Suchergebnisse

One of the innovations of Islamic Penal Code in 2013 was to accept criminal liability of legal entities. By accepting criminal liability of legal entities, the way to punish them is arisen. As a legal person cannot commit any crime, any punishments are not applicable to them. Accordingly, Article 20 of this Law enumerated a list of penalties applicable to legal persons and it was tried to use penalties in accordance with the legal entities to deal with them. Punishments such as dissolution, confiscation, cash fine, announcement of the judgment, Diyeh, social and economic exclusion; such as a ban on business activities, prohibition of the public invitation to raise capital and ban from drawing business documents listed in Article 20 and Article 14, are a set of punishments which relatively different from usual punishment for individuals. These penalties are relative diversity, but what is objectionable is that the details and conditions of implementation of each of these punishments are not clear. If legislator described the details exactly or provided the condition to require the adoption of The Executive Bylaw of the punishment, it would be better. Given that all the points and issues about penalties for legal persons are not stated in this law as well as ambiguities in the law for a comprehensive definition of legal person, the way to implement main and supplementary punishments, In this study it was tried to evaluate and criticize the legal entities penalties including main and supplementary ones and their grading.

The article is devoted to the most important issues of morality and law, issues that make up public relations' value structure - justice and humanism. Justice and humanism as universally recognized virtues are ambiguously understood and interpreted in literature. Still, they are fundamental ideas that are the foundation of the harmonious existence of the human community. As the fundamental ideas of the virtues considered in the article are reflected in the modern Criminal Code of the Russian Federation as the principles of criminal law. What is the ontological essence of the principles established in the Criminal Code, what is the influence of ancient truths on the formation of the semantics of the "virtues of criminal law", what is the error of the legislator who formulated these principles - the essence of the article proposed to the reader.

Crime is perceived as a perennial problem in society. However, criminological study has arguably learned very little about questions of criminality. The reason for this is that criminology remains largely a modernist empirical discipline with attendant modernist assumptions. Primary among these is the assumption that criminals are pathological in their responses to the world around them. This book demonstrates that this is not the case. Crewe deconstructs conventional modernist criminological conceptualizations of the role of individuals in the construction of the world of which they are a part and provides a radically new model of the relationship between humans' way of being in the world and the capacities of society to constrain them. This book reconsiders the relationship between society, crime and the law and includes a foreword from Professor Bruce Arrigo, University of North Carolina, USA.

The subject of the article was the negative tendency in recent years to use by law enforcers the high repressive potential enshrined in art. 35 and 210 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (CC RF) on liability for the creation, leadership and participation in criminal communities for the purpose of criminal prosecution of owners and heads of legal companies that use the latter to commit crimes in economic field. More and more often, the law enforcer began to consider the organizational structure of a commercial organization, fixed in the charter and well-documented, as indisputable evidence of the presence of structural features of a criminal community (criminal organization). Until recently, such an interpretation of the criminal law was not hindered by either the criminal law or the position of the highest court in criminal matters. An attempt to solve this problem by the Federal Law of April 1, 2020 No. 73-ФЗ initiated by the President of the country, according to the author, is a "half measure". This novelty also raises new problems for the law enforcer in interpreting such valuation concepts as "reliable knowledge" and "are not subject to criminal liability ... due to the organizational and staff structure of the organization". In this regard, the legislator will be forced to continue the search for new, more effective and reliable barriers for the incorrect application of Article 210 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The author proposes to the expert community a number of specific legal and technical solutions to the problem of the unreasonably widespread application of art. 210 of the CC RF, including: using judicial control over the conformity of the legal entity with the goals of its creation and removing unreasonable restrictions when deciding whether there is a reason for initiating a criminal case under art. 210 CC RF in relation to owners, beneficiaries and heads of organizations, if the latter is charged with creating a legal entity for the purpose of committing a grave or especially grave crime; legislative limitation of the range of grave and especially grave crimes for the commission of which a criminal community (criminal organization) can be created; consolidation in the criminal law of the concept of creating a criminal community (criminal organization) in the form of a legal entity that does not belong to the state and municipal sectors, on the basis of the exceptional character of the criminal purpose of creating such a person.

AbstractWhile all but one U.S. law school and every state bar ask about criminal history on their admissions application, such inquiries vary considerably in the depth of information sought. One potential explanation for variations in the depth of criminal history inquiries among law schools and state bars relates to minority threat dynamics. Drawing on data quantifying the depth of criminal history inquiries for 190 ABA‐approved law schools and all state bars, as well as school and state demographics, this study explores the issue for the first time. Negative binomial regressions reveal that law schools and state bars located in states with larger Black and Latino populations employ more probing criminal history inquiries. We also find that this relationship is parabolic—where the minority threat effect is negative in states with a critical mass of Black/Latino residents. Finally, minority threat effects for law school criminal history inquiries are moderated by state bar criminal history inquiries, suggesting that law schools are cued by state bar policies. These results provide some support for minority threat theory, informing debates about the continued use of criminal history inquiries to screen prospective law students and lawyers, and the inclusiveness of the legal profession generally.