Про деякі проблеми впровадження пробації в Україні

Abstract

У роботі розглянуто проблеми впровадження пробації в Україні крізь призму нормативно-правового регулювання та практики діяльності уповноважених органів з питань пробації в умовах воєнного стану. Проаналізовано труднощі забезпечення контролю і соціально-виховної роботи щодо суб’єктів пробації, у тому числі в ситуаціях переміщення населення та обмеженого доступу до окремих територій. Визначено, що пробація є порівняно новим напрямом у загальній системі кримінальної юстиції України. Встановлено, що навіть за незначний час існування пробація довела високу ефективність у вирішенні поставлених завдань, те, що запроваджувалося в інших країнах протягом століть, в Україні відбулося за лічені роки, при цьому реформа в напрямі пробації потребує додаткових кроків і плідної злагодженої роботи як теоретиків так і практиків. Окрему увагу приділено питанням застосування дистанційних форм впливу, перспективам використання мобільних інструментів взаємодії, кадровому забезпеченню та потребі узгодженої державної політики у сфері запобігання повторним кримінальним правопорушенням особами, які перебувають на обліку пробації. Сформульовано пропозиції узагальнення щодо напрямів підвищення ефективності пробації шляхом усунення прогалин у правовій регламентації та посилення інституційної спроможності служби пробації.Problem setting. Achieving the goals of punishment declared in the national criminal legislation provides for the necessary prerequisite of the introduction of modern probation in Ukraine as a component of criminal justice. But such a novel faces a complex of regulatory and organizational difficulties that reduce the effectiveness of not only the punitive effect, but also supervision and social and educational work with respect to persons to whom punishments not related to deprivation of liberty have been applied. In practice, the problem manifests itself in gaps in national legislation regarding the regulation of remote forms of control, uneven staffing of units, the complication of interaction with subjects of probation under martial law and the lack of a holistic state policy on the prevention of repeated criminal offenses, in particular with respect to persons who have found themselves in temporarily occupied territories or internally displaced persons. Analysis of recent researches and publications. The issue of introducing the institution of probation in Ukraine, as well as the interaction of bodies and institutions of the State Penal Service of Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as the State Penal Service of Ukraine) in particular, as well as directly of probation bodies with state and public institutions in the field of execution of criminal sentences, was addressed by a number of scholars in the field of penal law and probation, in particular: K.A. Avtukhov, E.Yu. Barash, O.I. Bogatyreva, I.G. Bogatyrev, A.O. Galai, O.O. Gomanyuk, T.A. Denisova, V.M. Dryomin, O.G. Kolb, Y.O. Levchenko, V.O. Navrotsky, M.S. Puzyryov, M.V. Romanov, A.Kh. Stepanyuk, M.I. Khavronyuk, D.V. Yagunov, I.S. Yakovets. Abstract. The paper examines the problems of implementing probation in Ukraine through the prism of regulatory and legal regulation and the practice of the authorized bodies on probation issues under martial law. The difficulties of ensuring control and socio-educational work regarding probation subjects, including in situations of population displacement and limited access to certain territories, are analyzed. It is determined that probation is a relatively new direction in the general system of criminal justice in Ukraine. It is established that even in a short time of existence, probation has proven highly effective in solving the tasks set, what was introduced in other countries for centuries, in Ukraine took place in a matter of years, while the reform in the direction of probation requires additional steps and fruitful coordinated work of both theorists and practitioners. Special attention is paid to the issues of using remote forms of influence, the prospects for using mobile interaction tools, staffing and the need for a coordinated state policy in the field of preventing repeated criminal offenses by persons on probation. Generalization proposals are formulated regarding areas for increasing the effectiveness of probation by eliminating gaps in legal regulation and strengthening the institutional capacity of the probation service. Target of research. The purpose of the study is to identify and systematize the main problems of implementing probation in Ukraine, as well as to outline key areas for improving regulatory and legal regulation and organizational mechanisms for the activities of authorized bodies on probation issues under martial law. Article’s main body. It is seen that one of the basic problems of the national approach to determining probation is the inconsistency of state policy in the field of probation and the fragmentation of administrative decisions. The second problem is the regulatory and legal gaps that become apparent in areas where detailed procedures are required. A typical example is the mechanism for supervising those sentenced to non-custodial sentences and the requirements for reporting a change of residence. The third problem is control and supervision over persons who are in temporarily occupied territories or in areas of active hostilities. Here, the practical question arises: how to ensure the performance of duties and communication when the probation agency does not have physical access to the territory, and the state often does not have effective law enforcement tools. The fourth problem is the organizational and personnel capacity of probation. Even the best-written powers do not work if the staff is insufficient or overloaded. Martial law has intensified migration processes, and in some regions the number of persons registered has increased, which directly affects the ability to conduct probation work in a quality manner. The fifth problem is the limited tools for interaction and coordination with other entities, without which probation cannot be effective. Probationary measures by their nature involve cooperation with police authorities, local government authorities, employment services, social and medical services, as well as with public organizations. At the same time, scientific assessments draw attention to the fact that the logic of unilateral actions of a probation officer often prevails in regulation and practice, while mechanisms for involving the public and coordinated interaction with the police do not receive sufficient attention. The sixth problem is legal certainty and the application of norms during martial law. Martial law, as a special legal regime, changes the conditions for the exercise of rights and freedoms and approaches to the organization of state power. The seventh problem is the digitalization of probation and the use of remote forms of control and influence. Modern practice shows that some probation processes are inevitably moving to a remote format, and document flow to an electronic form. Conclusions and prospects for the development. The probation institute, as a lever of alternative punishment in the criminal justice system, requires additional attention among scientists, and will be able, thanks to its potential, to proportionally distribute responsibility with rehabilitation, as well as achieve the goals of correction of convicts. The problems of implementing probation in Ukraine have not “one reason”, but a whole group of interrelated factors: inconsistency of state policy, insufficient detailing of procedures, complexity of supervision during martial law, lack of stable mechanisms for working with persons in temporarily occupied territories, personnel imbalances and staff overload, as well as incomplete rules for remote interaction and digital tools. At the practical level, these problems manifest themselves as a shift in emphasis from individual social and educational work to administrative control, a decrease in the predictability of procedures for under-registered persons, and uneven quality of probation work depending on the region and resources of a particular unit. Further strengthening of probation requires legal certainty in supervision and communication procedures, real human resources reinforcement and professional training of personnel, as well as systematic coordination with the police, social services and local governments. With such an approach, probation can consistently fulfill its function: to provide control without separating a person from society, and to create conditions under which repeated criminal offenses become less likely.