Suchergebnisse

The aim of this chapter is to offer a critical analysis of the uses of criminal law in the context of the royal dictatorship and the rise of fascism in Romania during the 1930s. It explores the effacement of traditional categories of legality entailed by the emergence of the Criminal Code of 1936, by focusing on the notion of crimes against the constitutional order and its intricate relation to the socio-political context of the time. In this sense this chapter investigates critically and historically the relation between criminal law, constitutional law and the rise of fascism in Romania while stressing three crucial and overlooked elements: the ideological tenets of the Code present both in its substantial and formal structure, the politico-legal significance of the Code in the historical moment of its enactment, and the erosion of classical forms of legality determined by the Code's ideological appropriation. Moreover, it tackles the question of continuity between democratic legislation and authoritarian law.

LLibre de resums i programa del IALL Congress 2013. International Association of Law Libraries, 32nd Annual Course on International Law and Legal Information: Catalan Law and Legal Information in a Global Context. Aula Magna, Faculty of Law, University of Barcelona. Universitat de Barcelona. Barcelona, 15-19 September, 2013.

The Edge of Law explores the spatial implications of establishing a new legal institution in the wake of violent conflict. Using the example of the establishment of the War Crimes Chamber of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Alex Jeffrey argues that legal processes constantly demarcate a line of inclusion and exclusion: materially, territorially and corporally. In contrast to accounts that have focused on the judicial outcomes of these transitional justice efforts, The Edge of Law draws on long-term fieldwork in Bosnia and Herzegovina to focus on the social and political consequences of the trials, tracing the fraught mechanisms that have been used by international and local political elites to convey their legitimacy. This book will be of interest to socio-legal and geographical scholars working in the fields of transitional justice, legal systems, critical geopolitics and criminology.

Over the last few decades, a global trend of extending the reach of domestic penal power can be observed, namely driven by the changing face of crime as it becomes increasingly transnational in nature. It is demonstrated in this article that the Swiss legislature has clearly followed this global trend of broadening the extraterritorial reach of domestic criminal law, most notably since the 1980s. It has acted with particular resolve in the last decade, adding jurisdictional bases to the Swiss Criminal Code by virtue of which Swiss criminal law can be applied to many instances of conduct taking place abroad. Certain offences – specified crimes against minors and female genital mutilation – have even been subjected to an absolute and unrestricted universality principle. The Swiss legislature is not indifferent to the problems that such an expansive approach to jurisdiction may create, notably in terms of conflicts of jurisdiction. Yet, the rules it adopted to temper the effects of applying Swiss criminal law to extraterritorial conduct only partially remedy the situation. This development in Swiss law begs the question whether such an expansive approach towards jurisdiction is permissible – or even encouraged or requested by international law. Hence, this article explores to what extent international law informs the reach of domestic penal power and concludes that international law is Janus-faced with regard to the question of the geographical scope of domestic criminal law. While some of its rules push for long-arm jurisdiction, others put limits on the domestic legislature's endeavour to expand the reach of its domestic criminal law. In light of this, the idea of adopting, on an international level, general principles governing the definition of the scope of domestic prescriptive and adjudicative jurisdiction for transnational cases is tempting, albeit difficult to realize.

Over the last few decades, a global trend of extending the reach of domestic penal power can be observed, namely driven by the changing face of crime as it becomes increasingly transnational in nature. It is demonstrated in this article that the Swiss legislature has clearly followed this global trend of broadening the extraterritorial reach of domestic criminal law, most notably since the 1980s. It has acted with particular resolve in the last decade, adding jurisdictional bases to the Swiss Criminal Code by virtue of which Swiss criminal law can be applied to many instances of conduct taking place abroad. Certain offences – specified crimes against minors and female genital mutilation – have even been subjected to an absolute and unrestricted universality principle. The Swiss legislature is not indifferent to the problems that such an expansive approach to jurisdiction may create, notably in terms of conflicts of jurisdiction. Yet, the rules it adopted to temper the effects of applying Swiss criminal law to extraterritorial conduct only partially remedy the situation. This development in Swiss law begs the question whether such an expansive approach towards jurisdiction is permissible – or even encouraged or requested by international law. Hence, this article explores to what extent international law informs the reach of domestic penal power and concludes that international law is Janus-faced with regard to the question of the geographical scope of domestic criminal law. While some of its rules push for long-arm jurisdiction, others put limits on the domestic legislature's endeavour to expand the reach of its domestic criminal law. In light of this, the idea of adopting, on an international level, general principles governing the definition of the scope of domestic prescriptive and adjudicative jurisdiction for transnational cases is tempting, albeit difficult to realize.

1. Introduction -- 2. Country Report "Austria" -- 3. Country Report "France" -- 4. Country Report "Germany" -- 5. Country Report "Italy" -- 6. Country Report "the Netherlands" -- 7. Country Report "Norway" -- 8. Country Report "Portugal" -- 9. Country Report "Switzerland" -- 10. Comparative Analysis -- 11. Judicial Protection in International and EU Law -- 12. Recommendations. .