scholarly journals Punishing (Non-)Citizens

Author(s):  
Michał Peno

If sociologists are to be trusted, reflexivity, focused on itself and devoid of any religious or at least ideological framework, leads to the weakening of control mechanisms. Such changes are accompanied by the polarization of social classes and by the exclusion of the so-called underclass (which certainly includes a vast majority of criminals) from the civil society. In the doctrine of criminal law of “mature modernism”, within the framework of a liberal-democratic state, the civil society, together with the idea of communication, is supposed to constitute a central reference point in the research on criminal liability. Reflexivity brings up new problems. New citizen-oriented criminal law is being shaped, based upon mediation and communication (e.g. restorative justice, Expressive Theory). The civil society does not include the area of politics or political nature of things, where the problem is not the justification of the punishment but the effectiveness of mere spatial isolation. In this sense, it is difficult to talk about the merits of the emancipation of an individual from the limitations imposed by the society. The weakening of any external authority and of political duties owed to the state is replaced by self-control proper to reflexive modernity only in cases where the individuals have adequate intellectual and ethical predispositions. Disappearance of the influence of external rules and values together with the mechanism of exclusion from the civil society results in the weakening of self-control and in selfish care only about one’s own perspective (but also in repressive subordination by the state). Such a state of affairs creates favourable conditions for objectifying criminal liability, abandoning the concept of guilt, and for attempts to provide an ethical justification of penalty – which are concepts taken from the “world of citizens”.

Author(s):  
Markus D. Dubber

Part III of Dual Penal State uses dual penal state analysis to generate a comparative-historical account of American penality. With comparative glimpses at Germany and, to a lesser extent, England, it distinguishes between two responses to the shared challenge of legitimating state penal power in a modern liberal democratic state: (1) the failure to appreciate the legitimatory challenge of modern state penal power in particular (United States) and of modern state power in general (England); and (2) the failure to address the legitimatory challenge of modern state penal power as an ongoing existential threat to the legitimacy of the state (Germany). Chapter 6 undertakes a critical analysis of Jefferson’s 1779 draft of a criminal law bill for the State of Virginia, concluding that it fell well short of a criminal code that reflected the ideals of the American legal-political project as spelled out, for instance, in Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence of 1776.


Author(s):  
Y. Lutsenko

The article provides a scientific analysis of theoretical and practical problems that exist when implementing the criminal-legal policy of the state in the field of the protection of military security of Ukraine. Taking into account the existing challenges and threats facing the Ukrainian, sovereign, democratic state, and before the whole civilizedworld today, the place, tasks and goals of the criminal-legal policy of the state are determined, its role in the sphere of military security of Ukraine is comprehended. The work focuses on the concept and essence of criminal-law policy, clarifies its place and role in the state in counteracting the socially dangerous acts of the present. Attention is drawn to the fact that the state policy in the sphere of counteracting crime, which is being conducted now in Ukraine, should be developed taking into account new scientific developments, theoretical and practical recommendations of scientists, first of all, lawyers. The absence of a holistic, modern concept of the criminal-law policy of the state, as well as the development of the national legislation on criminal liability, leads to inconsistencies and inconsistencies with certain norms of the criminal legislation of Ukraine and other subordinate normative legal acts, including the Basic Law - the Constitution of Ukraine, which, in its turn, entails significant problems in the activity of law enforcement agencies of Ukraine.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 84-106
Author(s):  
Frieder Dünkel ◽  
Bernd Geng ◽  
Daniel Passow ◽  
Gintautas Sakalauskas

Taking together all the evidence on the aetiology, development and differential processes of delinquent behaviour from childhood to adulthood, we dispose of important new evidence from the neurosciences, which, compared to traditional criminological, developmental, psychological and sociological evidence, increases our capacity to explain the age-crime curve. In particular, the right-hand side of the curve, indicating desistance from crime in young adulthood between the ages of 18 and 25, can be based on new insights from neuroscientific research on brain maturation and the development of self-control mechanisms. As a result, new questions about judicial reactions and interventions must be raised. If an individual’s brain is fully matured only in the mid-twenties, general criminal law is possibly inappropriate, and a specific youth or young-adult criminal law reflecting the transitional processes and the diminished culpability of young-adult offenders should rather be applied. In many European jurisdictions, the scope of youth justice has been extended upwards to 18–20 year-old adults, in the Netherlands even up to 22 years of age, a political decision affecting criminality and based on new neuroscientific evidence.


2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 43-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Hunold

In this essay I examine the dispute between the German GreenParty and some of the country’s environmental nongovernmentalorganizations (NGOs) over the March 2001 renewal of rail shipmentsof highly radioactive wastes to Gorleben. My purpose indoing so is to test John Dryzek’s 1996 claim that environmentalistsought to beware of what they wish for concerning inclusion in theliberal democratic state. Inclusion on the wrong terms, arguesDryzek, may prove detrimental to the goals of greening and democratizingpublic policy because such inclusion may compromise thesurvival of a green public sphere that is vital to both. Prospects forecological democracy, understood in terms of strong ecologicalmodernization here, depend on historically conditioned relationshipsbetween the state and the environmental movement that fosterthe emergence and persistence over time of such a public sphere.


Author(s):  
Markus D. Dubber

The first part of Dual Penal State investigated various ways in which criminal law doctrine and scholarship (or “science”) have failed to address the challenge of legitimating penal power in a modern liberal democratic state. This, second, part explores an alternative approach to criminal law discourse that puts the legitimacy challenge of modern penal law front and center: critical analysis of criminal law in a dual penal state. Dual penal state analysis differentiates between penal law and penal police, two conceptions of penal power, and state power more generally, rooted in autonomy, equality, and interpersonal respect, on one hand, and in heteronomy, hierarchy, and patriarchal power, on the other. Chapter 4 applies the distinction between law and police as fundamental modes of governance set out in Chapter 3 to the penal realm and explores the tension between penal law and penal police as constituting the dual penal state.


1998 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 321-346 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naditn Rouhana ◽  
Asʿad Ghanem

The vast majority of states in the international system, democratic and non-democratic, are multi-ethnic (Gurr 1993). A liberal-democratic multi-ethnic state serves the collective needs of all its citizens regardless of their ethnic affiliation, and citizenship—legally recognized membership in the political structure called a state—is the single criterion for belonging to the state and for granting equal opportunity to all members of the system. Whether a multi-ethnic democratic state should provide group rights above and beyond individual legal equality is an ongoing debate (Gurr & Harff 1994).


Author(s):  
Vladimir Myslivyy ◽  
Angelina Mykyta

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 155-179
Author(s):  
Wojciech Zalewski

The introduction of social harmfulness (social danger) to Polish criminal law after the Second World War was politically motivated. For many, this circumstance was sufficient to formulate postulates about the necessity to remove this premise of criminal liability. Social harmfulness still remains controversial today. Before, criminal law was seen as a tool. Currently, it is to be an ultima ratio. It is clear that determining the essence of the crime and its nature, introducing into the law “what belongs to literature”, was necessary in the legal system of a totalitarian state, imposing its views and morals on society. In a legal system of a democratic state, a state ruled by law, a statutory ideological declaration regarding the essence of a crime seems redundant. However, changing the nomenclature is not enough here — there is a possibility of weakening the guaranteeing criminal law function. The social harmfulness premise contributes to the heterogeneity of jurisprudence, even in cases concerning serious crimes. The author is of the opinion that limiting the number of minor cases from the point of view of the state’s right to punish, which paralyzes the judiciary with their sheer number, should take place in a different way than introducing the social harmfulness of an act as a criterion determining the culpability. The currently adopted solution seems irrational and non-functional from the perspective of the legal certainty principle. A more appropriate move seems to be the assessing the advisability of prosecuting an act, i.e. by introducing and implementing the principle of opportunism in criminal proceedings.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karsten Gaede

Gaede examines the little-discussed question of whether administrative acquiescence precludes the accusation of unlawful gambling against the background of EU law. He shows that the transitional regime established until the full enforceability of the State Treaty on Gambling in 2021 limits criminal liability. In detail, he explains why a total internet ban on virtual slot machine games is no longer in conformity with EU law. He clarifies that general tolerations can also exclude § 284 StGB if they are in accordance with the legal discretion of the authorities. Gaede discusses the legal situation before and after 1.7.2021. The author is co-editor of the series and professor in particular of German and European economic criminal law.


2010 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 339-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Hindriks

AbstractIn criminal law, foresight betrays a guilty mind as much as intent does: both reveal that the agent is not properly motivated to avoid an illegal state of affairs. This commonality warrants our judgment that the state is brought about intentionally, even when unintended. In contrast to Knobe, I thus retain the idea that acting intentionally is acting with a certain frame of mind.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document