What is a punishment cell in prison in 2022? How is it deciphered?

Definition

How does ShIZO stand for? This abbreviation should be understood as a punishment cell or a special prison department in which cells for special prisoners are located.

The main difference between such “compartments” are:

Extremely small sizes - no more than 9 square meters;
Lack of warm water contributes to the flourishing of lice and skin diseases;
Lack of light - to illuminate the space they use a light bulb of the lowest power. As a rule, it is installed either on the ceiling or in a niche above the door and protected with a mesh;
Lack of windows - there may be only one small window in the cell, but it is also closed with a piece of wood or iron;
Folding bunks - raised for the day and lowered for the night. But the main problem is that if there are a large number of violators in one room, there are not enough bunks for everyone, so at night the prisoners often take turns sleeping. Sitting and lying on bunks or the floor during the daytime is strictly prohibited;
Lack of normal chairs and tables - the dimensions of the tables installed in most isolation wards are 20 x 30 cm. The role of chairs is played by so-called “mushrooms”, reminiscent of half a child’s stool;
Dampness and low temperature are explained by concrete walls and floors. During the cold season, the temperature in the punishment cell rarely exceeds 10-15 degrees;
Lack of ventilation and a proper toilet - the latter is located right in the cell and most often does not work, so there is a constant unpleasant smell in the room;
Poor nutrition.

In addition, a prisoner staying in a punishment cell does not have the right to:

Receive parcels;
Store personal belongings;
Convey letters and oral messages;
Meet with any of the visitors;
Enter into marriages;
Submit complaints and statements;
Read books (except textbooks);
To listen to the radio;
Talking on the phone;
Order food from the YiW store.

It should also be noted that if the offender is studying at a school or university, he cannot leave the cell for the sake of studying, but has the right to demand notes and textbooks to independently familiarize himself with the material.

Permitted activities include hour-long walks, conversations with a clergyman, as well as hygiene procedures and storage of the products necessary for their implementation.

What is the difference between a punishment cell and a punishment cell? The main difference between these punishments is the quality of food and the complete lack of communication with the outside world.

General concepts

So, it is necessary to understand that in the Russian Federation there are many different correctional institutions that provide for different conditions and regimes of detention, which means that the premises in question (punishment isolation cell) may differ from each other in them, even despite the fact that the legislation provides for certain regulated conditions that it must meet. To begin with, we should cite the provisions of Article 118 of the Criminal Executive Code of the Russian Federation, which contains the basic conditions for the type of temporary detention of guilty prisoners under consideration. Part 1 establishes that persons who were previously sentenced to actual imprisonment and subsequently placed in a punishment cell are deprived of the right to:

personal date;
telephone conversations;
independent purchase of food products through the relevant internal stores of the PS;
receiving parcels, parcels and parcels.

To build a more complete picture of understanding what troublemakers face, to the prohibitions described above, we should add features in the configuration of the punishment cell, some of which are of an unregulated nature:

the size of the room does not exceed 9 square meters;
minimal illumination due to the presence of one small window boarded up with bars;
stricter sleep and rest regime. During the daytime, beds (also known as bunks or cots) are folded up to prevent their direct purpose and are raised only during night sleep. Their use during the daytime is strictly prohibited;
ordinary chairs and stools are simplified and represent a small “mushroom” the size of a children’s chair;
relatively low temperature, which averages less than 20 degrees;
simplified diet;
the presence of a sanitary facility directly in the premises.

In addition to the above, perhaps the key feature worth noting is the lack of strict internal regulations on the number of prisoners simultaneously placed in a punishment cell. This feature is twofold, since on the one hand there is no principle of using solitary confinement (i.e., simply having someone to talk to), and on the other hand, the number of beds is limited, which can lead to the impossibility of all the culprits sleeping at the same time. And this can already create certain personal conflicts based on the physical superiority of one over the other. But it should be repeated that such measures are not advertised and, from the point of view of current legislation, simply do not exist. In the system under consideration, a punishment cell is the toughest and most effective measure of influence on violators, except for rare hour-long walks and the permission to invite clergy representing legitimate religious associations.

Why are they put in a punishment cell?

Why are they put in a punishment cell in a colony? The legislation specifies 2 main reasons why a prisoner can be sent to a punishment cell.

These include:

Repeated violations of the detention regime - fights, constant scandals, non-compliance with internal regulations, failure to exercise, etc.;
Possession of prohibited items found during a search of the cell.

But in reality, you can end up in a punishment cell for other offenses:

Refusal to comply with illegal demands of a prisoner who is on good terms with the prison administration;
Refusal to shovel snow instead of sleeping at night;
Refusal to comply with illegal demands of the management of a correctional institution;
Writing a complaint against prison employees;
The requirement to provide the required clothing allowance and food products.

Placement in a punishment cell is an extreme measure of punishment applied to a prisoner. The decision on its expediency is made by the administration of the correctional institution.

What is a punishment cell and its difference from a punishment cell

Punishment cells, or abbreviated punishment cells, are the departments in correctional institutions where cells are located for violators of the prison regime.

Punishment cells exist only in correctional colonies - in pre-trial detention centers or prisons, their analogues are punishment cells. The main differences between them are the terms of imprisonment and the nature of the detention (in punishment cells, prisoners are kept alone, they stay for a longer period - up to six months).

You will find more information about what a punishment cell is and what the conditions of detention in it are in a separate material.

Exceptions to the rules

According to the legislation in force in Russia in 2022 (Article 117 of the Criminal Executive Code), the following cannot be placed in a punishment cell:

Pregnant women;
Disabled people of group 1;
Women who have children under 3 years of age (if they are not deprived of maternal rights).

The main contingent of the punishment cell (about 90%) are young people aged 18-25 years . Due to youthful maximalism, they often put forward certain claims, for which they become the main objects of “education.”

Of these, only 10% are there legally. As a rule, these are repeat offenders and dangerous criminals who do not comply with the requirements of the administration of the correctional facility and need complete isolation from other prisoners.

Duration of stay in a punishment cell

The procedure for placing a prisoner in a punishment cell requires strict adherence to the deadlines specified in the regulatory documents.

Thus, the maximum time of stay in a special prison department should not exceed 15 days for adults and 7 for minors.

However, practice shows that not all correctional colonies adhere to the law. This means that any “undesirable” prisoner can serve more than 15 days in a punishment cell.

It happens like this: after the expiration of this period, the prisoner is released, and after a day or two they are sent back again for a far-fetched reason.

Thus, an offending criminal can remain in a punishment cell for an indefinite amount of time (up to 150 days).

On a note! The punishment cell can be assigned an unlimited number of times!

Introduction

This form of punishment, such as placement in a punishment cell, is the most severe form of all punishments.
After all, even those kept in solitary confinement are allowed visits and receiving parcels (read about how visits take place in prison here, and about what parcels can be sent to prisoners here).

Until 1988, prisoners who were kept in a punishment cell were entitled to a reduced food allowance. They ate every other day.

Now this rule no longer exists. However, the food provided to criminals held in a punishment cell may be worse than that of others due to the fact that they usually do not work (read about how they are fed in prison in this article).

Until 1988, among other things, prisoners were not provided with mattresses or bed linen. Many restrictions were lifted in 1992 after a petition was filed.

However, if a prisoner held in a punishment cell is studying in a secondary school or other educational institution, he is not sent out for training during his stay in the punishment cell.

He has the right to have textbooks in order to study the material independently.

Persons who are detained in Canada are not entitled to receive letters and parcels; in addition, they cannot go on scheduled dates, get married, or spend money on food. The conditions of detention in this place are as strict as possible.

So, we looked at the decoding of the punishment cell and the history of its origin. Let's consider the procedure for placing it in it.

Daily routine in the punishment cell

The punishment cell has its own daily routine, which is very different from the rules followed by other prisoners.

To begin with, the prisoner completely changes his form . If in the summer he is given uniform pants and a jacket with the inscription “SHIZO” on the back, then in the winter this set is supplemented with underwear consisting of a shirt and underpants.

If a prisoner does not have his own slippers, he is obliged to obtain a pair from the prison supply . True, calling them shoes can only be a stretch - often these slippers look like rags that do not save your feet from the constant cold.

The offender is then taken to a cell. It can be 2, 4, 6 or 8-seater. It all depends on the seriousness of the offense.

Food is delivered through a special window, closed with a massive lock . In order to monitor prisoners, a peephole or metal grill is installed on the door. Several times a day, convicts held in a punishment cell are subjected to a full search.

Further life in the punishment cell goes according to this plan:

5.00 – getting up, handing over mattresses, hygiene procedures;
6.00 – breakfast;
9.30 – 12.00 – alternate walks in the courtyard and examination by a doctor (if there are complaints);
12.00 – 13.00 – lunch;
13.00 – 16.00 – bath (once every 10 days);
17.00 – dinner;
18.00 – 20.30 – so-called “free time”;
20.30 – 20.45 – distribution of mattresses;
21.00 – lights out.

What time are they released from the punishment cell to work? If the order for placement in a punishment cell contains o, the prisoner is released from performing any duties. Otherwise, he can work on the territory of the punishment cell - clearing snow, chopping wood, sweeping the yard, etc.

Now you know not only the decoding of the abbreviation “ShIZO”, but also the conditions that await a prisoner in this prison department.

Court decision on placement in a punishment cell No. 2a-2538/2017 ~ M-1533/2017

SOLUTION

IN THE NAME OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

May 25, 2022 Irkutsk

Sverdlovsk District Court of Irkutsk, consisting of:

presiding judge Galata S.V.,

under secretary M.V. Dudkina,

with the participation of the representative of the administrative defendant FKU IK-6 GUFSIN of Russia for the Irkutsk region K.T.S.,

having considered in open court administrative case No. 2a-2538/16 on the administrative claim of O.R.M. to FKU IK-6 of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia for the Irkutsk Region on declaring illegal the decision to place him in a punishment cell,

INSTALLED:

O.R.M. appealed to the Sverdlovsk District Court of Irkutsk. with an administrative claim to FKU IK-6 of the GUFSIN of Russia for the Irkutsk Region to declare illegal the decision to place him in a punishment cell from.

In support of the application, he indicated that he had been sentenced to imprisonment by a court and was now serving his sentence in FKU IK-6 of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia in the Irkutsk Region. A decision was made against him to place him in a punishment cell (punishment cell). The specified resolution of the Acting Head of PKU IK-6 of the GUFSIN of Russia for the Irkutsk Region is considered illegal, unfounded and subject to cancellation on the following grounds: 1. He did not commit the violation for which he was found guilty and punished (negotiations from cell to cell), he was slandered by the inspector, so how the management “wanted”, out of personal hostility, to lock him in a punishment cell in order to harm him. 2. As stated in the resolution, this inspector did not give him any warnings at 20:50. 3. The report was not accompanied by a video recording from the video recorder, which is attached to the chest of all inspectors and is supposed to record all contacts with convicts. 4. The accused does not have to prove his innocence, the burden of proof lies on the prosecution, all doubts are interpreted in favor of the accused, but the administrative defendant did not provide evidence other than the words of the prosecution, and therefore the decision is unfounded and illegal. 5. The person with whom he allegedly spoke was not brought to justice, so the charge was falsified. 6. He (O.R.M.) was not summoned to the commission at FKU IK-6, where the issue of taking measures to address the violation specified in the report and resolution was decided; there are no video recordings of the meeting.

Based on the foregoing, he asks the court to cancel the decision of the Acting Head of PKU IK-6 of the Main Directorate of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia for the Irkutsk Region on the placement of O.R.M. to a punishment cell, as not based on the requirements of the law, and equally “illegal.”

At the court hearing, administrative plaintiff O.R.M. did not appear, was duly notified of the date and time of the court hearing, is serving his sentence in PKU IK-6 of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia, and did not ask for the case to be considered in his absence.

The court, taking into account the opinion of the persons participating in the case, considers it possible to consider the present case on its merits in the absence of the administrative plaintiff in accordance with Part 2 of Art. 150 CAS RF.

The representative of the administrative defendant PKU IK-6 GUFSIN of Russia for K.T.S., acting on the basis of a power of attorney, did not recognize the stated demands, submitted written objections to the court, in which she indicated that, according to paragraph 168 of Chapter XXIV of the PNR of the penitentiary institution, convicts are prohibited from negotiating, transfer any objects to persons held in other cells or other premises of the punishment cell, PKT, EPKT, solitary confinement cells, knock or correspond with them (part 2, paragraph 168). Convict O.R.M. , held in the punishment cell in the cell, at 20:50 hours he was negotiating with the convicts held in the cell of the punishment cell. In response to comments made to him by the junior inspector for the punishment cell, PKT, convicted O.R.M. did not respond, about which a report was drawn up from . Convict O.R.M. refused to give a written explanation of the fact of the violation of the established procedure for serving the sentence, about which the employees of the administration of the institution, in accordance with the provisions of Part 1 of Art. 117 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation, an act has been drawn up. O.R.M. recognized as a persistent violator of the UPON (signature of O.R.M. in the resolution recognizing him as a persistent violator of the Established procedure for serving the sentence is available). S is subject to strict conditions of serving his sentence. A reprimand is announced orally or in writing, other penalties only in writing. Violations of the established procedure for serving a sentence committed by convicts (hereinafter referred to as UPON) during the period of serving their sentence are considered by the administration of the Institution at the administrative commission, the composition of which was approved by order of the head of PKU IK-6 of the GUFSIN of Russia for the Irkutsk region dated. The presence of the convicted person during the consideration of materials on violation of UPON by the commission is not provided. The convicted person is only informed of the decision of the commission and provided with an extract from the protocol for review. If the convicted person refuses to familiarize himself with the Resolution on the application of a disciplinary measure, a report is drawn up. O.R.M. PM was asked to familiarize himself with an extract from the minutes of the administrative commission dated. O.R.M. familiarized himself with the decision to place him in a punishment cell, as evidenced by the signature of O.R.M. When imposing this disciplinary sanction, the administration of the Institution took into account the personality of the convict, his previous behavior, the severity and nature of the violation, as indicated by the characteristics of the convict O.R.M. available in the materials on the imposition of a disciplinary sanction, a certificate of violations and penalties drawn up by the head of the detachment Full name2 Regulatory legal acts regulating the activities of correctional institutions do not provide for the mandatory recording of violations committed by convicts on a wearable video recorder. In accordance with Part 1 of Article 83 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation, the administration of correctional institutions has the right to use audiovisual, electronic and other technical means of supervision and control to prevent escapes and other crimes, violations of the established procedure for serving a sentence and in order to obtain the necessary information about the behavior of convicts. The storage period for the archive of video recordings made using DVRs must be at least 30 days. Violation of UPON committed by O.R.M. did not provide for recording the violation using a wearable video recorder, so the convict conducted negotiations behind the closed door of the cell in which he was located. Based on the above, taking into account the unfounded arguments of O.R.M.. and also taking into account that the employees of PKU IK-6 of the GUFSIN of Russia, when imposing a penalty, the procedure for imposing a penalty was complied with in full, the disciplinary measure was applied within the powers of the Institution and in accordance with the requirements current legislation, requests that the demands be denied.

The court, having heard the representative of the administrative defendant PKU IK-6 of the GUFSIN of Russia for the Irkutsk Region, having examined the case materials, finds the statement of O.R.M. not subject to satisfaction for the following reasons.

In accordance with Art. 46 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Art. 1 and 3 of the Law of the Russian Federation of April 27, 1993 No. 4866-1 “On appealing to the court of actions and decisions that violate the rights and freedoms of citizens,” citizens can appeal to the court any actions (decisions) of state bodies, local governments or officials, except actions (decisions), the verification of which is referred by law to the exclusive competence of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, or in respect of which a different procedure for judicial appeal is provided.

According to Part 1 of Art. 3 of the Federal Law of March 8, 2015 N 22-FZ “On the introduction into force of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of the Russian Federation”, cases pending before the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and courts of general jurisdiction and not considered before September 15, 2015, are subject to consideration and resolution in accordance with the procedure , provided for by the CAS of the Russian Federation.

The procedure for appealing the actions of a government body, local government body, other body, organization vested with certain state or other public powers is established by Chapter 22 of the CAS of the Russian Federation.

According to Part 1 of Art. 218 CAS RF, a citizen, organization, or other persons may go to court with demands to challenge decisions, actions (inaction) of a government body, local government body, other body, organization vested with certain state or other public powers (including decisions, actions (inaction) ) qualification board of judges, examination commission), official, state or municipal employee (hereinafter - body, organization, person vested with state or other public powers), if they believe that their rights, freedoms and legitimate interests have been violated or challenged, or obstacles have been created to the exercise of their rights, freedoms and legitimate interests, or they are illegally assigned any duties. A citizen, organization, or other persons can appeal directly to the court or challenge decisions, actions (inaction) of a body, organization, person vested with state or other public powers, to a higher authority, organization in the order of subordination, or from a higher person in the order of subordination, or use other out-of-court dispute resolution procedures.

The court, having considered the administrative claims of O.R.M., checked in accordance with Part. 8, 9 tbsp. 226 CAS RF arguments and objections of persons participating in the case, having assessed the evidence presented, each individually and in their entirety, comes to the following conclusion.

Part 8 of Art. 226 of the Code of Arbitration Code of the Russian Federation provides that when considering an administrative case challenging a decision, action (inaction) of a body, organization, person vested with state or other public powers, the court verifies the legality of the decision, action (inaction) in the part that is being disputed, and in relation to the person , which is an administrative plaintiff, or persons, in defense of whose rights, freedoms and legitimate interests a corresponding administrative claim has been filed. When checking the legality of these decisions, actions (inactions), the court is not bound by the grounds and arguments contained in the administrative statement of claim to declare illegal the decisions, actions (inactions) of a body, organization, person vested with state or other public powers, and clarifies the circumstances specified in parts 9 and 10 of this article in full.

In accordance with Part 9 of Art. 226 CAS RF, unless otherwise provided by this Code, when considering an administrative case challenging a decision, action (inaction) of a body, organization, person vested with state or other public powers, the court finds out:

1) whether the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of the administrative plaintiff or persons in defense of whose rights, freedoms and legitimate interests the corresponding administrative claim was filed were violated;

2) whether the deadlines for going to court have been met;

3) whether the requirements of regulatory legal acts establishing:

a) the powers of a body, organization, person vested with state or other public powers to make a contested decision or perform a contested action (inaction);

b) the procedure for making a contested decision, performing a contested action (inaction) if such a procedure has been established;

c) the grounds for making a contested decision, performing a contested action (inaction), if such grounds are provided for by regulatory legal acts;

4) whether the content of the contested decision, the contested action (inaction) committed corresponds to the normative legal acts governing the disputed relationship.

In this case, the obligation to prove the circumstances specified in paragraphs 1 and 2 of part 9 of this article is assigned to the person who applied to the court, and the circumstances specified in paragraphs 3 and 4 of part 9 and in part 10 of this article are assigned to the body, organization, person , vested with state or other public powers and who made contested decisions or committed contested actions (inaction).

In accordance with Art. 2 of the Law of the Russian Federation of April 27, 1993 of the Law of the Russian Federation of April 27, 1993 No. 4866-1 “On appealing to the court of actions and decisions that violate the rights and freedoms of citizens” and in accordance with paragraph 1 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of February 10, 2009 No. 2 “ On the practice of courts considering cases challenging decisions, actions (inaction) of state authorities, local governments, officials, state and municipal employees" citizens have the right to apply to the court for the protection of their rights and freedoms with an application to challenge decisions of other federal government bodies, as a result of which: the rights and freedoms of a citizen are violated; obstacles have been created to the citizen’s exercise of his rights and freedoms; a citizen has been unlawfully assigned any duty or has been unlawfully held accountable for any purpose.

Thus, in order to satisfy the applicant’s request to recognize illegal decisions, actions (inactions) of state authorities, local governments, officials, state and municipal employees, a combination of two conditions must be present: the inconsistency of the appealed decisions, actions with the norms of the current legislation and their violation of the rights and legitimate interests of the administrative plaintiff.

Based on Part 1 of Art. 219 CAS RF, unless this Code establishes other deadlines for filing an administrative claim in court, an administrative claim may be filed with the court within three months from the day when a citizen, organization, or other person became aware of a violation of their rights, freedoms and legal interests.

Administrative plaintiff O.R.M. The ruling dated , O.R.M. is being challenged. filed a lawsuit with this administrative claim, that is, within the limits established by Part 1 of Art. 219 CAS RF three-month appeal period.

The court found that the decision to apply a disciplinary sanction from O.R.M. placed in a punishment cell for 10 days due to the fact that he violated Part 2 of Art. 11 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation (convicts are required to comply with the requirements of federal laws defining the procedure and conditions for serving sentences, as well as regulatory legal acts adopted in accordance with them); paragraph 168 ch. XXIV Order of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation dated December 16, 2016 No. 295 “On approval of the internal regulations of correctional institutions” (convicts are prohibited from negotiating, transferring any objects to persons held in other cells or other premises of the punishment cell, PKT, EPKT, solitary confinement , knock or text with them).

According to Part 2 of Art. 11 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation, convicts are required to comply with the requirements of federal laws defining the procedure and conditions for serving sentences, as well as regulatory legal acts adopted in accordance with them.

Failure by convicts to fulfill the duties assigned to them, as well as failure to comply with the legal requirements of the administration of institutions and bodies executing punishments, entails liability established by law (Part 6 of Article 11 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation).

In accordance with Part 1 of Art. 115 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation, for violation of the established procedure for serving a sentence, penalties may be applied to those convicted of imprisonment, including in the form of a reprimand, placement of convicts held in correctional colonies or prisons in a punishment cell for a period of up to 15 days.

By virtue of Art. 117 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation, when applying penalties to a person sentenced to imprisonment, the circumstances of the violation, the personality of the convicted person and his previous behavior are taken into account. The penalty imposed must correspond to the severity and nature of the violation. Before imposing a penalty, a written explanation is taken from the convicted person. Convicts who are unable to give a written explanation are provided with assistance by the administration of the correctional institution. If the convicted person refuses to give an explanation, a corresponding act is drawn up. The penalty is imposed no later than 10 days from the date of discovery of the violation, and if an inspection was carried out in connection with the violation - from the date of its completion, but no later than three months from the date of the violation.

A reprimand is announced orally or in writing, other penalties only in writing. The penalty is imposed by a resolution of the head of the correctional institution or his deputy.

The transfer of convicts to cell-type premises, single cell-type premises and solitary confinement, as well as placement in punishment and disciplinary isolation cells, is carried out with an indication of the period of detention after a medical examination and the issuance of a medical report on the possibility of staying in them for health reasons. The procedure for conducting a medical examination and issuing the said medical report is determined by the federal executive body exercising the functions of developing and implementing state policy and legal regulation in the field of execution of criminal penalties, in agreement with the federal executive body exercising the functions of developing state policy and normatively -legal regulation in the field of healthcare.

Order of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation dated December 16, 2016 No. 295 in accordance with Article 82 of the Criminal Executive Code of the Russian Federation and Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated October 13, 2004 No. 1313 “Issues of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation” approved the “Internal Rules of Correctional Institutions” (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ).

According to paragraph 1 of the Rules, these Internal Rules of Correctional Institutions establish internal rules in correctional colonies, prisons, medical correctional institutions, as well as medical and preventive institutions and pre-trial detention centers performing the functions of correctional institutions, in relation to convicts and convicts residing in them, respectively, left for maintenance work; convicted persons in respect of whom the court verdict has entered into legal force and who are subject to transfer to a correctional facility to serve their sentence; convicts traveling to the place of serving a sentence or moving from one place of serving a sentence to another; those sentenced to imprisonment and serving their sentence in a correctional institution or prison, left in a pre-trial detention center or transferred to a pre-trial detention center to participate in investigative actions or court proceedings as a witness, victim, suspect, accused; those sentenced to a term of not more than six months, left in a pre-trial detention center with their consent..

The rules are mandatory for the administration of correctional institutions, the convicts held there, as well as other persons visiting the correctional institution. Violation of the Rules entails liability established by the legislation of the Russian Federation.

According to para. 1 clause 13 of the Rules, convicted persons have the right to receive information about their rights and obligations, about the procedure and conditions for serving the type of sentence imposed by the court. The administration of the institution executing sentences is obliged to provide convicts with this information, as well as familiarize them with changes in the procedure and conditions for serving the sentence.

Upon admission to serve a sentence in IK-6 of the Main Directorate of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia in the Irkutsk Region, O.R.M. was familiarized with and undertook to fulfill, in accordance with the daily routine, all the duties and rules of behavior of convicts in this institution, which is not disputed by the administrative plaintiff.

By the resolution on the application of disciplinary measures in the placement of O.R.M. in a punishment cell for 10 days, it was established that at 20:50 he was negotiating with convicts held in a cell in a punishment cell. The junior inspector of the punishment cell, the PKT warrant officer of the internal service, FULL NAME1, did not react to the comments made.

In accordance with Part 2 of Section 168 of Chapter. XXIV Order of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation dated December 16, 2016 No. 295 “On approval of the internal regulations of correctional institutions”, convicts held in punishment cells, PKT, EPKT, solitary confinement are prohibited from negotiating or transferring any objects to persons held in other cells or other premises of the punishment cell, PKT, EPKT, solitary confinement cells, knock or correspond with them.

The prohibition for convicts to negotiate with persons held in other cells or other premises of the punishment cell, PKT, EPKT also follows from the provisions of Part 2 of Art. 11 and part 3 of Art. 82 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation, according to which convicts are obliged to comply with the requirements of federal laws defining the procedure and conditions for serving their sentences, as well as regulatory legal acts adopted in accordance with them, to which the above Rules relate.

At the court hearing it was established that the procedure for imposing a penalty was followed.

Thus, after the discovery of a violation by the junior inspector of the punishment cell PKT FULL NAME1, a report was drawn up, according to which, at 20:50, during a tour of the cells of the punishment cell, PKT, through the observation window of the cell of the punishment cell, the convicted person O.R.M. was discovered, who was negotiating with the convicts, kept in a cell in a punishment cell. He did not react to the comments made.

Before the imposition of the penalty O.R.M. it was proposed to give written explanations, which he refused, which is confirmed by the act dated.

From the conclusion of the head of the detachment, FULL NAME2, it follows that upon violation of the O.R.M. He refused to give written explanations and verbally explained that he did not consider this violation to be serious enough to bear disciplinary responsibility for it.

According to an extract from the protocol from the commission of PKU IK-6 of the GUFSIN of Russia for the Irkutsk region on the application of disciplinary measures when considering violations of O.R.M. the established procedure for serving the sentence, the commission decided: the convicted O.R.M. put in a punishment cell for 10 days.

The resolution contains a medical report from a doctor from Hospital-1 FKUZ MSCh-38 of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia stating that at the time of examination O.R.M. due to health reasons, he may be kept in a punishment cell; also in the materials on the imposition of a disciplinary sanction there is a medical report with a similar conclusion.

The decision on the application of disciplinary measures was announced by O.R.M. , about which there is his signature on the resolution.

Testing the argument of O.R.M. about the availability of evidence from the administrative defendant, the court found that, in accordance with Part 1 of Art. 83 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation, the administration of correctional institutions has the right to use audiovisual, electronic and other technical means of supervision and control to prevent escapes and other crimes, violations of the established procedure for serving a sentence and in order to obtain the necessary information about the behavior of convicts. The administration of correctional institutions is obliged to notify convicts on receipt of the use of the specified means of supervision and control. The list of technical means of supervision and control and the procedure for their use are established by regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation.

The regulations governing the activities of correctional institutions do not provide for the mandatory recording of violations committed by convicts on a wearable video recorder.

As follows from the explanations of the defendant’s representative, the violation of UPON committed by O.R.M. did not provide for recording the violation using a wearable video recorder, since the convict conducted negotiations behind the closed door of the cell in which he was located. The storage period for the archive of video recordings made using DVRs must be at least 30 days. At the same time, since no recording was made, it was not deposited in the archive.

Regarding the argument of O.R.M. about the lack of punishment of persons held in a cell of a punishment cell for a similar offense, which in his opinion confirms the falsification of his actions, the court considers it far-fetched and not corresponding to reality, since, according to the inspection materials, explanations of the representative of PKU IK-6 of the GUFSIN of Russia for the Irkutsk region, the persons detained in the punishment cell did not violate the Rules, in negotiations with O.R.M. did not enter, therefore they could not suffer punishment.

Regarding the argument of O.R.M. on considering the issue of applying disciplinary measures to him in his absence, the court comes to the conclusion that this circumstance is not a violation of his rights, since violations of the established procedure for serving a sentence committed by convicts while serving their sentence are considered by the administration of the Institution at the administrative commission , the composition of which was approved by order of the head of PKU IK-6 of the GUFSIN of Russia for the Irkutsk region dated. According to this normative act, the presence of the convicted person when considering materials on violation of UPON at the commission is not provided. The convicted person is only informed of the commission’s decision and provided with an extract from the protocol for review.

Thus, when imposing a disciplinary sanction, the personality of the convict, his previous behavior, the severity and nature of the violation were taken into account, as indicated by the characteristics of the convict O.R.M. available in the materials on the imposition of a disciplinary sanction, a certificate of incentives and penalties drawn up by the head of the detachment Full name2

The contested resolution states that O.R.M. During the entire period of serving his sentence, he committed a number of violations of the detention regime. Does not respond to disciplinary measures and does not draw proper conclusions. By nature he is secretive, cunning, and unable to resist bad influences. His behavior has a negative effect on other convicts. He was repeatedly placed in a punishment cell, PKT, and was recognized as a persistent violator of UPON. S is subject to strict conditions of serving his sentence.

Thus, the court found that O.R.M. in the process of serving the sentence, an offense was committed that was prohibited by the Penal Code of the Russian Federation and the Rules, thereby violating the established procedure for serving the sentence, the grounds for slander, the interest of the management of PKU IK-6 of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia for the Irkutsk Region in imposing a disciplinary sanction on O.R.M. not established by the court.

Moreover, application to O.R.M. disciplinary sanction for the offense he committed, taking into account its nature, in the form of placement in a punishment cell for a period of 10 days, is correct and imposed within the limits established by Article 115 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation.

Administrative plaintiff O.R.M. no evidence was presented to refute the conclusions of the commission of PKU IK-6 of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia for the Irkutsk Region about his violation of the established procedure for serving the sentence.

The court, when examining the evidence, did not find any violations by employees of IK-6 of the GUFSIN of Russia in the Irkutsk Region of the procedure for imposing an O.R.M. disciplinary action, the disciplinary measure was applied within the powers of the institution and in accordance with the requirements of the current legislation, in connection with which the court comes to the conclusion that the requirements of O.R.M. on the recognition of the resolution on the application of a disciplinary measure in the form of placement of O.R.M. in a punishment cell for 10 days, are unfounded and cannot be satisfied.

The parties did not present any other evidence to refute the court's conclusions at the court hearing.

Based on the above, guided by art. 227-228 Code of Administrative Proceedings of the Russian Federation, court

DECIDED

In satisfying the claims of O.R.M. to PKU IK-6 GUFSIN of Russia for the Irkutsk Region on the cancellation of the resolution of the Acting Head of PKU IK-6 GUFSIN of Russia for the Irkutsk Region on the installation of O.R.M. to a punishment cell, as not based on the requirements of the law, as well as “illegal” - refuse.

The decision can be appealed on appeal to the Irkutsk Regional Court through the Sverdlovsk District Court of Irkutsk within a month from the date the court decision was made in final form.

Chairman: Galata S.V.

The solution is made

Author of the article

Dmitry Leonov

Work experience 15 years, specialization - housing, family, inheritance, land, criminal cases.

Author's rating

721

Articles written

712
about the author