Suchergebnisse

Introduction to American criminal law concepts -- Comparing tribal criminal law and American criminal law -- Using American criminal law to control American Indian Nations -- Traditional law today -- Introduction : what is criminal jurisdiction? -- Traditional criminal jurisdiction -- Limitations on tribal criminal jurisdiction imposed by the United States -- Exercising jurisdiction over crimes committed by non-Indians -- Criminal jurisdiction as defined by tribal courts -- Tribal criminal jurisdiction reform : the Tribal Law and Order Act and the Violence Against Women Act -- State and tribal court collaboration -- Overview of criminal laws : statutes and procedures -- The mental state -- A closer look at criminal elements -- Is helping a criminal act? Preliminary crimes and accomplice liability -- Criminal defenses -- The burden of proof -- Rights of criminal defenders -- The law of arrest -- Interrogations and confessions : the right to remain silent -- Search and seizure -- The Exclusionary Rule : remedies for civil rights violations --The right to an attorney/advocate -- Defendant rights at trial -- Victims' rights -- Sentencing : fines and incarceration -- Tribal restorative justice

Legal pluralism was a fundamental feature of the political order in colonial Indonesia. It arose not only from the parsimony of the Dutch East India Company (VOC), but also from colonial doctrine. In the nineteenth century, pressure grew to move from pluralism to universalism in law, and policy battles were fought over a series of issues�the arbitrary rights of colonial officials, flogging (rottingslagen), and the death penalty�but progress towards legal unification was slow and incomplete. Legal pluralism had a lasting effect on Indonesians� attitudes to cultural diversity.

Legal pluralism was a fundamental feature of the political order in colonial Indonesia. It arose not only from the parsimony of the Dutch East India Company (VOC), but also from colonial doctrine. In the nineteenth century, pressure grew to move from pluralism to universalism in law, and policy battles were fought over a series of issues�the arbitrary rights of colonial officials, flogging (rottingslagen), and the death penalty�but progress towards legal unification was slow and incomplete. Legal pluralism had a lasting effect on Indonesians� attitudes to cultural diversity.

The strict criminal liability is one of the institutions which has been accepted and expanded its dimensions in countries, including England, since 19th century. Although, criminal intent or fault is the most important elements of every offenses, but, due to some reasons, such as expediency, necessity, benefit, increasing prevention index, the mens rea element of offense, fully or partially, is sometimes removed or presumed. In Iran's criminal legal system, this legal institution has not been considered formally and explicitly by the legislator, but recently, Iranian legal experts, given some existing necessities, try to put some offenses into the category of the strict criminal liability. In fact, some offencesin criminal legal system, namely traffic offences, bounced cheque, injuries resulted from medical operations and some environmental offences, can be placed under the title of the strict criminal liability. Despite many problems to which the acceptance and development of the strict criminal liability may be faced, It seems, in many cases, this institution can solve the problems related to difficulties of proof and ascertainment of the criminal intent beforecourts. Also, today, Iranian judicial courts don't take into account the mens rea practically and presume itin many cases.

Purpose – The purpose of this article is to provide the reader with some information on the development of liability of legal persons for violations of international criminal law, its implementation practice in common and civil law countries as well as its perspectives of development in the European Union.

To date, "transnational criminal law" has been the dominant paradigm for explaining and mapping rules on corruption in the international legal literature. Transnational criminal law is presented as a system of law descending from multilateral crime control treaties or a field or order that emerges through international political processes of regime formation. Transnational criminal lawyers identify and describe cross-border legal rules, and seek to evaluate them against liberal norms of democratic governance and individual civil and political human rights. This Article details the limits of transnational criminal conceptions of "anticorruption" through a study of proposed changes to Australian laws on corporate foreign bribery. Drawing on primary and secondary documentary sources, domestic and international, it shows that the emerging antipodean rules are only partially transnational, as that term is understood in transnational criminal law theory. Likewise, multilateral "suppression conventions" and related soft laws are but one impetus for the proposed changes to Australian federal anticorruption legislation. Rather, as the transnational legal ordering literature suggests, a recursive process appears to be at work between international organizations and local legislators, as well as transnational non-state actors, both charities and businesses. This process is marked by moments of borrowing from (former) patrons, the US and the UK. However, it is also punctuated by themes of modernization, economic efficiency, and reputation. In addition, Australian anti-corruption activities may result not just in changes to national criminal law, but also in the development of "new" – and controversial – techniques of governance.