CRIMINAL LAW POLICY OF THE EU COUNTRIES IN THE FIELD OF COMBATING ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMES

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 42-48
Author(s):  
Milena IGNATOVA ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Significant Degree ◽  
Environmental Crisis ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Environmental Crimes

The purpose of this article is to identify the main trends of development of criminal legal policy of EU countries in the field of combating crimes against the environment in the context of growing global environmental crisis and the development of consumer society the example of France, Germany, Spain and Italy, the features of statutory regulation of the characteristics of environmental crimes and prescribe the penalties in the legislation of the countries under consideration. The relevance of the problem under study is due to a significant degree of public danger of environmental crimes, their high latency, and therefore the fight against encroachments on the environment is recognized as one of the priority areas of the criminal policy of the EU countries. Criminal legislation plays a crucial role in the system of legal norms for countering environmental crimes. Conclusions. Despite the legal integration of EU countries in the field of environmental protection and the adoption of the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19.11.2008, which imposes obligations on member States to introduce certain elements of criminal acts into national legislation, the constitutional and criminal law norms of individual States do not differ in a uniform approach to environmental protection. However, the legislative regulations of the European Parliament have influenced the reform of criminal legislation in a number of countries in the direction of increasing responsibility for environmental crimes and introducing special chapters in the criminal codes that combine criminal acts that infringe on natural objects. The importance of the natural environment, flora and fauna as independent objects of criminal law protection is underestimated, so the severity of criminal repression depends on such a sign as causing harm to human health and life by environmental offenses.

scholarly journals To the question about the definition of «environmental crime»

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 245-247
Author(s):  
Elena V Frolova
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Environmental Crime ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Environmental Crimes

In this article, on the basis of the analysis of scientific approaches in the theory of criminal law and criminal legislation of the Russian Federation in the field of environmental protection describes some of the problems of the definition of "environmental crimes". It seems the author's definition of "environmental crime".

scholarly journals Criminal environmental protection: international practices and priorities for improving

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (33) ◽  
pp. 102-120
Author(s):  
Oleh Kyrychenko ◽  
Yuliia Khrystova ◽  
Oleksandra Skok ◽  
Taisiia Shevchenko ◽  
Oleh Litun
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Documentary Sources ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
The Eu

The purpose of the research is to reveal international practices, criminal law protection and the system of punishments for environmental crimes in the field of environmental protection. Main content. The paper uses a comparative method to study the criminal environmental protection international practices of some European Union countries, in particular Spain, Germany and Austria. In addition, the study of model criminal law standards of the EU made it possible to evaluate them as a factor that leads to the unification and universalization of the criminal legislation of the EU countries in the field of environmental protection, harmonization of criminal law and related sectors. Methodology: Research of materials and methods based on the analysis of documentary sources and regulatory legal acts of foreign countries. The dialectical method of cognizing the social reality facts is the basis on which the formal legal and rather-legal approaches are largely based. Conclusions. The absence of developed unified approaches to its unification and practical application in the countries of Europe and Asia has been established. Attention is focused on the attempt of individual countries (the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Lithuania) to determine the criteria for the correlation of main and additional punishments, to establish criteria for the equivalent application of sanctions related to isolation and without isolation, and also to expand the boundaries of judicial review in the field of setting the degree and type of measures of criminal liability, depending on the factual and legal circumstances of the criminal case.

Environmental Forensic Examinations in Poland: a Case Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 103-123
Author(s):  
Elżbieta Zębek ◽  
Denis Solodov
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Animal World ◽  
Environmental Crimes

Abstract In environmental criminal cases, forensic examinations are of particular relevance and create the basis for judicial decisions. In the article, four criminal cases concerning different types of environmental crimes were described to show current challenges and shortcomings in the area of environmental protection through criminal law in Poland, and the role of the experts in the process of proof. Special attention was paid to the forensic examinations of the plant and animal world within Nature 2000 sites, which are appeared to be the most challenging. The authors also addressed the issue of the compliance of domestic criminal law and its enforcement with the provisions of the Directive 2008/99/ec of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the protection of the environment through criminal law.

scholarly journals TOWARDS MINIMUM PROCEDURAL GUARANTEES FOR THE DEFENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE EU

2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 1017-1038 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurens van Puyenbroeck ◽  
Gert Vermeulen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Democratic Rule ◽  
Constitutional System ◽  
The Eu

A critical observer would not deny that the practice of European Union (‘EU’) policy making in the field of criminal law in the past decade since the implementation of the Tampere Programme has been mainly repressive and prosecution-oriented.1 The idea of introducing a set of common (minimum) rules, guaranteeing the rights of defence at a EU-wide level, has not been accorded the same attention as the introduction of instruments aimed at improving the effectiveness of crime-fighting. What does this mean for the future of EU criminal policy? Will the EU succeed in the coming years in developing an area where freedom, security and justice are truly balanced? According to several authors, to date the EU has evolved in the opposite direction. As one observer put it:[I]f Procedural Criminal Law arises from the application of Constitutional Law, or indeed if it may be described as “a seismograph of the constitutional system of a State”, then as a consequence the Procedural Criminal Law of the European Union shows the extent of the Democratic Rule of Law, of the existence of a true “Rechtsstaat”, within an integrated Europe. This situation may be qualified as lamentable, as the main plank of the EU's criminal justice policy relates to the simplification and the speeding up of police and judicial cooperation—articles 30 and 31 of the Treaty of the EU—but without at the same time setting an acceptable standard for fundamental rights throughout a united Europe.2

scholarly journals Criminal Law Protection of Reproductive Health: Current Challenges

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-153
Author(s):  
E. L. Sidorenko
Keyword(s):  
Reproductive Health ◽  
Human Genome ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Practical Importance ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The subject of the research is the specifics of the criminal law protection of reproductive health in the Russian legislation. The topic was chosen due to the increasing dynamics of crimes related to limitation on the reproductive rights of women and men and unauthorized manipulation of the human genome. Despite the growing need for providing a regulatory framework for this kind of relationships, the system of their criminal law protection is only beginning to take shape, therefore, a necessity arises to revise traditional approaches to the protection of the individual. Therefore, the purpose of the paper was to understand the system of criminal law protection of reproductive health in terms of its compliance with trends of medical practices and dynamics of socially significant diseases based on both traditional principles of scientific analysis and the results of applying sociological methods of data processing, which made it possible to identify the most significant directions of the Russian criminal policy development. Moreover, the critical analysis method was used in the research that showed the inconsistency of the system of criminal law prevention of criminal abortions, contamination with socially significant diseases and illegal use of the human genome. Based on the research findings, an author’s model of criminal prevention of attacks on reproductive health has been built and its systemic assessment is given. It is concluded that the legislator is inconsistent in assessing the attributes of an unlawful abortion; the accounting of contamination with certain socially significant diseases is inadequate; the laws prohibiting the use of the human genome need to be included into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The conclusions formulated in the paper have practical importance and can be taken into account by the legislator in the reform of the current criminal legislation.

scholarly journals Changes in the fiscal policy of EU states after the 2008 crisis

2019 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Witold Wiliński
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Fiscal Policy ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Steady Increase ◽  
Fiscal Policies ◽  
National Debt ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Fiscal Compact ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Debt Levels

Abstract The aim of this article is an extensive presentation of the fiscal policy conducted by the EU states in the years 2008–2015. The analysis concerns the legal regulations introduced at the EU level by the European Parliament and the Council, as well as the fiscal policies of governments of particular states. The first part of the article analyzes basic macroeconomic data in EU states concerning the level of debt, the level of gross domestic product (GDP) redistribution, and the level of economic growth in the analyzed period. The second part discusses the legal acts adopted by the European Parliament and the Council (the so-called ‘sixpack’ and the European Fiscal Compact), aimed at improving macroeconomic balance and ensuring supervision over the proper functioning of national finances. The third part analyzes the discretionary fiscal policies pursued in EU states. The main conclusions of this article are as follows: (i) EU countries recorded higher national debt levels and debt growth rates between 2008 and 2015 than most non-EU Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries; (ii) despite legal measures taken by the European Council and the European Commission in the form of the sixpack and the European Fiscal Compact, and despite discretionary fiscal measures such as in the form of the European Economic Recovery Plan, five EU countries (Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Spain) have experienced a steady increase in their national debt levels; and (iii) deep reforms in the composition and level of government expenditure are a prerequisite for reducing national debt levels and for achieving satisfactory economic growth in these countries.

Title XX Environment

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sacha Garben
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Common Concern ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
Dense Set ◽  
The Eu

The environment does not respect man-made borders, and is of common concern and interest of all mankind. As such, it is an area that merits and requires cross-border law and policy making par excellence. This should be reflected in the strong role played by the EU, which has a firm Treaty mandate and duty to protect the environment, features a rich body of case law, and boasts a dense set of secondary legislation. The very good reasons for this notwithstanding, it remains a remarkable development considering the absence of any reference to the environment in the original Treaties. Although a programme for action in this area was soon adopted in 1973, only in the 1986 SEA was an environmental legal basis introduced. Much of the initial environmental acquis was therefore developed by the Commission, the Council, and later the EP on the basis of other Treaty provisions, such as (now) Articles 114, 115, and 352 TFEU. EU environmental protection also owes a debt to the ECJ, which included it in the legitimate objectives on the basis of which MS could derogate from the free movement provisions. The Court has interpreted the provisions of EU environmental law generally in a protective manner, and endorsed the use of criminal law for the effective enforcement of EU environmental legislation.

scholarly journals A legitimacy-based approach to EU criminal law: Maybe we are getting there, after all

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-39
Author(s):  
Kimmo Nuotio
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Social Theory ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Strong Emphasis ◽  
European Criminal Law ◽  
The Eu

European Union (EU) law is known for its strong emphasis on effectivity and more generally for its instrumental character. This is not foreign even to European criminal law, a feature which creates some tension between the EU criminal law and criminal law in the national setting. EU Framework Decisions and Directives often require the Member States to criminalize certain forms of conduct with sanctions that are ‘Effective, Dissuasive and Proportionate’. In this article, I try to show that it would be timely to look at EU criminal law from an alternative point of view, as a more mature law. I call this a legitimacy-based approach. Such a reading would ease some of these tensions. It would also be helpful in developing a criminal policy for the EU, a policy which would be realistic and pragmatic. And it would be easier to look at EU criminal law from the point of view of justice. In order to get there, we need to see where the (current) narrow deterrence argument gets is wrong or one-sided. Some social theory is needed in order to make the point.

The Problem of Correlation Between the Criminal Policy Humanization and the Concept of Justice at Imposing Criminal Penalties in the Republic of Kazakhstan

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 147
Author(s):  
Meruyert MASSALIMKYZY
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
The Social ◽  
Penal Institution ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Feasible Solutions ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article raises the problem of unjustified humanization of criminal legislation and the practice of imposing a punishment. Imposing a punishment as a legal category has been extensively studied in the works of national and foreign scholars specializing in criminal law. However, despite the importance of this institution both for the convict and for the society as a whole, this penal institution remains one of the most problematic ones. The existing conflict between the current criminal policy humanism and the concept of social justice in criminal legislation, the adequacy of a punishment to the social danger of the offense being a part thereof, makes enormous harm to all law enforcement activities. It also causes negative response in the society, thus reasonably attracting a heightened attention of criminologists and experts in criminal law and procedure. The purpose of this work, as the author sees it, is trying to find feasible solutions to one of the most urgent problems of imposing a punishment. Attention is drawn to the fact that the concept of humanism has two aspects and implies, first of all, the protection of interests of law-abiding citizens. The author considers topical issues concerning the observance of the rights of victims through the solution one of the main tasks of criminal law, namely: to restore social justice by imposing a proportionate criminal punishment. Certain provisions of the theory of criminal punishment, as well as the practice of imposing punishment by the court, are studied here. Insufficient development of norms in the current criminal legislation can create problems in law enforcement, which, in turn, can lead to a significant violation of the victims’ rights. The author makes recommendations that can contribute to the improvement of the penal system consistent with the principle of humanism, considering the interests of the victims.

scholarly journals The goals of criminal punishment as a reflection of modern criminal policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 324-330
Author(s):  
V.V. Popov ◽  
◽  
S.M. Smolev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The presented study is devoted to the issues of disclosing the content of the goals of criminal punishment, analyzing the possibilities of their actual achievement in the practical implementation of criminal punishment, determining the political and legal significance of the goals of criminal punishment indicated in the criminal legislation. The purpose of punishment as a definition of criminal legislation was formed relatively recently, despite the fact that theories of criminal punishment and the purposes of its application began to form long before our era. These doctrinal teachings, in essence, boil down to defining two diametrically opposed goals of criminal punishment: retribution and prevention. The state, on the other hand, determines the priority of one or another goal of the punishment assigned for the commission of a crime. The criminal policy of Russia as a whole is focused on mitigating the criminal law impact on the offender. One of the manifestations of this direction is the officially declared humanization of the current criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. However, over the course of several years, the announced “humanization of criminal legislation” has followed the path of amending and supplementing the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: introducing additional opportunities for exemption from criminal liability and punishment, reducing the limits of punishments specified in the sanctions of articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and including in the system of criminal punishments of types of measures that do not imply isolation from society. At the same time the goals of criminal punishment are not legally revised, although the need for such a decision has already matured. Based on consideration of the opinions expressed in the scientific literature regarding the essence of those listed in Part 2 of Art. 43 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the goals of punishment are determined that each of them is subject to reasonable criticism in view of the abstract description or the impossibility of achieving in the process of law enforcement (criminal and penal) activities. This circumstance gives rise to the need to revise the content of the goals of criminal punishment and to determine one priority goal that meets the needs of modern Russian criminal policy. According to the results of the study the conclusion is substantiated that the only purpose of criminal punishment can be considered to ensure proportionality between the severity of the punishment imposed and the social danger (harmfulness) of the crime committed. This approach to determining the purpose of criminal punishment is fully consistent with the trends of modern criminal policy in Russia, since it does not allow the use of measures, the severity of which, in terms of the amount of deprivation and legal restrictions, clearly exceeds the social danger of the committed act. In addition, it is proportionality, not prevention, that underlies justice – one of the fundamental principles of criminal law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document