The subject of the study is penitentiary security as a legal and organizational system for the prevention, detection, and suppression of extremist manifestations in places of detention. The paper analyzes the interaction of regime, preventive, operational, and procedural mechanisms that ensure early diagnosis of threats, limitation of the resource base for extremist activities, and lawful, evidence-based responses to unlawful actions. Special attention is paid to the distinction between beliefs and unlawful behavior, as well as the risks of stigmatization, discrimination, and erroneous qualification. The aim of the research is to develop a constructive risk-oriented model that integrates the administrative decisions of institutions with procedural guarantees and the rights of prisoners to prevent the escalation of violence, reduce the influence of informal extremist networks, and ensure a balance between security, legality, individualization of measures, and compliance with standards of treatment of prisoners. System-structural analysis, a comparative legal approach to models for the prevention of ideologically motivated offenses, and logical-legal modeling of management procedures using risk-oriented threat assessment and principles of dynamic security were employed. The scientific novelty of the research lies in the justification of a two-component architecture of penitentiary security, which includes "structural barriers" – organizational and regime measures that block channels of recruitment, funding, and coordination – and "procedural barriers" that ensure standardized recording of facts, evidentiary basis, proportionality, and verifiability of responses. A three-tier model is proposed, incorporating early detection, containment, and resocialization, with a system of indicators focused on a set of objective facts rather than beliefs per se. Additionally, principles for dividing competencies between institution administrations and investigative bodies are formulated, eliminating the substitution of criminal processes with disciplinary measures. Practical conclusions include recommendations for implementing a risk matrix, training personnel, developing dynamic security, and post-penitentiary support while strictly complying with human rights and reducing the risk of violent escalation.
El'vin Safa ogli Sailov (Sun,) studied this question.