The Need to Update the Research Methodology in Criminal Law Science

Abstract

Introduction. The current state of criminal-political theory requires not only a substantive, but also a methodological renewal. This is both through the active creation of new methods and research directions, and also by utilization of already well established methodological principles. One of these principles, is the principle of unity and the struggle of opposites, which taken together constitute the core of dialectical methodology. This to some extent discredited in the history of Russian science, but its potential has not been fully revealed. Deprived of ideological flair, the study of criminal policy from the point of view of analysing its constituent contradictions is a new and promising area of research in the sphere of domestic legal science. Materials and Methods. The study was carried out using the tradition of dialectical understanding of the content and essence of any social phenomenon. This is by a methodology where its state at each specific moment of time is determined by the content and ratio of the opposites that form this phenomenon. From these positions, the current practice of the implementation of criminal policy and its assessment in modern literature are the subject of research. Results. In the analysis of the system of contradictions in criminal policy, it is promising to single for future independent research, two areas. The first is contradictions in the development and contradictions in the functioning of criminal policy. The second is the representation of the relationship between the opposite characteristics of the functioning of criminal policy at a given moment in time. This develops within a certain interval of policy development and manifests itself as a type of tendency. They can both be presented in the form of several groups that reveal the dialectic of the ideal and the material, the structure and functions of the system, the forthcomingly due and the current existing. Discussion and Conclusion. It is fundamentally important to distinguish between contradictions in the functioning of criminal policy and the subjective assessment of criminal policy itself as contradictory. If the subjective assessment is largely dictated by the ideological position of the observer, then the objective contradictions in the functioning of criminal policy are characterised by the eternal coexistence of opposites and their indestructibility. This presupposes their resolution in the context of the multi-vector development of society on a democratic basis by reaching agreement, and in some cases a compromise. The resolution of contradictions in the functioning of criminal policy should be subordinated not so much to the goal of optimising lawmaking or law enforcement activities, but rather to the goal of minimising crime and protecting constitutional values from criminal threats.