The article analyzes the main directions of the probation service in Ukraine. Based on the recommendations of international standards, the importance of introducing probation as a type of criminal punishment alternative to deprivation of liberty is justified. Taking into account international experience, the need for the probation service to be fully implemented in the postpenitentiary function is proved.

The probation service should have access to prisoners in prison in order to help them prepare for their release and to plan their future control in order to carry out constant monitoring and continuing educational work maintained during imprisonment. Control after release from imprisonment should be aimed at solving the problems of convicts, such as employment, place of residence, education, and ensuring their release conditions, in order to reduce the risk of commission of a new crime and the task of significant damage.

Thus, recognizing the urgency and importance of adopting the Law on Probation, on the basis of the study of the content of international standards in the field of probation and world’s experience in the implementation of criminal penalties, we should note that the list of probation types should be supplemented by probation as a type of criminal supervision and post-penitentiary probation.

Key words: Tokyo rules, probation, alternatives to imprisonment, probation service functions, international standards.

REFERENCES

1. Pro probatsiiu (2015), Zakon Ukrainy, available at: http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/160-19 (accessed 13 July 2017).

2. Minimalnyye standartnyye pravila Organizatsii Obyedinennykh Natsiy v otnoshenii mer, ne sviazannykh s tiuremnym zakliucheniyem [Tokiyskiye pravila] (1990), Mizhnarodnyi document, available at: http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_907 (accessed 21 July 2017).

3. Pro Pravyla Rady Yevropy pro probatsiiu (2010), Rekomendatsiia Komitetu Ministriv derzhavam-chlenam, Mizhnarodnyi document, available at: http://kvs.gov.ua/rekomendacia_2010.pdf (accessed 11 July 2017).

4. Obzor zakonodatelstva skandinavskikh i baltiyskikh stran po sluzhbe probatsii (ugolovnomu nadzoru) (2005), Sankt-Peterburgskaya obshchestvennaya pravozashchitnaya organizatsiya “Grazhdanskiy kontrol”.

5. Deyvis, K. and Bernkhardt, E. (2012), Rabota s pravonarushiteliami v obshchestve, Obshchestvennaya pravozashchitnaya organizatsiya «Grazhdanskiy kontrol», Sankt-Peterburg.

6. Zubarev S.M. (2010), “Organizatsiya ispolneniya ugolovnykh nakazaniy bez izoliatsii osuzhdennogo ot obshchestva v zarubezhnykh stranakh”, Vestnik VIPE FSIN Rossii: prestupleniye, nakazaniye, ispravleniye. No. 11, pp. 66-69. (in Russian).

7. Makovskiy, V.S. (2015), K voprosu o zarubezhnom opyte ispolneniya nakazaniy, ne sviazannykh s izoliatsiyey ot obshchestva, available at: http://xn—-7sbbaj7auwnffhk.xn--p1ai/article/1670 (accessed 30 July 2017).

8. Tigges, L. (2011), Probatsiya v Yevrope, available at: http://www.cep-probation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Presentation-CEP-Leo-Tigges-Dec2011-Rus.pdf (accessed 29 July 2017).

9. Yahunov D.V. (2012), “Yevropeiski pravyla probatsii yak standart upravlinnia sluzhbamy probatsii u krainakh-chlenakh Rady Yevropy: filosofiia, struktura, spriamovanist. Aktualni problemy derzhavnoho upravlinnia. Actual problems of public administration, No. 2 (50), pp.125–129.

10. Yahunov D.V. (2009), “Yakii buty probatsii XX stolittia? (Vplyv hlobalizatsii nykh protsesiv na suchasni penalni polityku ta praktyky)”. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats z pytan yevropeiskoi intehratsii ta prava, No. 5, pp.222–229.

11. Utkin, V.S. (2012), “Yevropeyskiye pravila o probatsii i problemy ikh realizatsii”. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Pravo. No. 1 (3). pp. 342–351.