Criminal law mechanism of compensation for harm caused by crime: trends in legislative regulation and practical implementation

Cover Page

Cite item


The relevance of research. Allocating compensatory actions a place either in the system of coercive measures or in the arsenal of stimulating measures, the legislator took the path of strengthening private interests, expanding the grounds for exemption from criminal liability, and reducing the requirements for post-crime behavior of the accused. The revealed legislative transformation of the restorative actions of the guilty party laid the foundation for the reevaluation of their content by a law enforcement officer. By recognizing as optional the solely personal participation of the offender in compensation for damage, as well as transferring “redressing of harm” from certain definitions to evaluative ones, the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court laid the foundation for forming practice in a new direction, the study of which is the purpose of this article . Research results. Critically assessing the emerging practice, the authors raise the questions of justification for the release of those guity, who personally did nothing for the state forgiveness, as well as justification for courts to refer to mitigation of harm, actions being far from compensatory. The paper substantiates the conclusion that the solely judicial discretion in determining the redress of harm conceals not only corruption risks, but also threatens the uniform application of the law. The accumulated experience does not allow development of universal criteria that allow to determine not only sufficient, but also the minimum necessary actions of the perpetrator to smooth down the harm caused by a crime infringing on public interests. The Plenum of the Supreme Court clarifications, which exclude recognition as compensatory actions of the guilty party to terminate the criminal offense, and also form active repentance in content, can facilitate the prompt elimination of defective law enforcement. The methodological basis is formed by general scientific (analysis, synthesis, and dialectics) and special scientific research methods (historical and legal, systemic and structural, formal and legal).

About the authors

Nina Yu. Skripchenko

Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov

Author for correspondence.
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2445-2231

Doctor of Legal Sciences, Full Professor of the Department of Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure

17 nab. Northern Dvina, Arkhangelsk, 163002, Russian Federation

Svetlana V. Anoshchenkova

Criminalistics and Criminology of the National Research Mordovian State University named after N.P. Ogareva

ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2045-9236

Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Criminal Law, Criminalistics and Criminology

68 st. Bolshevik, Saransk, Republic of Mordovia, 430000, Russian Federation


  1. Abashina, L.A. & Minakov, G.L. (2018) Judicial fine - a new other measure of a criminal-legal nature. All-Russian criminological journal. 12 (2), 266-274. (in Russian).
  2. Anoschenkova, S.V. (2017) Appointment of a court fine: questions of theory and practice. Journal of Russian law. (7), 114-125. (in Russian).
  3. Anoschenkova, S.V. (2014) Restorative and compensatory function of criminal law. Library of criminal law and criminology. 3, 56-66. (in Russian).
  4. Antonov, A.G. (2013) Exemption from criminal liability in cases of crimes in the sphere of economic activity. Russian Justice. (5), 20-25. (in Russian).
  5. Bazemore, G. & Schiff, M. (1996) Community Justice/Restorative Justice: Prospects for a New Social Ecology for Community Corrections. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice. 20 (2), 311-334.
  6. Boyarskaya, A.V. (2018) Judicial fine: problems of the substantive basis and law enforcement. Law enforcement. 2(1), 154-163. (in Russian).
  7. Chistyakov, O.I. (ed.) (1984) Russian legislation of the X-XX centuries. In 9 vol. Vol. 2: Legislation of Ancient Rus. Moscow, Yuridicheskaya literatura Publ. (in Russian).
  8. Chistyakov, O.I. (ed.) (1988) Russian legislation of the X-XX centuries. In 9 vol. Vol. 6: Legislation of the first half of the XIXth century. Moscow, Yuridicheskaya literatura Publ. (in Russian).
  9. Chistyakov, O.I. (ed.) (2001) History of domestic state and law. Part I: Textbook. 3rd ed., Perab. and add. Moscow, Jurist Pubk. (in Russian).
  10. Foynitskiy, I.Ya. (1889) The doctrine of punishment in connection with prison science. Saint Petersburg, Printing house of the Ministry of Railways Publ. (in Russian).
  11. Feld, B. (1990) The Punitive Juvenile Court and the Quality of Procedural Justice: Disjunctions between Rhetoric and Reality. Crime & Delinquency. (36), 443-466.
  12. Filchenko, A.P. (2019) Compensation for damage and mitigation of harm as a condition for exemption from criminal liability with the appointment of a court fine. Advocacy practice. (4), 21-27. (in Russian).
  13. Gal, T., Dancig-Rosenberg H. (2020) Characterizing multi-door criminal justice: A comparative analysis of three criminal justice mechanisms. New Criminal Law Review. 23(1), 139-166.
  14. Gertsenzon, A.A., Durmanov, N.D., Isayev, M.M. & Man'kovskiy, B. et al. (1938) Criminal law. A common part. Moscow, NKJ of the USSR Publ. (in Russian).
  15. Golovko, L.V. (2002) Alternatives to criminal prosecution in modern law. Saint Petersburg, Legal Center Press. (in Russian).
  16. Inogamova-Khegai, L.V. (2015) Conceptual foundations of competition in criminal law: monograph. Moscow, NORMA Publ., INFRA-M Publ. (in Russian).
  17. Karabanova, E.N. & Tsepelev, K.V. (2016) Stimulating the accused to compensate for the harm caused by the crime: problems and prospects. Russian Justice. (5), 24-27. (in Russian).
  18. Kaufman, M.A. (2021) On the issue of the grounds for exemption from criminal liability // Journal of Russian law. (1), 143-156. (in Russian).
  19. Khlebnitsyna, E.A. (2017) Functions of the norms providing for exemption from criminal liability with the appointment of a court fine. Russian judge. (7), 33-36. (in Russian).
  20. Kostroma, M.B. (2017) Criminal legal mechanisms of a compensatory nature as one of the trends in the “economically oriented” criminal policy of Russia. Criminal Law. (4), 73-79. (in Russian).
  21. Lanterman, J.L. (2019) Training partner selection and quality assurance in restorative justice for the criminal justice setting. Contemporary Justice Review: Issues in Criminal, Social, and Restorative Justice. 23(4), 544-562.
  22. Lopashenko, N.A. (2017) Reducing the repressiveness of criminal law: proposed measures and their assessment. Criminal law. (4), 84-93. (in Russian).
  23. Makarova, O.V. (2015) Exemption from criminal liability in cases of crimes in the sphere of economic activity. Journal of Russian law. (1), 111-118. (in Russian).
  24. Mallet, M.L. (2018) Alternative Dispute Resolution forms: a Transformation of the Judicial Ritual to Criminal Law. The Example of Criminal Mediation. Onati socio-legal series. 8(3), 363-385.
  25. Malysheva, O.A. (2020) Prospects for compensation to victims of harm caused by a crime. Bulletin of the Tomsk State University. 450, 226- 233. (in Russian).
  26. Pudovochkin, Yu.E. (2020) Socio-criminological characteristics of exemption from criminal liability. All-Russian criminological journal. 14(4), 581-592. (in Russian).
  27. Severson, M.M. (1995) Social-work and the pursuit of justice through mediation. Social work. 40(5), 683-691.
  28. Shargorodsky, M.D. (2003) Selected works on criminal law. Saint Petersburg, Legal Center Press Publ. (in Russian).
  29. Skripchenko, N.Yu. (2017) Judicial Fine: Problems of Implementation of Legislative Novels. Journal of Russian Law. (7), 106-114. (in Russian).
  30. Soloviev, O.G. & Knyazkov, A.A. (2012) On exemption from criminal liability in cases of crimes in the sphere of economic activity (article 76.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Laws of Russia: experience, analysis, practice. (7), 80-82. (in Russian).
  31. Stepanova, I.B. & Sokolova, O.V. (2017) Exemption from criminal liability with the appointment of a court fine: problems and prospects. Criminal law. (3), 74-79. (in Russian).
  32. Tagantsev, N.S. (1994) Russian criminal law: lectures. Part General. In 2 volumes. Vol. 2. Moscow, Nauka Publ. (in Russian).
  33. Tulkens, F. (1993) Les transformations du droid penal aux Etats-Unis. Pour un autre modele de justice. Nouveaux itinéraires en droit. En hommage à François Rigaux. Bruxelles, Bruylant. Р. 461-493. (in France).
  34. Vetoshkin, S.A. (2017) On the accuracy of legal formulations associated with criminal penalties and Russian criminal law policy. Actual problems of Russian law. (10), 152-158. (in Russian).
  35. Yankah, E.N. (2020) The right to reintegration. New Criminal Law Review. 23(1), 74-112.
  36. Zvecharovsky, I.E. (2016) On the legal nature of the court fine (Articles 762, 1044 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Criminal law. (6), 98-101. (in Russian).
  37. Zhalinsky, A.E. (2009) Criminal law in anticipation of changes: theoretical and instrumental analysis. 2nd ed., Rev. and add. Moscow, Prospect Publ. (in Russian).
  38. Zubkov, A.I. (ed.) (1997) Criminal executive law of Russia. Textbook. Moscow, INFRA group Publ. M-NORMA Publ. (in Russian).

Copyright (c) 2022 Skripchenko N.Y., Anoshchenkova S.V.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies