The legal collisions and gaps concerning the content of safety activity in places of detention

Abstract

The need to consider this issue as a separate element of the subject of the study is due to several circumstances, namely: 1) securing in Part 2 of Art. 50 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine such purpose of punishment as prevention of committing new crimes by convicted persons; 2) defining the same goal in Part 1 of Art. 1 KVC; 3) the current state of crime, and the level of offenses and others in the sphere of punishment of Ukraine; 4) the need for scientific support and provision of those reforms that are being carried out in this field of state activity; 5) solving problems related to clarifying the content of the concepts of "prevention" and "counteraction" to crime, which are discussed in the scientific literature; 6) the need for scientific substantiation of the measures developed in this work concerning the improvement of the legal mechanism on preventive activities in the sphere of punishment; 7) the tasks of adapting national legislation to EU legislation, as well as bringing the legal status of prisoners in Ukraine to European standards.

At the same time, it should be noted that each of the above circumstances is relevant both in terms of compliance with the rules of legal technology and in accordance with the principles of rulemaking. In addition, the importance of these circumstances is that by clarifying their content, one can find additional arguments regarding the priority of substantive law (in this case – criminal law) over procedural (procedural, in particular - criminal) norms, and, therefore, to answer the question: what term should be used in legislation relating to the fight against crime - "prevention" or "counteraction". It is the above mentioned circumstances that have defined the topic of this scientific article and its main task is to develop a series of scientifically sound measures aimed at overcoming legal conflicts and gaps in the specified subject of research.