Suchergebnisse

Due to the new instruments on human rights, both constitutional and international, the redefinition on the concept of public security needs a new refreshing as a preliminary and required task to the criminal political analysis simply because the view over them , either narrow, wide or both at the same time, will affect its reach, content and success in accomplishing them. Thus, these actions may be part of the new legal contexts or could end up infringing them.

For a long time, the Venezuelan democracy was an exception in South America due to a party system that was based on what was known as the 'Punto Fijo Pact'. At the start of the 1980s a series of economic, social and political events began to occur, which caused this 'exceptionalism' to stagger and disrupt the institutionality of the traditional Venezuelan democratic State. The events led to a deep national crisis and the birth of a new political era. By the end of the 1990s, there had been a significant shift towards left-wing governance. Hugo Chávez Frías subsequently won the presidential elections in 1998. This paper analyzes some aspects of the criminal policies that were implemented during the reign of left-wing leader Chávez till his death in 2013 and thereafter by Chavist party president elect, Nicolás Maduro during 2013-2014. Four stages can be identified in the behavior of incarceration rates. The first stage, from 1999 to 2000, was characterized by the lowest recordings of incarceration rates and the lowest measured percentage of preventive detention in Venezuela in thirty years. The second stage, from 2001 to 2005, saw a slight increase in the incarceration rate which then remained stable. The third stage, from 2006 to 2012, and the fourth stage, from 2013 to 2014, are characterized by sustained increases in preventive detention, incarceration and murder rates.

The issue of penal politization has been cited by Dionysios Spinellis in his presentation concerning Top hat Crimes in Penal Law Summit XV of 1994. Application of penal law in the so-called malpublic administration', refers to the three main issues in penal law. First, forms of ‗malpublic administration actswhich have been formulated as criminal act (criminalization process). Second, legal subjects that are liable for malpublic administration'. Third, kinds and forms of sanctions applicable to the ‗malpublic administration' deeds (penalization process). Camus acknowledged justification of penalization to offender, but this penalization should not eliminate hir or her human power in obtaining new values and new adaptation

Tujuan dari adanya hukum pidana, tidaklah berbeda dengan tujuan hukum secara umum, dimana hukum pidana bertujuan untuk menciptakan keamanan dan kesejahteraan ditengah-tengah masyarakat. Untuk mencapai tujuan tersebut, maka pemerintah selaku yang berwenang, memiliki hak untuk membuat kebijakan-kebijakan politik terkait pelaksanaan hukum pidana di Indonesia. Negara yang pada prinsipnya memiliki kekuasaan untuk melaksanakannya, dalam hal ini pemerintah. Adapun salah satu bentuk kebijakannya adalah melakukan tindakan-tindakan yang sekiranya harus dijalankan supaya orang tidak lagi berbuat jahat (Criminal Policy). Kebijakan itu tentunya juga harus sejalan dengan Social Policy demi mencapai kesejahteraan serta perlindungan bagi seluruh masyarakat. Namun pada kenyataan di lapangan masih ada ketidaksejalanan antara criminal policy dan social policy. Maka untuk menciptakan kesesuaian antara keduanya salah satu hal yang sangat berpengaruh adalah dibutuhkan pemerintahan yang bersih (Good Governance) selaku yang berkuasa untuk mengambil kebijakan dalam suatu negara. Sehingga pada akhirnya menjadi suatu kemestian bahwa criminal policy dan social policy yang bermuara kepada pembaharuan hukum pidana di Indonesia khususnya.

Acceleration in modern life requires acceleration, including acceleration on the highway. The accumulation of interests that are centralized on this highway creates a conflict of interest that ends in material loss or loss of life. Many road users do not realize that the legal consequences of negligence are categorized as criminal acts because they cause others to suffer. Legal politics the issuance of Law Number 22of 2009 concerning Road Traffic and Transportation as an embodiment of criminal policy to provide legal protection and legal certainty for citizens who are casualties of road traffic accidents. Through criminal policy, it is expected that there will be order, smoothness, security in road traffic and legal certainty and legal protection for road users.

RESUMEN: Grupos de expertos son convocados a menudo por los gobiernos colombianos para que presenten diagnósticos y propuestas referidas a los problemas de violencia y criminalidad. Este artículo analiza el trabajo de algunos de esos grupos o comisiones y el impacto de sus recomendaciones en el diseño de la política criminal o, más concretamente, de la legislación penal producida en la segunda mitad del siglo veinte. El texto contiene algunas reflexiones sobre las condiciones de integración de ese tipo de comisiones, y los efectos que ellas producen en el reconocimiento de "los expertos". Es importante anticipar que la guerra es un elemento de contexto común en los grupos de expertos, en las recomendaciones que formularon y las normas penales que se analizaron en este artículo. De ahí las alusiones a las relaciones entre guerra y derecho penal a lo largo del escrito. ; ABSTRACT: Expert commissions are often convened by Colombian governments to diagnose and submit proposals concerning the problems of violence and crime. This article analyzes the work of some of those groups or commissions and the impact of their recommendations in the design of criminal policy or more specifically of legislation produced in the second half of the twentieth century. The text contains some reflections on the conditions of integration of such commissions, and the effects they produce in the recognition of "experts". It is important to anticipate that war is a common element of context in these expert groups, on their recommendations and on criminal laws analyzed in this article. This explains the references to the relations between war and criminal law in the paper.

This article is encouraging this problem solving with finding and analyzing the formulation of the criminal offense criteria to punishable by death in Indonesian criminal law and reformulation of setting the criminal offender measurement that sentenced to death from the perspective of ius constituendum. The article based on normative legal research by examining primary and secondary legal materials by collecting legal-materials using a card system. The analytical approach uses legislation, concepts, and comparisons. The research analysis was present in the form of descriptive analysis with evaluative, systematic, formulating, and argumentative techniques in this article. The results of this research that conducted are the Indonesian criminal law does not regulate the criminal act criteria that punishable by death so that the execution of the death penalty results in injustice to both the perpetrator, the victim, and the community. The reformulation of Indonesian criminal law shall focus on the objectives and guidelines for the punishment of perpetrators of criminal offenses punishable by death refers to the Draft Criminal Code and the involvement of the victim and the community in their interests if in the execution of capital punishment there is a change to imprisonment or life imprisonment

The paper is concerned with the modern concept of the criminal policy of the Russian state from the standpoint of determining the main directions of improving the criminal and criminal procedural law.

The subject of the study is the criminal policy in the context of contradictions in the functioning of the courts.The purpose of the study is to investigate, which contradictions of criminal policy are generated by a multi-level system of courts, and which mechanisms for overcoming them in order to optimize criminal policy could be found out.The methodology. In modern conditions of diversification of methodological approaches to organizing and conducting political-legal research, it is important not to discard, but to rethink and rediscover the epistemological possibilities of the methods of classical science, especially the method of dialectical analysis.The main results and scope of the study. The use of the category "dialectical contradiction" for the purpose of studying the problems of the functioning of the courts in terms of the interpretation and application of criminal law provisions opens up new possibilities in the study of criminal and judicial policy, as well as determining the prospects for its development. In the study, the law enforcement contradictions of criminal policy refer to the relations between courts of various types and levels that develop in the course of their functioning and reflect the opposite approaches of law enforcement bodies to the interpretation and application of criminal legislation. Considering the level and type of legal proceedings, these contradictions can be summarized in the following groups: (a) between national and international courts; (b) between superior courts of the national legal system; (c) between the courts of various instances of the system of courts of general jurisdiction.The contradictions between national and international courts, emerging in the field of protection of human rights and freedoms, are an objective source of development of judicial practice and policy. The resolution of these contradictions is based on the consensus of various courts and compromise. If the position of the European Court of Human Rights does not contradict the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the state adjusts its legal practice in the direction set by the authoritative international instance by means of: (a) direct application of national legislation with due regard for the ECHR's legal positions; (b) the application of national legislation in its constitutional interpretation by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which does not differ from the decisions and positions of the ECHR; (c) amending national legal acts in pursuance of ECHR judgments. In exceptional cases, when the position of the European Court touches upon issues of the country's constitutional identity, the contradiction between the international and national legal order is resolved by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the basis of the priority of constitutional norms.At the level of the superior national courts the contradictions are represented by the differing positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the assessment and interpretation of criminal law provisions. Such contradictions can be thought of as latent until they are not revealed in constitutional proceedings. The identification and resolution of these contradictions is the most important direction of legal policy in the country; it reflects the consistent solution of the aim of constitutionalization of the criminal law.At the level of the system of courts of general jurisdiction, the concept of "contradiction" can only be applied to those differing approaches of the courts to solving criminal cases that do not go beyond the rule of law. Contradictions arise only when, having correctly established the factual circumstances of the case, the courts disagree in the choice of the legal provision to be applied, although any such choice can be explained and motivated. These contradictions may or may not be related to the quality of criminal legislation. Therefore, the mechanism for their resolution includes not only law revision. It is important to use the capabilities of the judicial system itself to develop a consensual understanding of the textual content of the criminal law and the rules for its application.Conclusions. Overcoming the contradictions of the judicial criminal policy is possible only in the process of communication and dialogue between the courts of different levels on the basis of differentiation of jurisdiction, respect for authority and independence. ; Рассматриваются противоречия судебного уровня реализации уголовной политики, которые складываются в сфере функционирования международных и национальных судов различных уровней при толковании, оценке и применении правовых норм. Предлагается классификация этих противоречий на основе уровня, вида судопроизводства и источника возникновения, которая помогает лучше понять механизм функционирования судебной системы, роль судов в обеспечении верховенства права. Принимая во внимание диалектическую природу противоречий, доказывается, что механизм их преодоления должен включать в себя как организационные решения в части разграничения компетенции судов, так и идейно-нормативные решения, обеспечивающие компромисс судебных позиций ради достижения общей цели соблюдения прав человека при разрешении уголовно-правового конфликта.