Suchergebnisse

Starting from the definition of economic crime as a totality of illegal acts committed by an individual or a group of individuals to obtain a financial or professional advantage, criminal law protection of this type of crime is becoming more popular both from a theoretical and practical point of view, primarily due to its constituent elements (system of incrimination, subject of economic offense and forms of responsibility, sanctions), and secondary by identifying opportunities for its conception and realization. Therefore, this paper, analyzes situation both in terms of determining the causes of economic crime and responsibility for economic crimes, and in terms of the legal and factual opportunity to realize the criminal law protection in a modern democratic society and market economy, establishment and implementation of appropriate repressive and preventive measures to combat this type of crime

Cover -- Half Title -- Series Page -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Table of Contents -- Tables and figures -- Preface -- Abbreviations -- 1. Introduction -- Bringing the two fields together -- Defining the criminal offence -- The scope of international human rights law -- 2. An international human rights law approach -- Subjects and violations -- Applying international human rights law to criminalization -- Anote on human rights and human duties -- Summary -- 3. Rights in criminal theory -- Use of rights in criminal theory - Feinberg's welfare interest rights -- Challenges with welfare interest rights -- Rights, wrongfulness, and harm -- Further notions of rights - continental legal theory -- Summary -- 4. Crime and criminalization obligations in international human rights law -- The general security of person obligation -- The specific crime prevention obligation -- The general crime investigatory obligation -- Summary -- 5. Criminalization in human rights treaties -- Criminalization obligations in human rights treaties -- ICERD Article 4 -- CAT Article 4 -- OP-CRC-AC Article 4 and OP-CRC-SC Article 3 -- CPED Articles 4 and 25 -- Lessons from human rights treaty-based criminalization -- Summary -- 6. Criminalization in human rights cases -- Direct negative and positive criminalization cases -- Conviction cases -- Investigatory and procedural obligation cases -- Criminalization cases - acts and rights -- Criminalization cases - outcomes -- Summary -- 7. Reasoning in criminalization cases -- Societal interests -- Autonomy -- Harm and offense -- Community consensus -- Human dignity -- Other grounds of reasoning -- Criminal theory concepts -- ECHR structural principles -- Paternalism and vulnerability -- Links between grounds of reasoning -- Summary -- 8. Differences between criminal theory and an international human rights law approach.

The traditional Swedish monocentric and uniform legal model is challenged by an increasingly diverse contemporary legal situation associated with the development of a multicultural and pluralistic society. How Swedish criminal courts handle this in terms of understanding and framing minority legal culture is addressed by looking into what role is given to this culture in the courts' construction of facts and in sentencing. A particularly interesting case in this regard is the national minority Roma, seen as an example of a Swedish group that brings other normative systems into the state legal system through their distinct legal culture. Through an investigation of written verdicts, it is demonstrated that accounts of Roma legal culture face 'legal silencing' by the court – it is either not given significance or is given a form of attention that essentializes and alienates the culture. An analysis into why this legal silence occurs and into the possibilities for taking legal culture into account is provided. It is argued that there are structural barriers hampering the courts from taking legal culture into account but also that these structures can be changed for betterment to ensure equality before the law and hence legitimacy in a multicultural society.

From the adoption of the Criminal Code in 2006 until the latest amendments of 2019, the Serbian criminal legislation treated recidivism as an optional aggravating circumstance, which had its specific legal status in comparison with other mitigating and aggravating circumstances. According to the new legal solution, instead of being optional, recidivism has become a mandatory aggravating circumstance. Together with clearly specified conditions for harsher penalties this narrows down the possibility of free judicial decision-making when meting out punishment. The paper answers several questions: whether harsher penalties for recidivists are only the result of continuous tightening of repression at a normative level, whether and to what extent the criminal-law framework has been improved, and whether returning to some solutions, which were not normally applied in court practice, can be marked as appropriate to achieve the desired degree of crime prevention. Final critical conclusion is that the new legal solution on recidivism appears regressive, given that the court is strictly bound by the law through oblitatory conditions regarding prior and persistent offending, which is in compliance with the general trend of tightening repression at the normative level and reducing the role of the court to the level of administrative application of the norm.

Diese innovative Studie versteht das nationalsozialistische Strafrecht – in Übereinstimmung mit Kontinuitäts- und Radikalisierungsthese – als rassistisch (antisemitisch), völkisch ("germanisch") und totalitär ausgerichtete Fortschreibung der autoritären und antiliberalen Tendenzen des deutschen Strafrechts der Jahrhundertwende und der Weimarer Republik. Dies wird durch die systematisch-analytische Aufbereitung der Texte relevanter Autoren belegt, wobei es primär um die – für sich selbst sprechenden – Texte, nicht die moralische Beurteilung ihrer Verfasser geht. Dabei werden auch Erkenntnisse zur Rezeption des deutschen (NS-)Strafrechts in Lateinamerika mitgeteilt. Die besagte Kontinuität existierte nicht nur rückwärtsgewandt (post-Weimar), sondern auch zukunftsgerichtet (Bonner Republik). Kurzum, das NS-Strafrecht kam weder aus dem Nichts noch ist es nach 1945 völlig verschwunden. Der zeitgenössische Versuch der identitären Rekonstruktion des germanischen Mythos durch die sog. "neue Rechte" schließt daran nahtlos an. "alles … ungeheuer spannend … viel neues Material … In der Sache stimme ich … durchgehend zu, insbesondere auch bei der Behandlung des Neukantianismus."Prof. (em.). Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Claus Roxin, München "großartiges Buch …. Materialreichtum und Sicherheit der Beurteilungen beeindruckend"Prof. (em.) Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Günther Jakobs, Bonn "Eine höchst beeindruckende Leistung, die sowohl ungewöhnlich tiefe Einblicke in das nationalsozialistische (Un-)Rechtsdenken eröffnet als auch ungemein breite Vertrautheit mit der lateinamerikanischen Strafrechtsdoktrin erkennen lässt."Prof. (em.) Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Albin Eser, M.C.J., Freiburg i. Br. "... ein gehaltvolles Buch, das für die Bestimmung des Gegenstandes der modernen Strafrechtswissenschaft wichtig ist, jedenfalls werden sollte. Die vorherrschende Meinung und die übliche Arbeitsweise im Strafrecht wird Mühe haben, die Themen aufzunehmen, die hier mit Klarheit ausformuliert wird. … höchst informative Auseinandersetzung mit Zaffaronis Ansichten und dabei ohne jeden vorwurfsvollen Ton ..."Prof. (em.) Dr. Wolfgang Naucke, Frankfurt am Main "ein gelungenes Werk, von dem ich sehr profitiert habe"Prof. (em.) Dr. Dr. h.c. Franz Streng, Uni Erlangen Nürnberg "Beeindruckend… Ein solches Buch zu dieser Zeit empfinde ich als Glücksfall. Entschieden wird der Gegenwartsbezug herausgestellt. Damit wird gleichermaßen entschieden Tendenzen entgegengetreten, das Thema der Strafrechtsgeschichte zu überantworten. Dem Materialreichtum der Schrift wird sich niemand entziehen können."Prof. (em.) Dr. Klaus Marxen, Berlin"Die überaus materialreiche Schrift öffnet die Augen für die Kontinuität des Strafrechts in den Jahren vor, während und nach dem Ende des Nationalsozialismus. Sie zeigt zugleich die – durchaus aktuellen – Gefahren, die von einer Ent-Rationalisierung des Strafrechts und von dem Postulat einer vagen Gemeinschaftsethik als dessen vermeintlicher Grundlage ausgehen."Prof. (em.) Dr. Thomas Weigend, Köln

Recent studies have highlighted the instrumental use of language, wherein actors deploy claims to strategically pursue policy goals in the absence of persuasion or socialisation. Yet these accounts are insufficiently attentive to the social context in which an audience assesses and responds to strategic appeals. I present a theoretical account that highlights the distinctly powerful role of international law in framing strategic argumentation. Legalised discourses are especially legitimate because law is premised on a set of internally coherent practices that constitute actors and forms of action. I then illustrate the implications in a hard case concerning US efforts to secure immunities from International Criminal Court jurisdiction. Contrary to realist accounts of law as a tool of the powerful, I show that both pro- and anti-ICC diplomacy was channelled through a legal lens that imposed substantial constraints on the pursuit of policy objectives. Court proponents responded to US diplomatic pressure with their own legal arguments; this narrowed the scope of the exemptions, even as the Security Council temporarily conceded to US demands. While the US sought to marry coercion with argumentative appeals, it failed to generate a lasting change in global practice concerning ICC jurisdiction. Adapted from the source document.

This paper considers why some harm-generating activities are controlled by criminal law and criminal sanctions while others are subject to some other mechanism such as civil law, administrative law, regulation or the tax system. It looks at the question from the perspective of the law and economics approach. We seek to identify the comparative benefits of using the criminal law relative to other enforcement mechanisms and - more broadly - why certain specific behaviours are criminalized. The paper argues that an economic approach emphasizing the relative merits of alternative legal instruments for bringing about harm reduction can provide an explanation for a number of recent legal developments. It argues also that the willingness of legislators to combine the use of sanctions traditionally used in one area of the law with sanctions from other areas is more readily explicable in economic terms than in other terms.