Forced Feeding and Artificial Feeding of Convicts: Terminological Dispute or Substantive Difference

: the article discusses the possibility of replacing the term “forced feeding”, used in Part 4 of Article 101 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation, with the term “artificial feeding”,enshrined in a number of international documents. Results: the term “artificial feeding” is by its nature medical (non-legal) and includes several possible ways of feeding a person in an unnatural way: both prohibited by international acts and permitted by them. At the same time, in the declarations of the World Medical Association (WMA), which specifically regulate the actions of doctors in situations where convicts refuse to take food, “forced feeding” refers to any artificial feeding of a convict carried out against his/her will. In this regard, the inclusion of the term “artificial feeding” in the Penal Code of the Russian Federation without changing the essence of domestic regulation of the problem under consideration is pointless, since such a change will still not ensure compliance of domestic legislation with the WMA recommendations, and the term “artificial feeding” does not fully convey the meaning of the institution established in Part 4 of Article 101 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, although forced feeding can cause physical and moral suffering to convicts, as well as encroach on the autonomy of their personality, it seems inappropriate to exclude the possibility of forced feeding of convicts from legislation, since the institution of forced feeding in the domestic legal system lets the state fulfil its duty to protect the life and health of persons in penitentiary institutions and achieve the goal of correcting convicts.