THEORETICAL CONCEPTS ON THE GOALS AND PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT

Abstract

Theoretical concepts about the goals and purpose of punishing the perpetrators of criminal acts appear as far back as ancient thinkers and represent issues that still occupy contemporary philosophy, philosophy of law, criminal law, penology, sociology and other sciences. Although they are basically questions of a philosophical nature, theories about the goals and purpose of punishment have a direct implication in the normative sphere because the prevailing theoretical discourse becomes the basis of punishment, and the goal and purpose proclaimed by the views of a certain theory (theory) become the basic punitive reactions to criminal behavior. For this reason, it is very important to understand the basic assumptions and theories about the goals and purpose of punishment, the dominant teachings in comparative law and the variety of proclaimed goals, studied in order to determine the effectiveness in preventing the commission of criminal acts, reducing crime rates and protecting society from criminal behavior. In the most direct connection with the questions of goals and purposes of punishment, there are questions and explanations of the basis of the state's right to punish (ius puniendi) because, to the greatest extent, opting for one concept of explanation of the basis of the state's right to punish directed the entire discourse of theoretical explanations of the goals and purpose of punishment. The author's idea in this work is to present the basic propositions of absolute (retributive), relative (utilitarian) and mixed theories about the goals and purpose of punishments in order to, in the modern period and in the modern challenges, more easily understand the idea of ​​a complex, polyvalent, function and nature punishments, which is of particular importance for understanding the potential effectiveness in the suppression and control of crime.