Punitiveness and Criminal Law-Making Policy. Four Homogeneous Legislative Terms (1996–2011)

2021 ◽  
pp. 189-201
Author(s):  
José Luis Díez-Ripollés
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Law Making

scholarly journals Understanding processes of criminalisation: Insights from an Australian study of criminal law-making

2019 ◽  
pp. 174889581986851 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke McNamara ◽  
Julia Quilter ◽  
Russell Hogg ◽  
Arlie Loughnan ◽  
Heather Douglas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Analytical Approach ◽  
New South ◽  
Democratic Participation ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Australian Study ◽  
South Wales ◽  
Methodological Tool ◽  
Law Making

Criminalisation theory scholars have examined important questions regarding what behaviours should be criminalised and why. More recently, greater attention has been paid to linking normative accounts with empirical and historicised analyses of criminalisation practices. Building on recent work on modalities of criminalisation as a methodological tool for contextual criminalisation research, this article introduces a second analytical approach for better understanding how criminal laws are made: processes of criminalisation. We discuss the findings of a pilot study of 143 criminal law statutes enacted in three Australian jurisdictions (New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria) from 2012–2017. We conclude that a processes approach supports a nuanced appreciation of the conditions under which criminal law statutes are produced, and facilitates scrutiny of whether legislative enactments are evidence-based and a product of meaningful consultation and genuine democratic participation in law-making.

Who Writes Criminal Laws? Actors, Values, and Institutions in Criminal Law-Making / Wer schreibt das Strafrecht? Akteure, Werte und Institutionen der Strafrechts-gesetzbegung

2014 ◽  
Vol 34 (1-2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Hammel
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Structural Difference ◽  
State Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
Expert Control ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Historical Factors ◽  
Penal Law ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Law Making

AbstractThe responses of the U.S. and Europe to increased crime from the 1960s to the 1990s differed starkly: the U.S. enacted a punitive agenda, while penal polity and incarceration rates in Western (and Eastern) Europe remained gener­ally stable. To explain this divergence, many commentators invoke cultural or historical factors such as America’s ‘frontier mentality” or Calvinist religious heritage. This article proposes another focus: differing cultures of criminal law-making. During the Enlightenment, a pattern of expert control over penal law emerged in most European nation-states. The pattern still holds - even today, major changes to penal polity are still entrusted to groups of elite professors, jurists and senior civil servants, who create coherent codes covering the entire national territory. In the United States, no tradition of expert control took hold. Criminal law is made at the state level, there is little emphasis on logical code-drafting and shifting local majorities can pass new criminal laws almost at will This structural difference in who writes criminal laws has far-reaching effects not only on the how crime is defined, but on other factors such as public expectations of the criminal justice system and the values penal legislation is thought to express.

Law-making errors in criminal law

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (149) ◽  
pp. 263-266
Author(s):  
A.A. UMAROVA ◽  
◽  
V.P. LEBEDINSKAYA ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Law Making

scholarly journals Public danger and criteria for its assessment

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 330-335
Author(s):  
R. V. Kilimbaev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
The Social ◽  
Law Making

Public danger is a fundamental sign of any crime, but to date law-making practice has not developed an algorithm to determine the presence or absence of a public danger in an act sufficient to recognize it as criminal. Among legal scholars there is also a lack of consensus on issues of the essence of the social danger of an act and the criteria for its determination. All this gives rise to the inclusion in the criminal law of norms providing for liability for acts whose social danger is very conditional. On the basis of the materials studied in this work criteria are formulated, the establishment of the totality of which allows recognizing the act as socially dangerous and, as a consequence, criminally punishable

scholarly journals Legal discretion in criminal law: general theoretic and branch-wise aspects

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 02015
Author(s):  
Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Nikitin
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
General Law ◽  
General Scientific ◽  
Adequate Evaluation ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Law Making

Pre-requisites: legal discretion in criminal law just as in other branches has only partially been a subject matter of legal analysis. Predominantly, a law-enforcement type of discretion was studied, which is implemented by law-enforcement authorities during criminal prosecution. However, modern surveys in the field of law theory consider discretion as a general law phenomenon including law-enforcement, law-making, and law-interpretation aspects. This suggests the need to study legal discretion in criminal law from new points of view. Moreover, one should also take into account a dual-aspect nature of legal discretion, e.g., a combination of characteristics of the subject implementing discretion and law-regulated relations where this takes place. The research objective is to define an opportunity of affecting subjects implementing individual types of legal discretion (law-enforcement, law-making, and law-interpretation) intended for optimization of the discretion level in criminal law. Methods: a combination of common, general scientific, specific scientific, and specific legal methods. First of all, the paper uses a systemic and functional approach. Results. Legal discretion in legal law is represented by law-enforcement, law-making, and law-interpretation discretion of respective subjects. These types of discretion are interdependent and indissolubly related. Currently, an integrated approach to studying these types of discretions in legal law is poorly discussed in literature. Meanwhile, only this approach allows for a systematic study of legal discretion limits (in general and for individual types) and for adequate evaluation of their efficiency in criminal law.

scholarly journals LIETUVOS AUKŠČIAUSIASIS TEISMAS BAUDŽIAMOJOJE TEISĖKŪROJE

Teisė ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 88 ◽  
pp. 7-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Prapiestis ◽  
M. Girdauskas
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Law Making

Straipsnyje, pasitelkiant naujus šaltinius, išsamiau ir būtent materialiosios baudžiamosios teisės srityje atskleidžiami Aukščiausiojo Teismo dalyvavimo teisėkūroje būdai ir problemos.The article, using new sources, reveals at length ways and problems of taking part in material criminal law making by the Supreme Court of Lithuania.bsp;

Certain tendencies of development of the Russian criminal-law drug abuse policy conditioned by the impact of international treaties, to which the Russian Federation is a party and the membership thereof in international organizations on responsibility for illicit drug trafficking

Narkokontrol ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 3-14
Author(s):  
Aleksandr Vyacheslavovich Fedorov ◽  
◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Drug Trafficking ◽  
Illicit Drug ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Illicit Drug Trafficking ◽  
Law Making

The article concerns some tendencies of development of Russian legislative (law-making, law-establishing) criminal-law antidrug policy conditioned by the impact on development of national criminal-law antidrug policy of international treaties, the party to which is the Russian Federation and the membership thereof in international organizations.

25. EU criminal law

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Criminal Justice Systems ◽  
Practical Necessity ◽  
Ideological Resistance ◽  
Law Making ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines what EU criminal law consists of; the reasons for its existence; and the mechanism by which it is created. It then describes the more important of its practical manifestations. It shows that Member States are torn between the practical necessity for certain problems in the area of criminal law to be dealt with at an EU level, and a deep-seated ideological resistance to this happening. A consequence of this is that the bulk of the EU instruments of which EU criminal law is composed are designed to help and encourage the criminal justice systems of the various Member States to work together, rather than to impose upon them uniform rules of criminal law or criminal procedure devised by EU law-making institutions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document