, as well as the conditions for sentencing when the jury verdicts on leniency, for an unfinished crime, for a crime committed in complicity, etc.
The appointment of a fair punishment is ensured by a fairly wide list of its types, the legislative formulation of criminal sanctions, etc.
3. Part 2 of the commented article essentially reproduces Art. 50 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation: no one can be held criminally liable twice for the same crime.
Third commentary to Article 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation
1. Justice is not only and not so much a moral and ethical category that characterizes the relationship between the measure of good and evil, the citizen’s value judgment about this measure. Justice is a universal category, one might say, comprehensive, permeating all aspects of social relations. In law in general and in criminal law in particular, it finds a peculiar refraction, since all its norms must correspond to the principles of justice and morality. A norm of law devoid of these principles is no longer a legal norm in its very essence. Such a “norm” can no longer fulfill any of its inherent functions. Justice is inherent in the normative material from the very beginning; it seems to be “spread” throughout its entire content. That is why the elevation of justice to the principle of criminal law and its enshrinement in Art. 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is an expression in the law itself of one of the guiding principles that together form the foundation on which the entire edifice of Russian criminal legislation is based.
2. Part 1 art. 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, in essence, reduces the principle of justice to the appointment of a person found guilty of committing a crime, a fair punishment or other measures of a criminal law nature that would correspond to the nature and degree of public danger of the act, the circumstances of its commission and the identity of the perpetrator. Undoubtedly, imposing a proportionate punishment or other measures of a criminal legal nature on a citizen, i.e. such compulsory measures of state legal coercion, which are fully consistent with the gravity of the crime, is the most typical and, apparently, the most important form of manifestation of the principle of justice in criminal law and the practice of applying its norms. However, this is far from the only such form. An analysis of the new criminal legislation regarding the manifestation of the principle of justice in it allows us to identify and outline other forms, without touching on what is enshrined in Part 2 of Art. 6 of the Criminal Code stipulates that no one can be held criminally liable twice for the same crime. This rule is known to Roman law (“non bis in idem”).
3. Along with the principles commented above, the principle of fairness in criminal law, enshrined in Art. 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, has other forms of manifestation. These, in particular, include: the determination by the legislator of the minimum necessary range of socially dangerous acts classified as crimes (the process of criminalization); timely and justified exclusion from it of acts that can be combated by other measures and means (decriminalization process); establishing in the sanctions the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code regarding the exact correspondence between the severity (nature and degree of public danger) of the crime and the degree of severity of the punitive sanction; designing the type of sanctions themselves, while giving preference to alternative, relatively specific sanctions, taking into account the reasonable establishment of the limits of the discretionary powers of the court when imposing punishment on the perpetrator; implementation of the principle of saving criminal repression into legislation; imposing a more lenient punishment than provided for by law for this crime (Article 64); imposition of punishment upon the jury's verdict of leniency (Article 65); suspended sentence (Article 73); the institution of exemption from criminal liability (Chapter 11, Art. 75 - 78); institution of exemption from punishment (Chapter 12, Art. 79 - 83).
The mentioned and many other provisions of the new Criminal Code of the Russian Federation significantly strengthen the principles of justice of the criminal law, raised by the legislator to the highest level as one of the basic principles of this branch of Russian law.
‹ Article 5. The principle of guiltUp Article 7. The principle of humanism ›
Judicial practice under Article 6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation
Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 09/05/2017 N 45-UD17-19
The punishment was imposed on the convicted person in accordance with the requirements of Art. Art. , , part 2 art. of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, taking into account the nature and degree of public danger of the crime committed, the specific circumstances of the case, data on the identity of the perpetrator. Issues related to the execution of a sentence in the presence of other unexecuted sentences, if this is not resolved in the latest sentence in accordance with Art. of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, are resolved by the court that passed the sentence in the manner prescribed by Art. 396, 397 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.
Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated August 11, 2017 N 11-UD17-39
In accordance with Art. According to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the punishment applied to a person who has committed a crime must be fair, that is, correspond to the nature and degree of public danger of the crime, the circumstances of its commission and the identity of the perpetrator. In accordance with Part 3 of Art. When imposing punishment, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation takes into account the nature and degree of social danger of the crime, including circumstances mitigating and aggravating the punishment, the identity of the perpetrator, as well as the impact of the imposed punishment on the correction of the convicted person and on the living conditions of his family.
Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 06.06.2018 N 48-APU18-10
Punishment for the convicts was imposed in accordance with the requirements of the articles and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, contrary to the arguments of the complaints, the court took into account as circumstances mitigating the punishment of the convicted, confession and active assistance in solving the crime. Along with this, the court rightfully recognized as aggravating circumstances the commission of crimes while intoxicated, as well as the presence of recidivism in their actions.
Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 06/07/2018 N 50-APU18-8
Punishment for convicted Nurimbetov B.I. and Yusupov M.A. both for each crime individually and for a combination of crimes, assigned in accordance with the requirements of Art. and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - fair, taking into account the nature and degree of public danger of the crimes committed, information about individuals, including those indicated in appeals, all the circumstances of the case, as well as the impact of the imposed punishment on the correction of convicts and the living conditions of their families.
Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 06/05/2018 N 18-APU18-6sp
This decision is based on the provisions of Part 4 of Art. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It is consistent with the requirements of Part 1 of Art. and part 2 of Art. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, one cannot ignore his commission of two particularly serious crimes from the point of view of the availability of data indicating the danger of V.F. Klimentov. for society.
Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 17, 2018 N 4-APU18-18SP
Shabunin's punishment was imposed in accordance with the requirements of Art. , , of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, taking into account the nature and degree of public danger of the crime, the circumstances of the crime, personal data, the presence of mitigating circumstances, and the jury’s recognition of him as deserving leniency. The court fully justified the conclusion regarding the non-recognition of Shabunin’s “sincere confession” as his confession and active assistance, with which the Judicial Panel finds no reason to disagree.
Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Military Personnel Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 24, 2018 N 201-APU18-19
Punishment for Dzhumaev N.M. assigned taking into account the nature and degree of public danger of the crime, information about the identity of the convicted person, other circumstances taken into account when assigning punishment, including mitigating circumstances and aggravating circumstances. Requirements of Art. Art. , the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation were complied with by the court.
Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 06/07/2018 N 4-APU18-21
As follows from the verdict, assigning punishment to the convicted Yuldoshev, Karakulova and Ibrogimov, in accordance with the provisions of Art. and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the court took into account the nature and degree of public danger of the crimes they committed, information about their personality, as well as other circumstances affecting the amount of the imposed punishment.
Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 16, 2018 N 5-APU17-108SP
When imposing a sentence, the court took into account all the circumstances relevant in accordance with Art. Art. , the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, including everything provided for in Part 1 of Art. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, mitigating circumstances that are seen in the case materials. The punishment for the convicted person was imposed fairly, there were grounds for mitigating it, including on the grounds provided for in Art. Art. , Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the Judicial Collegium does not see it.
Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 06.06.2018 N 41-APU18-7sp
The punishment of the convicted person was imposed by the court in accordance with the requirements of Art. and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Guided by Art. Art. 389.20 and 389.28 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, the Judicial Panel determined: the verdict of the Rostov Regional Court of December 5, 2021 in relation to Inessa Vasilievna Tarverdieva is left unchanged, and the victim’s appeal is not satisfied.
Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Military Personnel Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated June 21, 2018 N 205-APU18-11
Thus, the punishment assigned to Kaplanov by virtue of Art. The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is proportionate and fair. The panel of judges agrees with the conclusions of the court of first instance that there are no grounds for changing the category of the crime to a less serious one in accordance with Part 6 of Art. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
