ОБСУЖДЕНИЕ ЗАКОНОПРОЕКТА «О ВЫДАЧЕ ПРЕСТУПНИКОВ ПО ТРЕБОВАНИЯМ ИНСТРАННЫХ ГОСУДАРСТВ» В III ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОЙ ДУМЕ

Шестаков Ю.А.

Кандидат исторических наук, доцент, Южно-Российский университет экономики и сервиса

ОБСУЖДЕНИЕ ЗАКОНОПРОЕКТА «О ВЫДАЧЕ ПРЕСТУПНИКОВ ПО ТРЕБОВАНИЯМ ИНСТРАННЫХ ГОСУДАРСТВ» В III ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОЙ ДУМЕ

Аннотация

В статье предпринята попытка анализа дебатов по поводу принятия законопроекта «о выдаче преступников по требованиям иностранных государств» в третьей Государственной думе. Он позволяет выявить определённые особенности правосознания различных фракций российского парламента третьего созыва и их отношение к принципам правового государства. Возможно использование материалов статьи в преподавательской деятельности.

Ключевые слова: преступность, государство, право.

Shestakov Y.A.

PhD in  historics, assosiate professor, South-Russian state University of economy and service

THE DISCUSSION OF THE BILL «ABOUT THE DELIVERY OF CRIMINALS UNDER REQUIREMENTS OF THE FOREIGN STATES » IN THE III STATE DUMA

Abstract

The article shows the analysis of debate about the acceptance of the  bill «about the delivery of criminals under requirements of the foreign states» in the third State Duma. It allows to reveal certain features of sense of justice of various groups of the Russian parliament of the third convocation and also demonstrate its relation to the principles of the law-based state. It is possible to use the materials of the article in teaching activity.

Keywords: crime, the state, the law.

The bill « about the delivery of criminals under requirements of the foreign states » has been brought in III State Duma on the Russian government’s initiative. The bill being consisted in definition of persons subject to delivery and the criminal activity supposing delivery. The analysis of the debate about the acceptance of the bill allows to reveal features of sense of justice of various groups of the Russian parliament of the third convocation.

The essence of disputes has been connected with different understanding of a phenomenon of political crimes by different groups.

That is the reason why the question on necessity of delivery to the foreign states the so-called «political criminals» became a stumbling-block at bill discussion. Against the future law assuming «delivery in cases when criminal act has been caused by the political motive» orators from party of national freedom and social democratic group of the Duma have acted. But they had different motives.

Cadets considered the state as a result of the public contract realizing "the natural" rights and freedom. That’s why they demanded of equality of the accused against the law, irrespective of political underlying reason of the committed crime. The constitutional democrats did not deny the presence of the phenomenon of political crime as a destruction factor for an existing system. However they supposed that at its definition there should be equality guarantees. They considered jury trial not applied that time in Russia for political criminals as such guarantee. By their opinion it was the only thing that could bring the trial proceedings to the public control. Just it could divide political crimes as a violent encroachment into a system approved by the population and an encroachment on interests of an authoritarian regime and bureaucracy. So, by means of that amendment orators from the party of national freedom defended the necessity of control of a civil society of the power, the control of the observance of a principle of leadership of the law, the rights and a population freedom.

Social democrats justified crimes by the exploiter essence of the modern state. So the law did not correspond to requirements of the people to their opinion. They could be satisfied just by the change of the class essence of the government. According to this, social democrats called for voting against the law without improving its amendments. Such position, « worse  is better»,  certainly is impossible to call the constructive one.

For the right groupss of the Duma the state and the right (as the state tool) were just the forms of sovereign dictatorship. Any encroachment on this dictatorship was treated by them as a state crime. Cruel punishment of criminals was the primary goal of criminal law from their point of view. Thinking that it is necessary to answer by the state terror to the antistate terror the right groups strangely approached with the left groups. They understood a crime not as an action contradicting the legal law, but as an encroachment to their ideological postulates.

From the point of view of the Octobers the state should express public interests on one hand and supervise a society on the other. That’s why deputies from that group treated political crimes as «robbery under the political sauce». So they thought that every encroachment on political foundations must be punished. That exposes in members of «the union on October, 17th» an aspiration to see the main conductor of modernization in executive power. They considered that it’s possible to make an agreements with it by means  of guarantees of equality of the population.

It is obvious that positions of the leading groups of the Russian parliament about the bill «about delivery of criminals under requirements of the foreign states» were closely connected with their sense of justice. Their views to the phenomenon of political crimes and to the law-based state principles were different according to it. The analysis of the Duma’s debate about the bill allows to express the opinion about the problematical character of realization of principles of a law-based state. The reason is that just the cadets supported them.