Preventive and corrective function of the criminal mode of punishment in the form of freedom restriction
In article questions of completeness and sufficiency of the mode of restriction of freedom are analyzed. The legislative design of article 53 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation, and also modern practice of purpose of the considered punishment is criticized. Statistical data on the personality guilty which restriction of freedom is appointed are provided. Among them persons who don't work anywhere meet, don't study, have alcoholic or drug addiction, funds for the maintenance of a family at them are absent. In practical activities not always it turns out to consider these aspects, as the list of measures in article 53 of the criminal code of Russian Federation exhaustive. Introduction of article 72 ¹ in the existing Criminal code doesn't solve this problem. The duty to pass treatment for drug addiction and medical and (or) social rehabilitation can be applied only to the persons recognized as patients with drug addiction. Concrete judgments which contain a complex of the restrictions and duties, in certain cases which aren't considering character of the committed crime, and also personal characteristics of the guilty are provided as examples. In most cases, they allow to control only persons to whom restriction of freedom is appointed. Therefore, the mode given punishment possesses low preventive and educational function, and can't significantly influence a condition of crime in our country. However enrichment of its contents will allow to raise these indicators, and restriction of freedom will make more effective. It in turn will give independent character to the considered punishment and will make it competitive.