Introduction: the paper considers the role of the individual perpetrator in relation to the question of individualization of punishment in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. On the basis of a comprehensive analysis of the legislation of the Russian Federation, jurisprudence, comparative law and the concrete sociological study of the relevant norms of criminal legislation defined the meaning of individualization of punishment in a comprehensive account by a court the identity of the perpetrator. The urgency of the problem is defined by the general processes of humanization and liberalization of criminal policy of Russia, the contradictions in legal practice, and the presence of different points of view on this issue in the scientific community. Materials and Methods: the author studied the general theory of guilt, research on similar issues. The study of the problem was carried out by the logical, systemic-structural, statistical, specific sociological and formal-legal methods. Results: the author came to the conclusion about the relative independence of the general criteria for appointment and individualization of punishment. The individual properties of the individual offender should be regarded as a significant criterion of individualization of punishment in his appointment. Discussion and Conclusions: the author argues that the personality characteristics of the perpetrator are of interest in determining the individualization of punishment in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. Significant proposals for improving certain provisions of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation are justified. The obtained results can be used in the legislative process, the courts ‘ practice and further research problems.
imposition of punishment, criteria of individualization of punishment, personality of a guilty, mitigating circumstances, aggravating circumstances
1. Makeeva N.V. Prioritety ugolovnoy politiki Rossiyskoy Federacii na sovremennom etape // Izvestiya vuzov. Povolzhskiy region. Obschestvennye nauki. 2012. №3 (23) S. 3-11.
2. Zubkova V.I. Ugolovnoe nakazanie i ego social'naya rol': teoriya i praktika: monografiya. M.: Norma, 2002. 304 c.
3. Sundurov F.R. Social'no-psihologicheskie i pravovye aspekty ispravleniya i perevospitaniya pravonarushiteley. Kazan': Izd-vo Kazan. un-ta, 1976. 144 s.
4. Veliev S.A. Principy naznacheniya nakazaniya. SPb.: Izdatel'stvo R. Aslanova «Yuridicheskiy centr Press», 2004. 388 s.
5. Dagel' P.S. Uchenie o lichnosti prestupnika v sovetskom ugolovnom prave: uchebnoe posobie. Vladivostok: Izd-vo Dal'nevost. un-ta, 1970. 132 c.
6. Shotkinov S.A. Kriminologiya: ucheb.-metod. kompleks / Irkutsk: Art-press, 2003. 287 c.
7. Zhidkih I.V. Lichnost' vinovnogo kak odin iz kriteriev naznacheniya nakazaniya // Vestnik Adygeyskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2008. № 8. S. 392-400.
8. Kuznecova N.F. Kurs ugolovnogo prava: T. 2. Obschaya chast'. Uchenie o nakazanii / pod red. N.F. Kuznecovoy, I.M. Tyazhkovoy. M.: Zercalo, 1999. 400 s.
9. Nepomnyaschaya T.V. Naznachenie ugolovnogo nakazaniya. Teoriya, praktika, perspektivy. SPb.: Izd-vo R.Arslanova «Yuridicheskiy centr Press», 2006. 800 s.
10. Kruglikov L.L. O kriteriyah naznacheniya ugolovnogo nakazaniya // Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo, 1988. № 8. S. 60 - 62.
11. Kruglikov L.L. Genezis pravovoy prirody obstoyatel'stv dela, smyagchayuschih i otyagchayuschih otvetstvennost' // Voprosy sovershenstvovaniya ugolovno-pravovyh mer bor'by s prestupnost'yu: mezhvuz. sb. nauch. st. Sverdlovsk, 1983. S. 33 - 42.
12. Sundurov F.R. Ugolovnoe pravo Rossii. Obschaya chast': uchebnik / pod red. F.R. Sundurova, I.A. Tarhanova. M.: Statut, 2009. 750 s.
13. Antonyan Yu.M., Kudryavcev V.N., Eminov V.E. Lichnost' prestupnika SPb.: Izd-vo R.Arslanova «Yuridicheskiy centr Press», 2004. 366 s.
14. Buranov G.K. Otyagchayuschie nakazanie obstoyatel'stva v ugolovnom prave Rossii. Ul'yanovsk: Ul'yanov. gos. un-t, 2002. 164 s.
