The right to truth is a phenomenon that appeared in international law after about the 1980s. Its development is associated with the repression of authoritarian governments in Latin America in the context of basic human rights leveling, which received negative reaction from society. The global need for justice and the preservation of a stable world has led to the gradual expansion of the institute to other regions of the world. The uniqueness of the developed methods allowing us to preserve the memory of large-scale crimes against the person in the public consciousness, to improve and fill in the right to receive information (the right to know), makes it possible to talk about the right to the truth as one of the most promising mechanisms of the human rights protection system. The paper attempts to understand the right to the truth at the present stage, the scope of guarantees it contains, and examines particular cases in relation to the right to know the circumstances of crimes, including cases of enforced disappearance, facts about victims, their fate and location, identification of criminals, rights of victims and their families. The right to the truth is a dynamically developing complex institution of international law, a powerful tool in the hands of international justice bodies in the fight against the perpetrators of the most serious crimes and in the prevention of crimes, a tool for the formation of a truly legal, democratic state. It is based on customary international law, supplemented in general terms by special rules of contract law. The incompleteness of material regulation is compensated by the law enforcement activities of international courts. By its legal nature, the right to the truth is based on positive international obligations of states to prosecute, to provide assistance to other states and international bodies, and on negative obligations as a means of prevention.

The paper examines the experience of the United States of America in recording and classifying convicted sexual offenders. The Federal register is a comprehensive criminal and administrative law tool for crime prevention. It has its origins in similar state registers. The author examines the principles of maintaining the register, the grounds for inclusion in the register and exclusion from it, the volume of data to be published, the frequency of data updates, and conducts a criminological characterization of the Institute. The paper analyzes the case law of the Supreme courts of the United States regarding the constitutionality of the rules and principles that form the institution of the registry, their retroactive application, and compliance with procedural and material guarantees of a fair trial. The author concludes that it is possible to introduce a similar Federal register in Russia, but taking into account the shortcomings identified in the study. Currently, the efforts of the legislator in this part are obvious (increasing criminal responsibility for violent sexual crimes with the establishment of restrictions on freedom, the emergence of new tools of "deterrence" in the hands of law enforcement agencies, such as administrative supervision). However, the measures are not comprehensive, often overlap, and do not achieve the stated goal (execution of restrictions under administrative supervision after serving the restriction of freedom). The author believes that it can be an independent institution, implemented from the stage of execution of the sentence, accessible to law enforcement agencies and victims, and in cases provided for by law — for social and educational institutions, guardianship authorities, family and child protection.

With the development of technical capabilities for the exploration and exploitation of the continental shelf, the desire of coastal states to expand the area of their jurisdiction in the "underwater territory" (the territory of the seabed) increased. Thanks to the activism of the judges of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the concept of the continental shelf for the purposes of international maritime law has been significantly developed. As a result, the coastal states signatories to the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea were able to establish the outer limit of the continental shelf, which, under certain conditions, can extend even beyond 350 nautical miles from the baseline.Disputes between states on the continental shelf mainly arise in connection with the need to distinguish between marine areas rich in sources of living and non-living resources. In such cases, it may be necessary to delineate the continental shelf between adjacent States (with a common border) or located opposite each other, i.e. their delimitation under article 83 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea. The subject of the dispute is the external legal boundary of the continental shelf of the state, where it extends beyond 200 nautical miles from the baseline of that state (the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles), adjoins the area that is the common heritage of mankind, outside the jurisdiction of any of the states.On the issue of determining the limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles, the decision of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea of 14.03.2012 "On delimitation of maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar" is of a precedent value, since no international court has previously addressed this issue.