Pursuant to Article 48 of the Criminal Code of the RA, punishment is a means of state enforcement assigned by court sentence on behalf of the state to the person who has been found guilty of the crime, and is expressed in deprivation or restriction of one’s rights and freedoms, as envisaged by law.

The purpose of punishment is applied to restore social justice, to correct the punished person, and to prevent crimes.

Article 61 of the same Code provides: “A fair punishment is assigned in relation to the person found guilty in the committal of a crime which is determined within the limits of the appropriate article in the Special Part of this Code, taking into account the propositions of the General Part of this Code.”

The type and degree of punishment is determined by the extent of social danger of the crime and its nature, by the characteristic features of the offender, including circumstances mitigating or aggravating the liability or the punishment.

The strictest punishment for the crime is assigned only when the less strict type cannot serve for the purposes of the punishment.

The RA Court of Appeals is entitled to annual the judgment of the Administrative Court in the following cases when:

1. The court of the first instance failed to meet the general principles of infliction.
2. The court of the first instance failed to consider the type and degree of punishment determined by the extent of social danger of the crime and its nature, by the characteristic features of the offender, including circumstances mitigating or aggravating the liability or the punishment.
3. Failure to consider the above mentioned circumstances by the court of the first instance caused a stricter (disproportionate) punishment for the crime.

The Court of Appeal must reason its decision by indicating which type and degree of punishment, or which extent of social danger of the crime and its nature, by the characteristic features of the offender, including circumstances mitigating or aggravating the liability or the punishment were not considered by the court of the first instance.

That is if the Court of Appeals finds that the punishment indicated in the judgment is unjust, apparently strict or lenient, it should provide reasoning of what the court considers evidence of strictness of lenient character of the punishment.

Source: Iravaban.net