Conceptualizatio criminologica institutionis rehabilitationis personarum iniuste damnatarum in paradigma iurium humanorum

The phenomenon of wrongful conviction in contemporary legal systems underscores the effectiveness of mechanisms for restoring violated human rights and the responsibility of the state for judicial errors. In the context of increasing attention to fair trial standards, the institution of rehabilitation of wrongfully convicted persons acquires particular significance not only as a procedural legal means of overturning unjust judgments, but also as a complex legal and criminological instrument aimed at safeguarding human dignity and restoring social justice. The subject of the research is the institution of rehabilitation of wrongfully convicted persons within the human rights paradigm, with an emphasis on its criminological nature, functional purpose, and role in the system of guarantees for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The purpose of the study is to develop a criminological concept of rehabilitation based on an analysis of its genesis, normative content, and doctrinal approaches, taking into account international human rights standards. The methodological framework of the research is based on general scientific and special legal methods of cognition, including analysis and synthesis, the systemic-structural method, the formal legal method, the comparative legal method, and the criminological method, which ensure a comprehensive understanding of rehabilitation as a multidimensional legal phenomenon. The relevance of the study is determined by the persistence of structural risks of wrongful conviction even in states with well-developed legal institutions, as well as by the insufficient conceptualization of rehabilitation within the criminological dimension. The scientific novelty of the research lies in substantiating rehabilitation as an independent criminological category that integrates restorative, compensatory, and preventive functions. The results of the study demonstrate that wrongful convictions have a complex criminological nature and are caused by a combination of procedural violations, institutional dysfunctions, and evidentiary deficiencies. The expediency of distinguishing between a narrow (procedural) and a broad (socio-legal) interpretation of rehabilitation is substantiated. An original conceptual approach to the grounds for rehabilitation is proposed, defining them as a set of legally significant and socially conditioned circumstances, the establishment of which confirms the unlawfulness or groundlessness of criminal prosecution and gives rise to a positive obligation of the state to ensure the full restoration of the legal and social status of the individual. The practical significance of the findings lies in their potential application to improving criminal procedural legislation, law enforcement practice, and the formation of criminological policy in the field of preventing judicial errors and protecting human rights. It is concluded that the effective functioning of the institution of rehabilitation serves as a criterion of the democratic maturity of a rule-of-law state and as a necessary condition for the humanization of criminal justice.