At the beginning of the 20th century, the classical philosophy of punishment in Western Europe underwont a crisis. Repressive punishment, intended to be proportinate with the crime committed, proved to be an ineffective deterrent against crime. This was particularly true in the cases of recidivists and juvenile offenders. Consequently, then the contemporary concept of fairness and faith in just retribution wers shaken. New philosophical and sociological ideas entered public thinking and it was realized that the increase in the crime rate stemmed from contradictions in the socio-economic power structure. The overwhelming majority of offenders belonged to the lowest social strata who were so negatively affected by the great forces of developing capitalism. It was the malfunctions of this development/unemployment, lack of social welfare and health programs, etc./which forced this lower strata to the fringes of society. When these new causes of crimes were acknowledged it seemed, in the light of non-determinist philosophy, the search for proportionality and justice in the spheres of criminal responsibility became more and more illusory. The school of sociology, which emerged an alternate philosophy, unfolded a banner bearing the old Aristotle thesis, “to treat inequale as equals, is the breatest injustice”. The determinist responsibility-concept of the new trend, with its conceptions about the social nature of crime, and corresponding criminal policy, especially the special preventive protective system, provided far greater possibilities for a socialist policy, then taking shape, than the theory of classical responsibility and system of institutions did. In Western European countries, this new concept of criminal-policy managed initially to break through the barriers of the classical system to enter into practice with. juvenile and recidivist offenders. Early experiences with these two categories of offenders were favourably received in Western European countries.