The article analyzes the development of the doctrine of judicial discretion in the history of criminal law. It has been proven that most of the modern theories of judicial discretion are integrative in nature, reflected in modern criminal codes. For example, the French Criminal Code of 1992 relies on the ideas of the school of “new social protection” and on the concepts and institutions developed by the classical school (in the case of the classification of criminal acts, guilt, insanity). The same can be said about the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which, together with the consolidation of the institutions of the classical school of criminal law (the institution of guilt, insanity, the need to comply with the severity of the crime), also contains the institutions of the school of “new social protection” (the need to take into account the identity of the culprit, the circumstances mitigating and aggravating punishment, release from punishment and its further serving, etc.). As for the issue of judicial discretion in the legislation of Ukraine, it should be noted that the interest of researchers in this issue arose after the collapse of the USSR. In Soviet jurisprudence, the doctrine of judicial discretion has long been harshly criticized. It was believed that any legal problem can have only one legal solution. therefore, almost no research was done on judicial discretion. In our time, interest in this issue has arisen due to the comprehensive transformations that have taken place in the socio-economic system of Ukraine, changes in the nature and direction of legal relations, the formation of new legal thinking, the growth of public activity. And in a situation where the courts, guided by the initial principles of the rule of law, are obliged, at their discretion, to find grounds for solving cases by analogy or on the basis of general principles of justice, reasonableness, honesty, the problem of judicial discretion acquires particular urgency and urgency.
1. Platon. Zakony [Laws]. M. : Mysl’, 1999. 832 p. 2. Aristotel’. Nikomakhova etika [Nicomachean ethics]. M. : Mysl’, 1983. 830 p. 3. Anners E. Istoriya yevropeyskogo prava [History of European law]. M. : Eksmo, 1993. 396 p. 4. Istoriya gosudarstva i prava zarubezhnykh stran [History of state and law of foreign countries] / Pod red. Krasheninnikovoy i O. A. Zhidkova. M. : NORMA-INFRA, 2004. 624 p. 5. Foma Akvinskiy. Summa teologii [Sum theologians]. URL : http://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3897119. 6. Montesk’ye Sh. Persidskiye pis’ma [Persian letters]. M. : Gospolitizdat, 1956. 399 p. 7. Kant I. Spor fakul’tetov [Dispute of faculties]. M. : Choro, 1994. 495 p. 8. Gegel’ G. V. F. Filosofiya prava [Philosophy of Law]. M. : Mysl’,1990. 443 p. 9. Gegel’ G. V. F. Fenomenologiya dukha [Phenomenology of spirit]. SPb. : Nauka, 1992. 444 p. 10. Ferri E. Ugolovnaya sotsiologiya [Criminal sociology]. SPb. : Izdatel’stvo “Prosveshcheniye”, 1910. 454 p. 11. Reshetnikov F. Ugolovnoye pravo burzhuaznikh stran [Criminal law of bourgeois countries]. M. : UDN, 1966. 99 p. 12. List F. Uchebnik ugolovnogo prava. Obshchaya chast’ [Textbook of criminal law. A common part]. M. : Izdatel’stvo Tip. A. I. Mamontova, 1903. 334 p. 13. Ansel’ M. Novaya sotsial’naya zashchita (Gumanisticheskoye dvizheniye v ugolovnoy politike) [New social protection (Humanistic movement in criminal policy)]. M. : Izdatel’stvo “Progress”, 1970. 312 p.