Dolgopolov Kirill Andreevich

This article examines current issues in applying the principle of absorption of a lesser punishment by a more severe one when sentencing for a combination of crimes. This article analyzes the provisions of Russian criminal law governing the procedure for determining final punishment, as well as the practice of their implementation by the courts. Particular attention is given to the controversial issues of the relationship between the principles of justice, equality of citizens before the law, and the individualization of criminal liability when using the mechanism of absorption of punishments. It is argued that current legal regulation does not contain sufficient criteria for choosing between absorption and cumulative punishments, therefore judicial discretion assumes significant significance. It is noted that the application of the absorption principle in some cases can lead to the de facto nullification of the criminal law significance of individual offenses included in the aggregate, raising reasonable doubts about the achievement of the goals of punishment and the implementation of the principle of justice. Approaches to improving this institution existing in criminal law are considered, including proposals to abandon the absorption principle, limit its scope of application, or expand its scope in certain cases. It is concluded that the practical significance of this sentencing method remains intact, while further improvement of legal regulation is needed. The rationale for more detailed regulation of the grounds for the application of the absorption of penalties and the expansion of the clarifications of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation aimed at ensuring uniformity in judicial practice and compliance with the principles of criminal law is argued

punishment, cumulative offenses, absorption of penalties, addition of penalties, criminal law, criminal liability, judicial discretion, fairness, individualization of punishment, judicial practice

Dolgopolov Kirill Andreevich – Doctor of Sociological Sciences, Candidate of Juridical Sciences, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Criminal Law and Procedure of the Law Institute, North Caucasus Federal University (1, Pushkin st., Stavropol, 355017, Russian Federation), ORCID: 0000-0003-4496-1789, RSCI Author ID: 543535, e-mail: nadal06@mail.ru

Dolgopolov K.A. Problemy primeneniya printsipa pogloshcheniya pri naznachenii nakazaniya po sovokupnosti prestupleniy [Problems of applying the absorption principle in sentences for combination of crimes]. Sibirskij yuridicheskij vestnik [Siberian Law Herald]. 2026, no 3 (114), pp. 75–80. – DOI 10.26516/2071-8136.2026.3.75 (in Russian).

343.24

1. Antonova E.Yu. Princip pogloshcheniya i slozheniya pri naznachenii nakazaniy po sovokupnosti prestupleniy: problemy primeneniya [Principle of absorption and addition in sentencing for multiple crimes: problems of application]. Pravo i gosudarstvo: teoriya i praktika [Law and State: Theory and Practice], 2023, no. 12(228), pp. 417-420. (in Russian)

2. Blagov E.V. Primenenie spetsialnykh nachal naznacheniya ugolovnogo nakazaniya [Application of special principles of criminal sentencing]. Moscow, Yurlitinform Publ., 2007, 288 p. (in Russian)

3. Karpenko L.K., Zelenya N.I. Differentsiatsiya naznacheniya nakazaniya po sovokupnosti prestupleniy po zakonodatelstvu zarubezhnykh stran [Differentiation of sentencing for multiple crimes under the legislation of foreign countries]. Sbornik nauchnykh rabot serii "Pravo" [Collection of Scientific Works of the Series "Law"], 2022, no. 2(26), pp. 123-133. (in Russian)

4. Korotkikh N.N. Primenenie printsipa pogloshcheniya pri naznachenii nakazaniya po sovokupnosti prestupleniy [Application of the principle of absorption in sentencing for multiple crimes]. Problemy prava [Problems of Law], 2014, no. 1(44), pp. 92-96. (in Russian)

5. Kurovskiy S.V., Mishin D.A. Diskussionnye voprosy primeneniya printsipa pogloshcheniya menee strogogo nakazaniya bolee strogim [Debatable issues of applying the principle of absorption of a less severe punishment by a more severe one]. Izvestiya Tulskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ekonomicheskie i yuridicheskie nauki [Proceedings of Tula State University. Economic and Legal Sciences], 2025, no. 2, pp. 56-66. (in Russian)

6. Larina L.Yu. Problemy ugolovno-pravovoy reglamentatsii, naznacheniya nakazaniya i preduprezhdeniya sovokupnosti prestupleniy [Problems of criminal law regulation, sentencing and prevention of multiple crimes]. Moscow, Yurlitinform Publ., 2013, 184 p. (in Russian)

7. Ugolovnoe pravo. Obshchaya chast. Nakazanie. Akademicheskiy kurs. V 10 t. T. 6. Naznachenie nakazaniya [Criminal law. General part. Punishment. Academic course. In 10 vols. Vol. 6. Sentencing]. Ed. by N.A. Lopashenko. Moscow, Yurlitinform Publ., 2021, 736 p. (in Russian)

8. Rakhimkulov D.B. Naznacheniye nakazaniya po sovokupnosti prestupleniy: problemy primeneniya chastey 2 i 3 stat'i 69 UK RF [Sentencing for the Aggregate of Crimes: Issues Regarding the Application of Parts 2 and 3 of Article 69 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation]. Vestnik nauki [Bulletin of Science], 2026, no. 5, pp. 785-789. (in Russian)

9. Stepashin V.M. Algoritm naznacheniya nakazaniya po sovokupnosti prestupleniy i prigovorov [Algorithm for sentencing for multiple crimes and multiple sentences]. Vestnik Omskogo universiteta. Seriya "Pravo" [Bulletin of Omsk University. Series "Law"], 2022, no. 3, pp. 93-97. (in Russian)

10. Yusupova A.D. Problemy naznacheniya nakazaniya po sovokupnosti prestupleniy [Problems of sentencing for multiple crimes]. Dialog [Dialogue], 2025, no. 23, pp. 77-78. (in Russian)