scholarly journals Collective Criminal Liability in the Republic of Poland

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 3-10
Author(s):  
Aleksandr V. Fedorov ◽  
◽  
Petr A. Litvishko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Broad Sense ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Polish Law ◽  
Corporate Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Entities

The article explores collective criminal liability in the Republic of Poland. The analysis of the relevant provisions of Polish law is preceded by a summary of the approaches to the understanding of collective criminal liability abroad, determining the interrelation of the notions of collective criminal liability and corporate criminal liability, defining the content of criminal liability of legal persons in the narrow and broad sense. The paper considers the substantive provisions of the Republic of Poland’s legislation regulating collective criminal liability (criminal liability of legal entities in a broad sense), as well as views of the Polish criminal law doctrine on the nature of such liability and prospects of improving its legal regulation.

scholarly journals The History of the Development of the French Laws on Criminal Liability of Legal Entities

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 46-56
Author(s):  
Aleksandr V. Fedorov ◽  
◽  
Mikhail V. Krichevtsev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Economic Crime ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Entities

The article reviews the history of development of French laws on criminal liability of legal entities. The authors note that the institution of criminal liability of legal entities (collective criminal liability) dates back to the ancient times and has been forming in the French territory for a long time. Initially, it was established in the acts on collective liability residents of certain territories, in particular, in the laws of the Salian Franks. This institution was inherited from the Franks by the law of the medieval France, and got transferred from the medieval period to the French criminal law of the modern period. The article reviews the laws of King Louis XIV as an example of establishment of collective criminal liability: the Criminal Ordinance of 1670 and the Ordinances on Combating Vagrancy and Goods Smuggling of 1706 and 1711. For the first time ever, one can study the Russian translation of the collective criminal liability provisions of the said laws. The authors state that although the legal traditions of collective liability establishment were interrupted by the transformations caused by the French Revolution of 1789 to 1794, criminal liability of legal entities remained in Article 428 of the French Penal Code of 1810 as a remnant of the past and was abolished only as late as in 1957. The publication draws attention to the fact that the criminal law codification process was not finished in France, and some laws stipulating criminal liability of legal entities were in effect in addition to the French Penal Code of 1810: the Law on the Separation of Church and State of December 9, 1905; the Law of January 14, 1933; the Law on Maritime Trade of July 19, 1934; the Ordinance on Criminal Prosecution of the Press Institutions Cooperating with Enemies during World War II of May 5, 1945. The authors describe the role of the Nuremberg Trials and the documents of the Council of Europe in the establishment of the French laws on criminal liability of legal entities, in particular, Resolution (77) 28 On the Contribution of Criminal Law to the Protection of the Environment, Recommendation No. R (81) 12 On Economic Crime, the Recommendation No. R (82) 15 On the Role of Criminal Law in Consumer Protection and Recommendation No. (88) 18 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States Concerning Liability of Enterprises Having Legal Personality for Offences Committed in the Exercise of Their Activities. The authors conclude that the introduction of the institution of criminal liability of legal entities is based on objective conditions and that research of the history of establishment of the laws on collective liability is of great importance for understanding of the modern legal regulation of the issues of criminal liability of legal entities.

Corporate Criminal Liability for the Criminal Offences in Lithuania

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomas Girdenis ◽  
Marius Laurinaitis ◽  
Irmantas Rotomskis ◽  
Raimundas Jurka
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Financial Reports ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Illegal Activities ◽  
Material Advantage ◽  
Corporate Criminal Liability ◽  
Limited Scope ◽  
Legal Entities

Abstract Cases, where operations of legal entities entail unfair income through the malpractice of improving financial reports, are quite frequent. Such behaviour is unacceptable and deserves a stern response from the state, not only against persons involved in illegal activities but also against particular legal entities resorting to such behaviour. The purpose of this article is to analyse the elements of corporate criminal liability in the legislation of Lithuania. The article investigates the fundamentals of corporate criminal liability with the major focus on the problems of distinction and applicability of relevant elements of the latter. The analysis emphasizes the assurance of the inevitability of corporate criminal liability. The article also discusses the method of criminalizing the liability of legal entities, chosen by the Lithuanian legislator, according to which criminal liability can arise only for a limited scope of criminal offences. Presumably, the current legal regulation enables an unreasonable avoidance of criminal liability in cases where the criminal offence falls outside the aforementioned limited scope, even though it was committed to gain a material advantage over the affected party. The article also addresses the guilt of legal entities. In this regard, the article criticizes the approach of the Supreme Court of Lithuania for its evident limitation of corporate criminal liability, especially in the context of large corporations owned by many shareholders. As a possible solution, it was proposed to lay criminal responsibility on corporate governance bodies instead of the shareholders.

scholarly journals Criminal Enforcement Law Policy for Corporate

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dinh Thi Mai
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Enforcement Policy ◽  
Corporate Criminal Liability ◽  
Enforcement Policies ◽  
Legal Entities

Corporate criminal liability remain a very new issue for Vietnam's criminal justice background. Criminal judgment execution and criminal enforcement policy for corporate in Vietnam are still in the process of formulating and forming policies. Therefore, in this article, we study and discuss four factors that are considered the main pillars of criminal law enforcement policies for criminal, including: (1) Impact object of criminal law enforcement policy on corporate; (2) Object of criminal law enforcement policy for corporate; (3) Subjects of criminal law enforcement policies for corporate legal entities; (4) Forms and measures of criminal law enforcement policy for corporate. Keywords: Criminal law enforcement policy; corporate criminal; impact object; object; subject; form and measure of policy. References: Đỗ Đức Hồng Hà (2019). Nhận diện pháp nhân thương mại trong Luật Thi hành án hình sự (sửa đổi). Hội thảo khoa học về Chính sách pháp luật thi hành án hình sự: Những vấn đề lý luận và thực tiễn cấp bách, Học viện Khoa học xã hội, tháng 4 năm 2019.[2] Đinh Thị Mai (2019). Các yếu tố tác động tới chính sách pháp luật thi hành án hình sự đối với pháp nhân thương mại phạm tội. Hội thảo khoa học Chính sách pháp luật thi hành án hình sự: Những vấn đề lý luận và thực tiễn cấp bách, Học viện Khoa học xã hội, tháng 4 năm 2019.[3] Ngô Đức Minh (2019). Trình tự, thủ tục thi hành án và các biện pháp bảo đảm thi hành án cấm kinh doanh, cấm hoạt động trong một số lĩnh vực đối với pháp nhân thương mại. Phiên tọa đàm về thi hành án hình sự đối với pháp nhân thương mại, ngày 28/2-01/3/2019, Ủy ban tư pháp của Quốc hội.[4] Đậu Anh Tuấn (2019). Cơ quan quản lý nhà nước lĩnh vực hoạt động của pháp nhân thương mại và xác định trách nhiệm của cơ quan quản lý nhà nước trong thi hành án đối với pháp nhân thương mại. Phiên tọa đàm về thi hành án hình sự đối với pháp nhân thương mại, ngày 28/2-01/3/2019, Ủy ban tư pháp của Quốc hội.[5] Quốc hội (2015). Bộ luật Dân sự năm 2015.[6] Quốc hội (2014). Luật Doanh nghiệp năm 2014.[7] Văn phòng Quốc hội (2013). Văn bản hợp nhất Luật Chứng khoán số 27/VBHN-VPQH ngày 18 tháng 12 năm 2013. [8] Văn phòng Quốc hội (2013). Văn bản hợp nhất Luật Kinh doanh bảo hiểm số 12/VBHN-VPQH ngày 23 tháng 7 năm 2013. [9] Văn phòng Quốc hội (2018). Văn bản hợp nhất Luật Đầu tư số 06/VBHN-VPQH ngày 29 tháng 6 năm 2018.  

scholarly journals CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF LEGAL ENTITIES IN THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 68-77
Author(s):  
Aleksandr V. Fedorov ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Slovak Republic ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
The Republic ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Legal Entities

The article is dedicated to the general issues of establishment of the criminal liability of legal entities in the Slovak Republic (Slovakia). Similarity of prerequisites for introduction of such liability in the Slovak Republic is noted. Gradual establishment of criminal liability of legal entities in Slovakia is noted, initially it was by means of amendment of the Criminal Code of Slovakia by Law No. 224/2010, which allows for using such “protective measures” as redemption and deprivation of property in relation to legal entities, then it was by means of adoption of Law No. 91/2016 on criminal liability of legal entities. Basic provisions of the Slovak law on criminal liability of legal entities are considered. The attention is paid to the fact that in the Slovak Republic there is a so-called selective criminalization as to the criminal liability of legal entities, when they can be held criminally liable not for all crimes specified in the Criminal Code of the Republic of Slovakia, but only for those of them, which are specified in the special Law No. 91/2016. A list of crimes, for which criminal liability is possible for legal entities, and conditions under which a crime is admitted to be committed by a legal entity, is specified. It is specified, which types of legal entities are foreseen by the Slovak law, and noted that not all of them can be the subjects of criminal liability according to the national laws. The effect of the criminal law is considered in relation to legal entities that have committed crimes in the territory of the Slovak Republic and outside it. The article contains the description of the types of criminal punishments of legal entities, which include: liquidation of the legal entity; deprivation of property; deprivation; penalty; prohibition to carry out activity; prohibition to receive subsidies and grants; prohibition to receive assistance and support from funds of the European Union; prohibition to participate in state procurement; publication of conviction.

scholarly journals Legal entities and criminal law – principles of sanctioning

2013 ◽  
Vol 61 (7) ◽  
pp. 2261-2268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Věra Kalvodová
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Protective Measure ◽  
Corporate Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Entities

The article deals with the issue of sanctioning of legal entities in connection with corporate criminal liability introduced after 1 January 2012. It provides a characterization of the sanctioning system provided for under the Act No. 418/2011 Coll. on the Criminal Liability of Legal Entities and on Proceedings against Them, and deals with the crucial principles governing the imposition of punishments and the protective measure. It further discusses the modifications of the sanctions with respect to legal entities, mainly as regards the principles of legality, purposefulness, adequacy, personality and subsidiarity of criminal repression.

scholarly journals A Comparative Understanding of Criminal Liability Formation for Crimes Against Women in Uzbekistan and Cameroon

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-148
Author(s):  
Dilbar J. Suyunova ◽  
Yana Yu. Koniushenko ◽  
Nana Charles Nguindip
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Sexual Freedom ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Crimes Against Women ◽  
Victims Of Violence ◽  
Expert Study

Women continue to be victims of violence and the violation of their human rights keep being in the increase as they experienced constant hatred on their status. This article analyzes liability for crimes against women under criminal legislations of the Republic of Uzbekistan and Cameroon by assessing the Criminal Codes rules in both countries in terms of identifying its distinctive features of legal regulation conditional to gender and family differences of subjects is provided. Expert study of criminal legislations related to crimes against women plays a facilitating role in identifying not only real scope of criminal law rules, but also determining if there is a gap in law, or legal regulation is insufficiently socially conditioned. Moreover, analysis of genesis of criminal standards on responsibility for crimes against women made it possible to trace changes in law in relation to such objects of criminal law protection as, for example, life, health, sexual freedom and sexual immunity, honor and dignity of woman, interests of family and its members.

scholarly journals Competing Norms on the Confiscation of Property in the Criminal and Criminal Procedure Legislation of the Republic of Belarus and of the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 914-926
Author(s):  
Alexey Lukashov ◽  
Svetlana Sheveleva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
Dual Nature ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Procedure Codes

The confiscation of property is a conventional measure of criminal law impact, therefore, it is included in different normative interpretations of all European states. The legal regulation of the confiscation of property changed in Belarus on July 19, 2019, when it was excluded from the system of punishments and ceased to be applied as a measure of additional punishment. The legislation preserved special confiscation of property acquired as a result of a crime or connected with committing a crime; at the same time, the scope of its application was broadened to include cases of exemption from criminal liability. Special confiscation is determined as a compulsory measure of criminal law character, and not a criminal law measure. A measure that is similar in its content — the confiscation of property — has been in force in Russia since 2006. The authors of the article describe the dual nature of confiscation provided for in the norms of the Criminal Codes and the Criminal Procedure Codes of both countries, as well as the legal ambiguity of these norms. They analyze the legal positions of the Constitutional and the Supreme Courts of Belarus and Russia on the problem of the correlation and application of competing criminal law and criminal procedure norms on confiscations, as well as the court practice of their application, which is contradictory and lacking in uniformity. They recommend how the above-mentioned norms of the Criminal and the Criminal Procedure Codes of Belarus and Russia could be amended. The authors also identify the positive and negative sides of normative regulation of confiscation in both countries and show how Russia and the Republic of Belarus could draw on the positive experience of one another: they give a positive assessment to the absence of a link between special confiscation of property and concrete articles of the Special Part of criminal legislation, as well as to the possibility of using the analyzed measure in cases of exemption from criminal liability without exoneration in Belarus law; Russian law poses a good example of regulating the possibility of seizing not only the property to be confiscated, but also money and other property whose value is proportionate to the value of the property to be confiscated in cases of its absence. It is proven that only the norms of criminal law could act as grounds for the confiscation of property in the Russian Federation (special confiscation in the Republic of Belarus). Criminal procedure norms should just regulate the procedure of applying the norms of criminal law on the confiscation of property (special confiscation).

scholarly journals Pertanggungjawaban Korporasi dalam Tindak Pidana ‎Pencucian Uang menurut Hukum Islam

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 385-407
Author(s):  
Renata Amalia
Keyword(s):  
Money Laundering ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Action ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Article 5 ◽  
Corporate Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Entities

Abstract: This article highlights a corporate responsibility in the crime of money laundering in accordance with Islamic law. Corporate criminal liability set forth in article 6 of Law No. 8 of 2010 which states that in the case of money laundering as defined in Article 3, Article 4 and Article 5 committed by a corporation, crime laid against and/or personnel controlling corporation. Islamic law also recognize the existence of the legal entity or corporation. This is evidenced by the jurists who introduced treasury as the legal agency. It has rights and can take legal action but can not be burdened with responsibility because they do not have the knowledge and choice. So that if a legal agency has committed a crime then a person who should be accountable are administrators or managers of the legal agency. But there are also penalties for legal entities, such as the punishment of dissolution, destruction, eviction and foreclosure.Keywords: Corporate, money laundering, Islamic criminal law. Abstrak: Artikel ini membahas tentang pertanggungjawaban korporasi dalam tindak pidana pencucian uang menurut hukum Islam. Pertanggungjawaban pidana korporasi diatur dalam pasal 6 UU No. 8 tahun 2010 yang menyebutkan bahwa dalam hal tindak pidana pencucian uang sebagaimana dimaksud dalam pasal 3, pasal 4, dan pasal 5 dilakukan oleh korporasi, pidana dijatuhkan terhadap dan/atau personil pengendali korporasi. Hukum Islam juga mengenal adanya badan hukum atau korporasi, hal ini dibuktikan dengan para fuqaha yang mengenalkan baitul mal (perbendaharaan negara) sebagai badan hukum. Badan hukum ini mempunyai hak dan dapat melakukan tindakan hukum tetapi tidak dapat dibebani pertanggungjawaban karena tidak memiliki pengetahuan dan pilihan. Sehingga apabila badan hukum melakukan suatu tindak pidana maka yang dapat dimintakan pertanggungjawaban adalah pengurus atau pengelola badan hukum tersebut, tetapi ada pula hukuman bagi badan hukum, seperti hukuman pembubaran, penghancuran, penggusuran dan penyitaan.Kata Kunci: Korporasi, pencucian uang, hukum pidana Islam

scholarly journals THE LAWS OF LATVIA ON THE CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF LEGAL ENTITIES

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 73-80
Author(s):  
Aleksandr V. Fedorov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Entities

The article is devoted to the issues of criminal liability of legal entities in the Republic of Latvia, established in 2005 by amending the Criminal Law of the Republic of Latvia. Attention is drawn to the fact that in the Latvian legislation a model of criminal liability is implemented, in which a legal entity is recognized not as a subject of a crime, but as a subject of criminal liability, to which measures of a coercive nature provided for by the Criminal Law are applied. At the same time, only legal entities of private law are subject to criminal liability, while the law does not provide for bringing public legal entities to criminal liability. The reasons for the application of enforcement measures to legal entities and the types of such measures are considered. It is indicated that compulsory measures against a legal entity can be applied for a criminal act if it was committed in the interests of the relevant legal entity, in its favor or as a result of improper supervision on its part by a responsible individual who acted individually or as part of a collegial body of a legal entity. In this case, a specially authorized person means a person who acted: on the basis of the right to represent a legal entity or act on its behalf; on the basis of the right to make decisions on behalf of a legal entity; or on the basis of the right to exercise control within a legal entity. The author considers the enforcement measures applied to legal entities (liquidation; restriction of rights; confiscation of property; monetary recovery), as well as criminal procedural issues of the application of compulsory measures to legal entities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document