PREVENTION OF OFFENCES: HISTORICAL ESSAY

Introduction. It is an axiom that crime prevention should be the main focus of the fight against crime. Its ideological basis was laid by the ancient Greek philosophers Socrates, Platon and Aristotle, who persistently asserted the idea of justice as the fundamental philosophical basis of a reasonable – “good” – state. Purpose. The goal is to analyze the development of the doctrine of crime prevention in the historical context and its practical implementation. Methodology. The authors used a comparative historical method, that allows you to identify the stages and patterns in the development of the theory of crime prevention, as well as in the policy of crime prevention. Results. The foundations of the theory of crime prevention were formed by ancient Greek and Roman thinkers, whose creations were characterized by clarity of thought and the desire to learn the ontological foundations of the state and law. A notable contribution to the development of this theory was made by utopian socialists, classics of the Enlightenment and their followers. It was then that the main idea of prevention was formulated, that it is better to prevent crime than to punish, and that a good legislator will try not so much to punish as to improve morals. The most active theory of crime prevention developed in the USSR. In practical terms, the idea of crime prevention was first embodied in Ancient Rome – in the Laws of the XII century, which become public and thus acquire a preventive value. However, in a full-fledged embodiment, the foundations of criminological legislation are most clearly formed in Imperial Russia. A unique normative legal act in this regard should be recognized as the “Code on the prevention and suppression of crimes”, adopted in 1832, which contains a number of provisions that have a modern preventive sound. The apogee of preventive activities should be recognized as the experience of the internal Affairs bodies of the USSR in the 1960s-1970s. High efficiency of such activities was provided by a strong social policy, full support from the authorities at all levels, qualified implementation of criminological research, active participation of the population in crime prevention. In relation to crimes, the state and citizens have formed a solid position – we must fight crime together and this is our common task. Conclusion. In the modern truncated-recreated form, crime prevention imitates activities in this direction rather than being able to actually be the main direction of the fight against crime. This is due to at least three significant circumstances: 1) the loss of the importance of social policy as the basis for General crime prevention; 2) a catastrophic stratified gap in the population's income, which undermines the credibility of the government, its declarations and appeals; 3) changing the nature, properties and parameters of crime, which requires a conceptually new preventive response to it.