scholarly journals Jake and Josie Get Drunk and Hook Up: An Exploration of Mutual Intoxication and Sexual Assault

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Scott
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Assault ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Bodily Integrity ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Valid Consent ◽  
Lower Courts

In R. v. Daviault, the Supreme Court of Canada recognized a defence of extreme intoxication to general intent offences, including sexual assault. In the aftermath of Daviault, Parliament swiftly enacted section 33.1 of the Criminal Code. While the lower courts are divided on the constitutionality of section 33.1, its operation precludes a defence of extreme intoxication for some general intent offences. Thus, intoxication can prevent the complainant from giving valid consent, but cannot prevent the accused from forming the necessary intent. How should criminal liability be determined where two individuals become voluntarily intoxicated to the point of incapacity and engage in sex? In theory, the criminal law is committed to the protection of the bodily integrity of all individuals and to the punishment of only the morally blameworthy. However, this article argues that the law’s treatment of mutual voluntary intoxication violates these core principles of our 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.

scholarly journals Criminal Misconduct: An Objective Need or a Declared Necessity?

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 142-154
Author(s):  
N. Yu. Skripchenko ◽  
S. V. Anoshchenkova
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The actively defended idea of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the inclusion of an offencse  of criminal misconduct in the criminal legislation was reflected in the revised draft federal law submitted to the  Parliament on October 13, 2020. The purpose of the study is to determine the key changes in the content of the  institutions of criminal misconduct and other measures of a criminal law nature proposed for consolidation in the  Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, to assess the objective need of the reforms initiated by the Supreme  Court of the Russian Federation. The methodological basis is a set of methods of scientific knowledge. General  scientific (analysis and synthesis, dialectics) and specific scientific research methods (system structural, formal legal)  were used. A comparative analysis of draft laws allows us to classify the substantive content of acts constituting a  criminal misconduct as key changes and the modification of other measures of a criminal legal nature. The authors  critically assess the idea underlying the classification of acts as criminal misconduct. By laying in the criteria for  the isolation of acts that are minimal in terms of the degree of danger, not legally significant elements of corpus  delicti, but the types and amount of punishments, the lack of criminal experience, the interests of the business  community, the developers of the draft law violate the system of law, since the proposed approach excludes the  assessment of the public danger of the act based on the significance of the protected by the criminal the law of  public relations. The meaning of the differentiation of criminal liability declared by the initiator of the reforms is  lost with the proposed duplication of other measures applied both to persons who have committed a criminal  misconduct and to those guilty of committing crimes of small or medium gravity, and the proposed conditional  nature of other measures levels the idea of liberalizing the criminal law. The paper focuses on the provisions of  the project that require revision and additional comprehension.

scholarly journals Consequences of failure to pay a court fine

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 639-650
Author(s):  
Nina Yu. Skripchenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legislative Regulation

The article discusses issues that arose during enforcement of the new grounds for exemption from criminal responsibility, enshrined in 2016, in connection with a court fine (Article 76.2 of the Criminal Code). Despite the criticism of its legislative regulation, demand for a new way of ceasing criminal prosecution began to appear in connection with the non-payment of a fine. Having determined the voluntary execution of a court fine, the legislator did not settle the issue of the further execution of the fine in cases where there are valid reasons for non-payment. After analyzing the existing proposals to solve this problem, the author confirms that the elimination of the gap would be facilitated by the legislative obligation of the bailiff to establish the circumstances by which the judicial penalty is not paid, as well as the addition of the list of decisions made by the bailiff to suspend enforcement proceeding. Analysis of judicial practice showed that Art. 76.2 of the Criminal Code began to be applied in cases where the court has justification for implementing less onerous grounds for the defendant to be exempt from criminal liability. Legislative duplication of the conditions under which criminal prosecution can be terminated for various reasons calls into question the wide alternative of the latter, as well as the embodiment of the idea of humanizing criminal law, which is the basis for securing a new ground for exemption from criminal liability. The article substantiates the proposal to supplement the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court dated June 27, 2013 with a provision allowing the release of a person from criminal responsibility with a judicial fine in cases where the court has no basis for suspending criminal prosecution for unconditional types of exemption from criminal liability. The author draws attention to the gap in the legislation, part 3 of Article 78 of the Criminal Code, which is related to the renewal of the statute of limitations for criminal liability when an individual avoids paying a court fine.

scholarly journals FORMATION OF THE UKRAINIAN LEGAL DOCTRINE CONCERNING QUALIFICATION OF THE CRIMINAL OFFENSES COMMITTED BY THE ORGANIZED CRIMINAL GROUPS IN CONTEXT OF AMENDING CHANGES TO LEGISLATION ON CRIMINAL LAW

2021 ◽  
pp. 112-116
Author(s):  
D. Ptaschenko
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Groups

The Article 1 of the Constitution of Ukraine regulates: Ukraine is a sovereign and independent, democratic, social, legal state. One of the destabilizing factors in building the rule of law is the commission of criminal offenses by organized criminal groups. Due to the changes in the criminal legislation during the last two years, the criminal law norms have undergone significant changes, which directly or indirectly affect the qualification of criminal offenses committed by organized criminal groups. Given the changes in criminal law, the qualification of criminal offenses committed by organized criminal groups requires uniform systemic approaches, primarily at the level of judicial law enforcement practice. The formation of the Ukrainian legal doctrine on the qualification of criminal offenses committed by organized criminal groups is one of the significant auxiliary guidelines in the formation of such law enforcement practice. To achieve this goal and the defined objectives, the following methods were applied in the study: logical and normative – for the analysis of criminal law on the qualification of criminal offenses committed by organized criminal groups; system analysis – when considering judicial law enforcement practice (first of all, the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of Ukraine) of the qualification of criminal offenses committed by organized criminal groups. The legislation strengthens criminal liability for criminal offenses by organized criminal groups, in particular, as evidenced by the amendments to the Criminal Code under the Law of Ukraine "On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine on Liability for Crimes Committed by the Criminal Community" dated by the 4th of June 2020. Before the formation of new approaches to the doctrine of criminal law and law enforcement judicial practice on the qualification of criminal offenses (crimes), a specific part of which is provided by h.ch. 1-5 art. 255 of the Criminal Code, the indirect reference is the provision of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Ukraine of December 23, 2005 №12 "On the practice of consideration by courts of criminal cases on crimes committed by stable criminal groups." Keywords: criminal offenses, criminal community, criminal organization, organized group, creation of a criminal community, leadership of a criminal community, organized criminal groups.

Bedford and the Structure of Section 7

2015 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 575-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamish Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Sex Work ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Proportional Limit ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Policy Objectives ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Relationship

In Canada (A.G.) v. Bedford, the Supreme Court of Canada invalidated three prostitution-related provisions of the Criminal Code on grounds of overbreadth and gross disproportionality. The implications of Bedford go well beyond the particular context of sex work and even of criminal law. First, the Court held that the three constitutional norms against overbreadth, arbitrariness, and gross disproportionality are distinct from each other rather than aspects of a single norm against overbreadth. Second, the Court held that a Charter applicant could establish a violation of section 7 by showing that a law is overbroad, arbitrary, or grossly disproportionate in its impact on the life, liberty, or security of only one person and that the effectiveness of the law in achieving its policy objectives was not relevant to these norms. There are some difficulties in understanding this highly individualistic approach to section 7, and those difficulties lead to the third implication. By deferring any consideration of the effectiveness of the law to the question of whether it is a proportional limit on a section 7 right, the Court may be indicating a willingness to do something it has never done before: recognize an infringement of a section 7 right as a justified limit under section 1. The Court’s clarification of the relationship between the norms against overbreadth, arbitrariness, and gross disproportionality is welcome, but its individualistic articulation of those norms is difficult to understand and its suggestion that section 7 violations may now be easier to save under section 1 is troubling.

MAIN SPECIFICATIONS OF ASSESSING ACTIVITIES OF MINOR IMPORTANCE OF IN MODERN CRIMINAL LAW

Law and World ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-95
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Other ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Minor Importance ◽  
Detailed Review

The research includes the full and the detailed overview of assessing activities of minor importance in Georgian Criminal Law. The Article 7 of the Criminal Code of Georgia states the following: a crime shall not be an action that, although formally containing the signs of a crime, has not produced, for minor importance, the prejudice that would require criminal liability of its perpetrator, or has not created the risk of such harm. The research includes the main criteria of defining activities as activities of minor importance. The detailed review of Georgian case law is also introduced, as well as, legislation, judicial literature and experience of the other European countries.

Killing through negligence and its distinction with other kinds of murder

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimir Myslivyy ◽  
Angelina Mykyta
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The State ◽  
Sufficient Information ◽  
Main Body ◽  
Common Features ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Common

Problem setting. According to Art. 27 of the Constitution of Ukraine, everyone has an inalienable right to life, no one can be arbitrarily deprived of life, and the state, in turn, is obliged to protect human life. Protection of a person’s life, as a duty of the state, is manifested in the establishment of criminal liability, enshrined in Section II “Criminal offenses against life and health of a person” of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, who commit socially dangerous acts. whether there are criminal offenses and what punishments they should be committed. The distinction between crimes such as premeditated murder and negligent deprivation of another’s life is important, as criminal law theory still does not have sufficient information on this issue and does not have a complete list of features of the above crimes, but we tried to identify them in our article. Target of research. Deepening their knowledge on the caution of a person’s life due to inconsistency and drawing the line between possible offenses and conditional authority, clarifying the special characteristics of the perpetrator and the victim, outlining the essential features of the perpetrator and the victim, and researching the regulation of negligent proposal of a new version of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. Analysis of resent researches and publications. The theoretical basis for the study of the problem of murder through negligence are the works of legal scholars, in particular, M. Bazhanov, V. Borisov, S. Borodin, V. Glushkov, O. Gorokhovskaya, I. Zinchenko , V. Tyutyugin, O. Us, E. Kisilyuk, V. Kuts, M. Yefimov, S. Likhova, V. Stashis, V. Shablisty and others. Article’s main body. According to Art. 3 of the Constitution of Ukraine, man, his life and health, honor and dignity, inviolability and security are recognized in Ukraine as the highest social value. Given this constitutional provision, the legislator should pay special attention to the criminal law protection of human life and health as the most important public relations. So it is no coincidence that considering such encroachments as one of the most dangerous in the criminal law dimension, the legislator established criminal liability for their commission in Section II “Criminal offenses against life and health” of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. Due to the high public danger and the high prevalence of criminal offenses against human life and health, criminal law theory and law enforcement practice are under increasing scrutiny. Thus, the analysis of judicial practice in recent years shows that, for example, among all murders (Articles 117-119 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) the number of persons convicted of deprivation of life due to negligence is about 15 percent annually. In our opinion, it is also advisable to analyze the concept of “murder” by comparing the common and distinctive features of the offenses referred to in Art. Art. 115 and 119 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. According to scientific results, we can conclude that these offenses have many common features. It is possible to understand the common features and preconditions for the spread of these types of offenses. Conclusions and prospects for the development. A study of issues related to the criminal law analysis of murder through negligence and its difference from other types of murder, shows that these acts encroach on the identical object, which is “human life as a set of social relations.” Unfortunately, nowadays the dynamics of offenses committed in Art. Art. 115 and 119 is intensifying, so consideration of their delimitation and characterization of their features is very important. The study examines the main features of these types of crimes, as well as analyzes some provisions of national law and proposes some adjustments to them.

Suspended Sentence and Placement in a Special Educational Institution: Features of Application and Correlation in the Context of the Systematic Nature of Criminal Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 267-271
Author(s):  
Vаleria A. Terentieva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Educational Institution ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Simultaneous Application ◽  
Closed Type ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Regulation

The systematic nature of criminal law forms the main features of the industry, namely: normativity, universalism, that is, the absence of casuistry and obligation. The strict consistency of both the entire industry and its individual institutions allows avoiding the redundancy of criminal law regulation, clearly determining the legal status of a person in conflict with the law. However, the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation do not always meet these requirements due to defects in legal technology, and, sometimes, gaps in regulation. In practice, the courts, in an effort to minimize the above defects, sometimes resort to excessive criminal law regulation; as an example, the article gives the ratio of the application of suspended sentence and placement in a special educational institution of a closed type. The article analyzes sentences to minors in which Art. 73 and Part 2 of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation were simultaneously applied in one sentence for the same act. For a comprehensive study, the article analyzed sentences to minors held in special educational institutions of a closed type for the period from 2014 to 2020, criminal statistics posted on the website of the Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, as well as various points of view of leading legal scholars. The research methods of static observation, analysis and synthesis, the system-structural method, as well as a number of factographic methods, were used. The study develops from the general to the specific, i.e., first, systematicity is analyzed as a property of the branch of criminal law and then as a property of a legal institution, namely, the release of minors from criminal liability. Consistency as a property of the institution of exemption from criminal punishment presupposes the impossibility of intersecting elements within one institution. Special attention is paid to the legal nature of suspended sentence as the most common punishment measure for minors, and its effectiveness. Then the cases of the simultaneous application of Art. 73 and Part 2 of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are analyzed. In the course of the study, the author examines the features of suspended sentence and placement in a special educational and educational institution of a closed type, compares these two forms of criminal liability, and highlights the differences. The conclusion is that the simultaneous placement in a special educational institution of a closed type and suspended sentence are a redundancy of criminal law regulation. The article raises the question of the need to improve the Criminal Code in terms of the development of placement in a special educational and educational institution of a closed type as a type of exemption from criminal punishment: the court is to be provided with the opportunity to control the juvenile offender’s correctional process.

scholarly journals Criminal Liability and Artificial Intelligence: Theoretical and Applied Aspects

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 564-574 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zarina Khisamova ◽  
Ildar Begishev
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Industrial Revolution ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Design Development ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Active Involvement ◽  
Self Learning

The humanity is now at the threshold of a new era when a widening use of artificial intelligence (AI) will start a new industrial revolution. Its use inevitably leads to the problem of ethical choice, it gives rise to new legal issues that require urgent actions. The authors analyze the criminal law assessment of the actions of AI. Primarily, the still open issue of liability for the actions of AI that is capable of self-learning and makes a decision to act / not to act, which is qualified as a crime. As a result, there is a necessity to form a system of criminal law measures of counteracting crimes committed with the use of AI. It is shown that the application of AI could lead to four scenarios requiring criminal law regulation. It is stressed that there is a need for a clear, strict and effective definition of the ethical boundaries in the design, development, production, use and modification of AI. The authors argue that it should be recognized as a source of high risk. They specifically state that although the Criminal Code of the Russian Fe­deration contains norms that determine liability for cybercrimes, it does not eliminate the possibility of prosecution for infringements committed with the use of AI under the general norms of punishment for various crimes. The authors also consider it possible to establish a system to standardize and certify the activities of designing AI and putting it into operation. Meanwhile, an autonomous AI that is capable of self-learning is considerably different from other phenomena and objects, and the situation with the liability of AI which independently decides to undertake an action qualified as a crime is much more complicated. The authors analyze the resolution of the European Parliament on the possibility of granting AI legal status and discuss its key principles and meaning. They pay special attention to the issue of recognizing AI as a legal personality. It is suggested that a legal fiction should be used as a technique, when a special legal personality of AI can be perceived as an unusual legal situation that is different from reality. It is believed that such a solution can eliminate a number of existing legal limitations which prevent active involvement of AI into the legal space.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document