As a last resort, criminal law must respond to unlawful behavior by ensuring security and protecting fundamental human rights and freedoms (e.g. life and health, honor and dignity, privacy, freedom of speech and freedom of movement). The legislator’s efforts should aim to align legal norms with a holistic, humanistic concept that is balanced and proportionate in relation to the subjects of criminal legal relations (the person who committed the criminal offence, the victim, and third parties).

The study aims to establish criteria for proportional treatment in criminal law and to assess the disproportionate and inhumane nature of certain punishments and responses, considering the views of Academician V. Stashis and contemporary circumstances. The proportionality of the response is considered within the framework of the humanistic paradigm, which has a balanced focus on all subjects of criminal legal relations. The humanistic paradigm is discussed in detail in the author’s previous works. Through the prism of this paradigm, the concept of a proportional response to a person’s behavior, and how this interacts with the principles of criminal law, is considered. To achieve this goal, the concept of compliance with the “proportionality test” is used, supplemented by the way society perceives the means of response.

The article examines proportionality within the framework of the principles of criminal law, particularly humanism, legality and justice. The necessity and proportionality of the humanization of criminal legislation are substantiated. The content of proportionality in terms of punishments is revealed. It is demonstrated that political expediency and populism undermine the legitimacy and proportionality of criminal law.

It is concluded that, when imposing penalties, it is necessary to adhere to the European triad of principles: “effectiveness, proportionality and deterrent character”. It has been found that the death penalty is not only inhumane, but also disproportionate in terms of necessity, sufficiency and compliance with legitimate goals. Furthermore, it is ineffective and does not deter crime, as evidenced by studies of its application. Furthermore, indefinite restrictions on human rights and freedoms in connection with the commission of a criminal or other offence do not align with these principles.

It is argued that criminal law should continue to expand in a balanced and reasonable manner, incorporating incentive norms and alternative types of punishment unrelated to the deprivation of liberty, as part of the humanization of individuals who have committed criminal offences, with proportional and balanced consideration of the interests of other subjects of criminal law relations.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Babanly R, Pryznachennia pokarannia v Ukraini: teoretyko-prykladni zasady (Polihraf 2019) (in Ukrainian).

2. Horokh O, Kolomiiets S, Zasady zvilnennia vid pokarannia za kryminalnym pravom Ukrainy (Norma prava 2025) (in Ukrainian).

3. Khavroniuk M, Dystsyplinarna vidpovidalnist za koruptsiini ta pov’iazani z koruptsiieiu pravoporushennia. Zakonodavstvo. Praktyka. Propozytsii (Dakor 2025) (in Ukrainian).

4. Kostenko O, “Novi ochi” dlia novoho chasu (pro sotsialnyi naturalizm) (Teren 2022) (in Ukrainian).

5. Kostenko O, Sotsialnyi naturalizm. Pro sotsialnu pryrodu ta yii zakony (Petrash K. T. 2019) (in Ukrainian).

6. Kostenko O, U svitli sotsialnoho naturalizmu (vybrane) (Palyvoda A. V. 2020) (in Ukrainian).

7. Ponomarenko Yu, Novely u systemi ta vydakh pokaran za KK Ukrainy v umovakh voiennoho stanu (Vaite 2025) (in Ukrainian).

8. Shevchenko S, Pryntsyp proportsiinosti u kryminalizatsii diian (Dakor 2024) (in Ukrainian).

9. Timofieieva L, Humanistychna paradyhma: dosvid, vyklyky ta perspektyvy kryminalnoho prava Ukrainy (Pravo 2020) (in Ukrainian). Edited books

10. Baulin Yu, ‘Kryminalna vidpovidalnist ta pokarannia v rishenniakh Konstytutsiinoho Sudu Ukrainy: Tezy vystupu do kruhloho stolu, prysviach. 80-richchiu z dnia narodzh. prof. S. S. Yatsenka (23 hrudnia 2016 r.)’, Baulin Yu, Siahnuvshy vershyny, prodovzhuiu put…: (do 70-richchia vid dnia narodzhennia) (O Petryshyn, V Beschasnyi (uklad) VAITE 2023) 637–646 (in Ukrainian).

11. Panov M, Vybrani pratsi z problem pravoznavstva (S Kharytonov (vidp. za vyp.), Pravo 2020) (in Ukrainian).

12. Stashis V, Vybrani pratsi (V Tatsiy (red), Pravo 2015) (in Ukrainian).Journal articles

13. Mozol S, Polishchuk H, Ternavska A, ‘Perspectives for the imposition of individual types of punishment in Ukraine’ (2021) 9 Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law 130–135 https://doi. org/10.32849/2663-5313/2021.9.19.

14. Tuliakov V, ‘Victimization and Victim-Oriented Development of Ukrainian Doctrine of Criminal Law through European Union Dimensions’ [2024] 62(2) International Annals of Criminology 426–447. DOI: 10.1017/cri.2024.22.

15. Horbachova I, ‘Uhody pro prymyrennia ta vyznannia vynuvatosti: indulhentsii chy zasoby zaokhochennia’ 4(37) [2022] Pravova pozytsiia 214–245 (in Ukrainian).

16. Stashis V, ‘Osnovni novely novoho Kryminalnoho kodeksu Ukrainy’ [2003] 2–3(33–34) Visnyk Akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy 614 (in Ukrainian).

17. Timofieieva L, ‘“Pravo na nadiiu” zasudzhenoho do dovichnoho pozbavlennia voli VS pravo na bezpeku suspilstva ta poterpiloi osoby’ [2023] 20 Visnyk asotsiatsii kryminalnoho prava Ukrainy 87–109 https://doi.org/10.21564/2311-9640.2023.20.292398 (in Ukrainian).

18. Khylchenko A, ‘Pryntsyp proportsiinosti pry pryznachenni pokarannia ta zvilnenni vid yoho vidbuvannia v umovakh voiennoho stanu’ [2024] 7 Yurydychnyi naukovyi elektronnyi zhurnal 373 https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0374/2024-7/90 (in Ukrainian). Newspaper articles

19. Albul S, ‘Tramp nakazav posylyty zastosuvannia smertnoi kary u stolytsi SShA za osoblyvo tiazhki zlochyny’ (Livyi bereh 26 veresnia 2025) (accessed 20.10.2025) (in Ukrainian).