INTERPRETATION OF HATE IN CRIMINAL LAW OR QUANTUM CRIMINOLOGY

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (77) ◽  
pp. 12
Author(s):  
Jānis Baumanis
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Public Safety ◽  
Public Order ◽  
Great Intensity ◽  
Mental Functioning ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Object A ◽  
Specific Object ◽  
Internal Incentive

In an article about criminology is disclosed not very widespread method related to the hate essence and harmfulness, when it comes to the hate interpretation in criminal justice. Considering that to describe the feelings, emotions and passions is quite complex, the author is using fiction and theological reference for the existing knowledge, to show a hatred as manifestations of emotions existence and harmfulness. As a result, the author comes to the conclusions: 1. Hatred is the human expression of feelings, that is directed against a specific object (a person, a group of people, processes, phenomena), characterized by evil, ill-will and that is persistent, with a great intensity and destructivity. 2. Hatred as a crime motive is not included in any Latvian Criminal Law intended to be as a mandatory element for a criminal offense. 3. A controversial question is whether the religious motive is hatred or intolerance motive. In the author's opinion religious motive is human mental functioning internal incentive, passion, disposition, which is based either on a religion preached values or against opinion expressed by the religion. 4. In the author's opinion the fact about instigation of hatred, is basically a crime target materialization, bringing towards a significant level of harmfulness, as it greatly threatens the legally protected interests of public safety and public order, undermining tolerance and integrity. 5. Deep aversion, fear and hatred, could be materialized into defined action, shown as evidence of wrongdoing, which possess a seriousness of a criminal offense.

scholarly journals Legality Letter of Statement of Khilaf in Indonesia Criminal Justice System

FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 128
Author(s):  
Rugun Romaida Hutabarat
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Criminal Matters

In criminal law, a person charged with a criminal offense may be punished if it meets two matters, namely his act is unlawful, and the perpetrator of a crime may be liable for the indicated action (the offender's error) or the act may be dismissed to the perpetrator, and there is no excuse. The reasons may result in the death or the removal of the implied penalty. But it becomes a matter of how if the Letter of Statement Khilaf is the answer to solve the legal problems. The person who refuses or does not do what has been stated in the letters is often called "wanprestasi" because the statement is categorized as an agreement. The statement includes an agreement which is the domain of civil law or criminal law, so its application in the judicial system can be determined. This should be reviewed in the application of the law, are there any rules governing wrong statements in the criminal justice system. By using a declaration of khilaf as a way out of criminal matters, then the statement should be known in juridical rules. This study uses normative juridical methods, by conceptualizing the law as a norm rule which is a benchmark of human behavior, with emphasis on secondary data sources collected from the primary source of the legislation. The result of this research is that the statement of khilaf has legality, it is based on Jurisprudence No. 3901 K / Pdt / 1985 jo Article 189 Paragraph (1) of Indonesian criminal procedure law. However, this oversight letter needs to be verified in front of the court to be valid evidence, but this letter of error is not a deletion of a criminal offense, because the culpability of the defendant has justified the crime he committed. Such recognition, cannot make it free from the crime that has been committed.Keywords: Legality, Letter of Statement, Criminal Justice System

scholarly journals CORPORATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN INDONESIA ON THE PERSPECTIVE OF COMPARISON

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-154
Author(s):  
Muchammad Chasani
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Corporate Criminal Liability ◽  
Responsibility System

The regulation of corporate criminal liability in Indonesia's criminal justice system is basically a new and still debatable issue. It is said that because in the Criminal Code is not recognized and regulated explicitly about the corporation as a subject of criminal law. This is a natural thing since the WvS Criminal Code still adheres to the principle of "societas delinquere non potest" or "non-potest university delinquere", that is, a legal entity can not commit a crime. Thus, if in a society there is a criminal offense, then the criminal act is deemed to be done by the board of the corporation concerned. Regarding the corporate criminal responsibility system in Indonesia, in the corruption law Article 20 paragraph (1), if the corporation committed a criminal act of corruption, then those responsible for the criminal act shall be the corporation only, the management only, or the corporation and its management. Thus, it can be said that the regulation of corporate criminal liability in the legal system in Indonesia is expressly only regulated in special criminal legislation, because the Criminal Code of WvS still adheres to the principle of "societas delinquere nonpotest" so it is not possible to enforce corporate criminal liability in it.

The Criminalisation of Armed Jihad under French Law: Guilt by Association in the Age of Enemy Criminal Law

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 299-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henri Decœur
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Critical Assessment ◽  
Public Order ◽  
French Law ◽  
Guilt By Association ◽  
Travel Abroad

This article discusses the offence of participation in a terrorist group or conspiracy under French law, as applied by the French criminal justice system to prosecute and convict individuals who travel or attempt to travel abroad to participate in armed jihad. In light of a critical assessment of decisions rendered by French courts in cases involving jihadi fighters, it proposes to reflect on the orientation of the criminal law in matters relating to the participation of European nationals in armed jihad in foreign territory. Expressing concern over the excessive reach of substantive criminal-law provisions and of related prosecutorial policies, the article argues that the current legal framework and newly proposed legislation no longer serve the legitimate objective of protecting public order and safety from a tangible threat, and that the criminal law is at risk of becoming a tool of ideological warfare against designated enemies of the state.

scholarly journals Critical analysis of the object of the crime as an element of the corpus delicti

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-109
Author(s):  
Sergey Veklenko ◽  
Igor' Semchenkov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Social System ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Group Formation ◽  
Public Order ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
External Objects ◽  
Internal Goods ◽  
Constituent Elements

The article provides evidence of the groundlessness of recognizing the object of a crime as an element of the corpus delicti. The substantiation of this conclusion in relation to such types of criminal offenses as preparation for a crime, attempted crime, incitement to a crime, aiding in a crime and the act of the organizer of a criminal offense is carried out by demonstrating that they do not even come into contact with the object of the crime and don’t have a direct impact on it. The proof that the object of the crime is not an integral part of the criminal act, expressed in causing harm, is carried out in two directions - in relation to crimes that harm the internal benefits of a person, for example, his life or health, and in relation to crimes that harm external benefits of people recognized as objects of criminal law protection, in particular, such as public order, public safety, etc. It is shown that the object of a crime in the form of a person’s internal goods cannot be a constituent part of a crime because these benefits are inside of their owner, and he himself is an element of some social group formation (social system), but not an element of a crime committed against him. The argument that external objects of a crime are not an integral part of a crime is based on the results of a detailed analysis of the process of causing harm. The results of such an analysis, carried out using the categories of the part and the whole, demonstrate the fundamental impossibility of isolating any constituent elements (parts) in the process of causing harm. In this process, it is possible to single out only certain of its phases and stages, but not its component parts.

scholarly journals Creating and Maintaining Structural Hindrances to Criminal Justice Control – A Policy Analysis on the Normalisation of Parental Violence as a Crime in Finland

2021 ◽  
pp. 096466392110208
Author(s):  
Riikka Kotanen
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Interpersonal Violence ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Division Of Labour ◽  
Legal Form ◽  
Parental Violence ◽  
Control Policies ◽  
And Control

In the context of home, violence remains more accepted when committed against children than adults. Normalisation of parental violence has been documented in attitudinal surveys, professional practices, and legal regulation. For example, in many countries violent disciplining of children is the only legal form of interpersonal violence. This study explores the societal invisibility and normalisation of parental violence as a crime by analysing legislation and control policies regulating the division of labour and involvement between social welfare and criminal justice authorities. An empirical case study from Finland, where all forms of parental violence were legally prohibited in 1983, is used to elucidate the divergence between (criminal) law and control policies. The analysis demonstrates how normalisation operates at the policy-level where, within the same system of control that criminalised these acts, structural hindrances are built to prevent criminal justice interventions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document