Suchergebnisse

There is an ongoing debate amongst hate crime scholars about the categories of victims which should be included within hate crime legislation. Some commentators argue that affording protection to groups based on pre-defined characteristics results in many victims being excluded from the legislation. They would prefer a more inclusive approach which would offer protection to a potentially limitless number of groups. This paper considers the question from a doctrinal perspective, and argues that a principled way of deciding the characteristics of hate crime is required. It will conclude that the core concern of hate crime legislation is with the furthering of the broader equality agenda and, as such, the victims of hate crime should form an exclusive group based on those characteristics protected under equality legislation. This approach can help provide a theoretical framework for hate crime legislation which can be more easily accommodated within criminal law principles.

Protecting the victims of crimes is an objective of the judicial bodies to avoid the risk of revictimization, thus exercising their obligation to defend the fundamental rights of the person (the right to life, the right to health and physical and mental integrity, the protection of dignity, private life, the right to free expression etc.), as protected by a series of national and international normative acts.
The criminal procedural measures for the protection of victims of the crime of domestic violence can belong to various criminal legal or criminal procedural institutions: general protective measures, regulated in art. 113 of Criminal Procedure Code related to art. 125-130 of Criminal Procedure Code, preventive measures, accessory and complementary punishments and administrative protective measures ordered on the basis of Law 682/2002 on the protection of witnesses.
The development of Romanian legislation to complete the spectrum of available instruments, protective measures imposed by international legislation or inspired by the legislation of other states or from the recommendations presented by international experts, is necessary and would follow the trend on a European scale to harmonize the practices of physical and psychological protection of victims.
Thus, the capacity of the judicial bodies to obtain the willingness of the victims to cooperate with the judicial bodies will be enhanced, the risks of exposure to any danger by participating in the trial being minimized, and they will be encouraged to adopt a sincere, unhindered attitude during the hearings.

The aim of this article is the analysis of the proper legal basis in order to establish a modern and flexible European legal system in Contract Law. To this end, the article examines the relevant backgrounds related to the process of legal harmonization and unification of Contract Law in the European Union. In addition, and through the analysis of the legislation, case law and doctrine, the basis for the establishment of this legal system is provided in order to consider if the European Union has competences to reach this goal. ; El objeto de este artículo reside en el análisis del fundamento jurídico adecuado para la creación de un sistema jurídico europeo moderno y flexible en materia de Derecho contractual. Para ello, en el artículo se estudian los antecedentes relevantes en el proceso de armonización y unificación jurídica del Derecho de los contratos en la Unión Europea. Asimismo, y mediante el estudio de la legislación, jurisprudencia y doctrina, se sientan las bases para la creación de dicho sistema jurídico, en orden a considerar si la Unión Europea tendría competencias para lograr este objetivo.The aim of this article is the analysis of the proper legal basis in order to establish a modern and flexible European legal system in Contract Law. To this end, the article examines the relevant backgrounds related to the process of legal harmonization and unification of Contract Law in the European Union. In addition, and through the analysis of the legislation, case law and doctrine, the basis for the establishment of this legal system is provided in order to consider if the European Union has competences to reach this goal.

Governments are increasingly relying on algorithms to automate decision-making in diverse areas, including social welfare, criminal justice, healthcare, law enforcement and national security. This chapter sketches the way in which algorithms are or may be used across the spectrum of government decision making — from the drafting of legislation, to judicial decision making, to the implementation of laws by the executive branch. Then, based on scholarship in the field and our own empirical, doctrinal and theoretical work, the chapter examines the rule of law values affected by automated government decision making systems and the legal and practical issues that the implementation and supervision of such systems may pose in practice.

The term validity of legal norms usually means the obligation of legal norms for entities whose behavior is regulated by a legal norm. In legal theory, the concept of validity of law is used in a different sense. Kelzen's idea of the validity of law stems from his so-called gradation theory according to which each legal norm is valid on the basis of an immediately higher legal norm, while at the head of the hierarchy is the constitution as the highest legal norm, which bases its validity on the assumed norm. According to Kelzen, a legal norm derives its validity, that is, its obligation, not from its content but from its form. In this sense, legal norms are valid because they are ideally obligatory, regardless of the fact whether subjects are familiar with them and their content. Kelzen puts special emphasis on distinguishing the validity of law from the efficacy of law. While the validity of law means that legal norms are mandatory, that is, that subjects should behave in the manner described in the norm itself, the effectiveness of law means that the addressees actually behave in the manner prescribed by the legal norm. However, although Kelsen separates the validity and effectiveness of a legal norm, he still believes that there is a connection between validity and effectiveness because only an effective norm is considered valid.

Human rights have become the grounding of human solidarity. They are, today, the substance of the brotherhood of man. They take the place once occupied by "our common clay," our common ancestry, and our common relationship with the Deity. This being the case, it is important to understand what, in turn, grounds human rights. There is nothing approaching a consensus: indeed, the impressive edifice on which much of the political order of the world now rests has been constructed based on the conscious decision by its principal authors to prescind from asking this basic question. Unsurprisingly under these circumstances, more and more rights are being proposed, and many divergent theories are propounded as to their bases. This Essay considers four proposed bases and rejects them. It proposes an account according to which the ethical basis for human rights is the protection of fundamental human attributes.

Cross-border transactions are generating corresponding globalisation of law enforcement efforts. Culture has significantly influenced the legal analysis of anti-bribery law. With the increase of transnational bribery, benefits from globalisation will be undermined unless an effective legal regime can mitigate the harm of bribery. It is perceived that corruption in China is more prevalent than in the West given its embedded place in Chinese culture. It is further alleged that Chinese multinational companies (MNCs) are taking advantage of an unlevel playing field, as they are not subject to stringently-enforced anti-bribery laws. This hypothesis creates a myriad of anti-bribery problems in terms of legislation and enforcement, which particularly manifest in China's perceived cultural toleration of bribery. Cultural assumptions undermine the global anti-bribery regime and compromise potential collaborative anti-bribery efforts across jurisdictions in a rapidly globalizing world. The Chinese culture does not necessarily impede China's criminalisation of paying bribes to foreign officials. It is argued that the cultural role should not be overestimated, otherwise the hazard of the ethnocentric engagement with the Chinese culture would affect the ability of foreign MNCs to integrate their global compliance programmes. Multinationals can only mitigate their exposure to criminal liability globally, provided that they comply robustly with anti-bribery laws of both home and host jurisdictions.

The criminal law has been subject to both increased demands in the societal functions that it is expected to perform, and heightened scrutiny for those points at which it fails to achieve these ends. The resulting pressures put into question the criminal law's capacity to perform justice. Rather than turning to contemporary sources to assess the criminal law's relationship to claims of justice, the author uses an analysis of the ancient myth found in the Book of Job as a means of exposing the irresolvable tensions at the core of the criminal law system's quest for justice. In the end, injustice manifests as senseless suffering. The profound precariousness of contemporary criminal law is that its prescribed task is to make sense of suffering but it is always unable to wholly achieve this goal and is, indeed, always on the precipice of making things worse.