scholarly journals Corporate Criminal Liability in India

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-48
Author(s):  
Pradeep Kumar Singh
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Money Laundering ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Corporate Crime ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Strict Liability ◽  
Business Environment ◽  
Corporate Body ◽  
Corporate Criminal Liability

In 21st Century, crimes committed by corporate bodies are creating more serious challenge for criminal justice system. Some vested interests which are controlling affairs of corporate bodies misuse the corporate body for commission of criminal acts to maximise profit. Corporate body is conferred with legal personality for regulation of its functions but it does not have physical body and mind of its own, thereby, problem arises for holding corporate body as criminal, and further, in imposition of criminal liability. Corporate criminal activities badly affect environment, health, safety and infra-structure development. Corporate entities are involved in corruption, forgery, money laundering, foreign exchange violations, money laundering, tax evasions, benami property transactions and other economic offences. Proper formulation of criminal justice actions and effective enforcement of corporate criminal liabilities are modern criminal justice requirements. Corporate bodies are business entities; economic wellbeing of society, prosperity of citizenry and development of nation depend on freedom of trade, amicable business environment and least regulation of corporate entities. Hereby, in determination and imposition of corporate criminal liability for betterment of society, it is necessary to make balance between to take stern actions to tackle corporate crimes and to take care to not hamper legitimate activities of corporate bodies. Law relating to corporate criminal liability in India will be analysed in this paper. Keywords: Criminal Justice System, Corporate crime, Corporate criminal liability, Natural person, Social wellbeing, Strict liability

scholarly journals The nature of corporate crime in law enforcement of the criminal justice system in Indonesia

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 166-179
Author(s):  
Hadi Supriyanto
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Corporate Crime ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Normative Approach ◽  
The Law ◽  
Executive Agencies ◽  
Corporate Criminal Liability

Law in its nature is not only used to control conduct that already occurs in society and sustain established behaviors patterns, but the law often contributes to its use as a means. The study revealed 1). Corporate Criminal Liability was an attempt to put the company in the sense of Equality Under the law with a view to achieving legal certainty, fairness and usefulness, 2) Control of corporate criminal penalties was implemented in several laws through a common formulation of the key criminal fines, 3) law enforcement against corporate crime can be achieved through a) Normative Approach. Therefore, it is required that the state will specifically articulate the responsibility for corporate criminal liability through legislative and executive agencies and what kind of liability can be formally demanded of the corporation as the object of criminal liability (legal policy), since the assessment of corporate errors is the basis of material for the demand of corporate criminals.

A Truce in Criminal Law’s Distributive Principle Wars?

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 565-583
Author(s):  
Paul H. Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Crime Control ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
A Value ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
Past Wrongs

Crime-control utilitarians and retributivist philosophers have long been at war over the appropriate distributive principle for criminal liability and punishment, with little apparent possibility of reconciliation between the two. In the utilitarians’ view, the imposition of punishment can be justified only by the practical benefit that it provides: avoiding future crime. In the retributivists’ view, doing justice for past wrongs is a value in itself that requires no further justification. The competing approaches simply use different currencies: fighting future crime versus doing justice for past wrongs. It is argued here that the two are in fact reconcilable, in a fashion. We cannot declare a winner in the distributive principle wars but something more like a truce. Specifically, good utilitarians ought to support a distributive principle based upon desert because the empirical evidence suggests that doing justice for past wrongdoing is likely the most effective and efficient means of controlling future crime. A criminal justice system perceived by the community as conflicting with its principles of justice provokes resistance and subversion, whereas a criminal justice system that earns a reputation for reliably doing justice is one whose moral credibility inspires deference, assistance, and acquiescence, and is more likely to have citizens internalize its norms of what is truly condemnable conduct. Retributivists ought to support empirical desert as a distributive principle because, while it is indeed distinct from deontological desert, there exists an enormous overlap between the two, and it seems likely that empirical desert may be the best practical approximation of deontological desert. Indeed, some philosophers would argue that the two are necessarily the same.

scholarly journals Penegakan Hukum Pidana Terhadap Anak Yang Terjerat Perkara Pidana Melalui Diversi (Studi Di Polrestabes Medan)

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-84
Author(s):  
Akalafikta Jaya ◽  
Triono Eddy ◽  
Alpi Sahari
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Convictions ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Law

In the past, the punishment of children was the same as the punishment of adults. This causes the psychological condition of children ranging from investigation, investigation and trial to be disturbed because it is often intimidated by law enforcement agencies. Under these conditions, Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Justice System was born. One of the reforms in the Child Criminal Justice System Law requires the settlement of a child criminal case by diversion. Based on the results of research that the conception of criminal offenses against children in conflict with the law in Indonesia is different from criminal convictions to adults. Children are given the lightest possible punishment and half of the criminal convictions of adult criminal offenses. That criminal liability for children who are ensnared in a criminal case according to the Law on the Criminal Justice System for Children is still carried out but with different legal sanctions from adults. Criminal imprisonment against children is an ultimumremedium effort, meaning that criminal imprisonment against children is the last legal remedy after there are no other legal remedies that benefit the child. That the concept of enforcement of criminal law against children caught in criminal cases through diversion is in fact not all have applied it. Some criminal cases involving children as the culprit, in court proceedings there are still judges who impose prison sentences on children who are dealing with the law.

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 Children's Criminal Responsibilities: Comparative Study in Islamic and Criminal Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-108
Author(s):  
Heni Hendrawati ◽  
Nurwati Nurwati ◽  
Budiharto Budiharto
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Responsibility ◽  
Interesting Phenomenon ◽  
Library Research

The study of criminal liability against child offenders based on Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Criminal Justice System of Children and according to Islamic Criminal Law is a very interesting phenomenon to study, especially during this time many phenomena of a minor underage sitting in the accused and detained like a big villain just because of a trivial matter. This study includes the type of research library research, so in this study, researchers conducted data collection through the study and library research on books relating to the problems the authors studied. In analyzing this study, the authors used a comparative method that is comparing child criminal liability in positive criminal law based on Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Child Criminal Justice System, with child criminal liability in Islamic criminal law. In Islamic law, a child will not be subject to a punishment for the crime he committed, because there is no legal responsibility for a child of any age until he reaches the age of baliq, qadhi will only have the right to reprimand him or set some restrictions for him to help improve the child in the future. It is expected that this research can contribute to the renewal of national criminal law, especially regarding criminal liability committed by children, taking into account the concepts in Islamic criminal law.

scholarly journals Exploring childhood, criminal responsibility and the evolving capacities of the child: the age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales

2016 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-282
Author(s):  
Raymond Arthur
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Young People ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
The Law

Currently in England and Wales the law considers that all children below 10 years of age are exempt from criminal liability for their actions as such children are morally not responsible and lacking blameworthiness. This approach to young people in conflict with the law misrepresents the evidence regarding young people who offend and encourages highly contestable judgements about individuality, identity and welfare. I will argue that children have a right to respect for their evolving capacities and that respecting this right would help to redirect the criminal justice system towards a normative framework better equipped to accommodate the realities of childhood and in which the child’s experience of vulnerability and powerlessness is embedded throughout.

A Pragmatic Critique of Corporate Criminal Theory

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
James G. Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Corporate Crime ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Core Questions ◽  
The Many ◽  
Legal Pragmatism ◽  
Corporate Criminal Liability ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

Corporate criminal liability is a controversial beast. To a large extent, the controversies surround three core questions: first, whether there is a basic conceptual justification for using a system of criminal justice constructed for individuals against inanimate entities like corporations; second, what value corporate criminal liability could have given co-existent possibilities of civil redress against them; and third, whether corporate criminal liability has any added value over and above individual criminal responsibility of corporate officers. This article criticizes all sides of these debates, using examples from the frontiers of international criminal justice. In particular, it highlights the shortcomings of corporate criminal theory to date by examining the latent possibility of prosecuting corporate actors for the pillage of natural resources and for complicity through the supply of weapons. Throughout, the article draws on principles derived from philosophical and legal pragmatism to reveal a set of recurring analytical flaws in this literature. These include: a tendency to presuppose a perfect single jurisdiction that overlooks globalization, the blind projection of local theories of corporate criminal responsibility onto global corporate practices, and a perspective that sometimes seems insensitive to the plight of the many who have fallen victim to corporate crime in the developing world. To begin anew, we need to embrace a pragmatic theory of corporate criminal liability that is forced upon us in a world as complex, unequal, and dysfunctional as that we presently inhabit.

scholarly journals Pembatasan Usia Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Anak dalam Peraturan Perundang-Undangan

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 232
Author(s):  
I Ketut Arjuna Satya Prema ◽  
Masruchin Ruba'i ◽  
Nurini Aprilianda
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Minimum Age

This article aims to discuss the age of criminal responsibility of children according to statutory regulations in Indonesia and the legis ratio of determining the age of child responsibility according to Law Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Criminal Justice System for Children. The study uses normative legal research with a statutory approach. The results of the study show that three regulations are governing the age limit for a child to be held criminally responsible, namely the Criminal Code Act, Law Number 3 of 1997 concerning Juvenile Court, Law Number 11 of 2011 concerning the Criminal Justice System for Children. These three regulations differ in determining the minimum limit for a child to be held liable for criminal liability. Psychological, sociological, and pedagogical aspects are the base for the ratio of the legal determination of the minimum age of 12 years in the Criminal Justice System for Children. 

scholarly journals C CRIMINAL LIABILITY AGAINST CHILDREN AS OFFENDERS OF NARCOTICS ABUSE BASED ON THE DECISION OF THE TEBING TINGGI DISTRICT COURT NO. 21/PID.SUS-ANAK/2018/PN.TBT

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-78
Author(s):  
Lidya Gultom, Syafrudin Kalo, Mahmud Mulyadi, M. Ekaputra
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Judicial Process ◽  
The Government

The development of narcotics abuse is increasingly increasing. The government has issued regulations governing the handling of children as perpetrators of criminal acts of narcotics abuse, namely Law No. 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics and Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System. This study will examine and analyze the Tebing Tinggi District Court Decision No. 21/Pid.Sus-Anak/2018/PN.TBT., Which has been decided by the judge for action against the child perpetrator of the crime of narcotics abuse, even though in the case diversion can be carried out, but not done. The problems in this study, namely: the criminal responsibility of child offenders of criminal offenses of narcotics abuse based on the Narcotics Law and the Child Criminal Justice System Law; analysis of decisions used as examples of cases in this study. This research is a descriptive normative legal research analysis. The data used are secondary data and empirical data. Furthermore, analyzed using qualitative analysis methods. The results showed that: First, the criminal act of narcotics crime based on the Narcotics Law and the Juvenile Criminal Justice System Law in both laws have narcotics crime; Second, Tebing Tinggi District Court Decision No. 21/Pid.Sus-Anak/2018/PN.TBT., Diversion was not attempted, which the Law Enforcement Officials, investigators, public prosecutors, and judges can seek diversion based on Article 7 of the Juvenile Criminal Justice System Law to avoid children from the judicial process, but not carried out.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document