The object of the study is the institution of exemption from criminal liability in Russian law. The subject, in turn, comprises the discretionary grounds for exemption from criminal liability and the mechanisms of their application in light of the articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation that provide for the corresponding grounds and judicial practice. The aim of the research is to identify the content and limits of discretion in making decisions on exemption and to propose a replicable model of law enforcement. Special attention is paid to the essence of discretion in exemption from criminal liability, the analysis of the content of the sub-institution of discretionary exemption from criminal liability, based on the examination of each ground separately. The issue of mediated discretion present in the new provision of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which establishes exemption from criminal liability during mobilization, is also addressed. The methodological basis of the research includes general scientific methods such as analysis, synthesis, induction, and deduction, as well as special legal methods, including formal-legal, systemic-structural, and comparative-legal methods. The main conclusion of the research is the statement that discretionary grounds for exemption from criminal liability operate according to a two-tier model, which presupposes the establishment of corresponding facts and their legal assessment. The research reveals the heterogeneity of discretion, attributed to the presence of so-called "double discretion," as well as mediated discretion. The scientific novelty lies in revealing discretion in exemption from criminal liability. The fact of varying volumes of discretion is demonstrated concerning different norms that provide for the corresponding grounds for exemption. A clear procedure is proposed: establish facts – verify the formal conditions of the norm – assess the factors – choose the aim and norm – provide a detailed justification for the decision. The practical significance lies in increasing the predictability of decisions and reducing the risk of arbitrariness without losing the individualization of the response.
Roman Sergeevich Serenko (Sun,) studied this question.