Suchergebnisse

This paper examines the problems of incorporating norms of customary law into the substantive criminal laws of a Melanesian state system. It focuses on the particular crime of sorcery in Vanuatu. It explores the historical and sociological contexts to the belief in sorcery in society today, and also how behaviour generated by the belief (allegations of sorcery and sorcerer-related attacks) is dealt with by the non-state customary legal system. It then investigates how the state has treated the issue of sorcery, discussing both legislative initiatives and also a number of cases brought before the courts in recent years. The paper argues that merely transplanting substantive norms from the customary system into the state system without consideration of the procedural and institutional framework those norms were developed within, or the ramifications the law may have on other aspects of the legal system, is doomed to failure. Finally, it highlights a number of issues that must be considered in order to successfully initiate a more fruitful process of legal pluralism.

The thesis of this Article is that the substantive criminal law is the missing element in sentencing reform. If comprehensive sentencing reform strategies are to have lasting effect, legislatures must reintroduce the criminal law to the sentencing process. This step will require a rekindled interest in a moral analysis of the substantive criminal law and the enactment of greatly reduced statutory sentence maximums, along with more conventional institutional changes to structure discretion and increase official accountability. Objections to American sentencing procedures range from the principled to the practical. Part II of this Article summarizes the basic objections that have influenced recent sentencing initiatives.All concern the unstructured discretion and absence of official accountability that characterize indeterminate sentencing. Part III then outlines the sentencing law reforms that have been proposed or adopted in response to these objections. Part IV asserts and at-tempts to demonstrate that sentencing in America has been divorced from the criminal law, and that present reform proposals are inadequate because they fail to address this separation. At trial, constitutional rights, the law of evidence, and the criminal burden of proof provide the defendant with important procedural safeguards. In addition, the state must meet all substantive criminal law requirements before the defendant can be convicted. Most convictions, however, result from guilty pleas. In these cases trial rights and protections are unimportant. Under an indeterminate sentencing scheme, defendants have virtually no rights at sentencing except for procedural rights such as the rights to counsel and to present and contest evidence. A court, therefore, can convict and sentence a defendant without ever applying substantive criminal law requirements. The new sentencing reforms have not ad-dressed this systemic flaw. Thus, part V of this Article argues that the logic and effect of sentencing reform proposals require that the criminal law ...

This chapter makes a case for the republican tradition in political philosophy as a theory that can provide a rational reconstruction of criminal law. It argues that republicanism offers a reconstruction of criminal law that is both rational and plausible. In particular, it shows that republicanism can help us to make sense of three important features of criminal law: first, the conviction that crime is a public wrong; second, the general pattern of development of criminal law historically; and third, the public nature of criminal law as a cooperative enterprise. To begin, however, it explains what republicanism is and why it is a proper place to look for a rational reconstruction of criminal law.

This article considers the concept of the essence of smuggling and its negative consequences for society. The general principles of legal liability for smuggling in Ukraine in accordance with current legislation are analyzed. The main types of smuggling and ways to counteract this criminal offense have also been investigated and identified. It is important to emphasize that smuggling is the transportation or movement of goods, as defined in Articles 201, 201-1 and 305 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, across the customs border of the Ukrainian state, but outside customs control in order to hide the subject of illegal transportation from customs and law enforcement agencies. As a result of this work, we have defined the general principles of legal liability for smuggling in accordance with the criminal law of Ukraine. In general, the punishment for this criminal offense depends on many factors, such as the subject of smuggling and the number of similar offenses committed. We also explored the main ways to combat smuggling, which aims to prevent its implementation. Today, the smuggling of goods, and hence non-compliance with customs rules in Ukraine, is increasing, and as a result destabilizes the foreign policy of the Ukrainian state, which negatively affects the national economy and its industries. That is why this topic is relevant today. The main problem, which is the illegal crossing of the border of Ukraine, is currently very common in our country due to the fact that the central authorities do not pay enough attention to it. During the research of this topic, we turned to current regulations and research of prominent scientists who also worked on this issue. The main measures to prevent smuggling when moving goods across the customs border of Ukraine were identified. Smuggling is actually the exemption of imported goods from any taxes and duties on the territory of Ukraine. Basically, such corruption is based on the gap in information flows with Ukraine's trading partners. Throughout the developed world, ...

Whether it is a question of the age below which a child cannot be held liable for their actions, or the attribution of responsibility to defendants with mental illnesses, mental incapacity is a central concern for legal actors, policy makers, and legislators when it comes to crime and justice. Understanding the terrain of mental incapacity in criminal law is notoriously difficult; it involves tracing overlapping and interlocking legal doctrines, current and past practices including those of evidence and proof, and also medical and social understanding of mental order and incapacity. Bringing together previously disparate discussions on criminal responsibility from law, psychology, and philosophy, this book provides a close study of mental incapacity defences, analysing their development through historical cases to the modern era. It maps the shifting boundaries between normality and abnormality as constructed in law, arguing that 'manifest madness' — the distinct character of mental incapacity revealed by this interdisciplinary approach — has a broad significance for understanding the criminal law as a whole.

"Text of the Criminal syndicalism act": p. 30. ; With: California Crusaders. The California criminal syndicalism law. Supplement. Concerning the recent United States Supreme court decision on the Oregon criminal syndicalism law. San Francisco, California crusaders [1937?] [4] p. ; Mode of access: Internet.

This article supports constraint of the modern federal criminal law regime through greater attention to, and use of, congressional investigation and over =sight powers. Through an analysis of the 2009 and 2010 United States House of Representatives hearings on over-criminalization, this article asserts that Congress has political and constitutional incentives to use its investigation and oversight powers to address these problems. Conventional wisdom asserts that political disincentives to reduce the federal criminal law regime and weaknesses in investigative and oversight powers limit congressional effectiveness.

This report is an abridged version of CRS Report R42001, Attempt: An Overview of Federal Criminal Law, by Charles Doyle, without the footnotes, attributions, citations to authority, or appendix found in the longer report.

The growing inter-relatedness between EC and EU law with national criminal law can be well illustrated with the example of enforcement of EU law. Criminal law is one of the latest examples of increasing European integration within the perimeters of explicit competences of EU/EC law which additionally is driven ahead by what functionalist theories of European integration might refer to as a spill-over of approaches. Necessities of crossborder crime and criminal enforcement make cooperation necessary. The latter takes place to a certain degree on the basis of positive law established on the basis of the Treaties. It also takes place in the context of evolutionary development of what one might refer to as 'administrative networks.'

This report provides an overview of the corporate criminal liability on federal law. It also further discusses entities subject to corporate criminal liability, Imputed Intent and knowledge etc.

Increasing use of technologies in the last decades has created an unprecedented opportunity to systematically collect and use a wide variety of data (including personal data) for different purposes. Information and data collected and processed with the help of new technologies is used not only for the purposes of natural and legal persons but also for various other purposes. Intelligence services that ensure prevention of crime must perform their functions to ensure safety of public. When doing so, they use various means and methods of information collection, which help them to reach their goals. However, the means applied undermine and intensively restrict a person's right to private life. Given that two legal interests compete during the application of criminal intelligence measures, i.e. the individual's right to privacy and ensuring of public security, the Author seeks to analyse their points of contact – restrictions of application of criminal intelligence measures, which in theory are designed to ensure the person's right to private life. In this article, the Author analyses the restrictions on the application of criminal intelligence measures, which are present in international, Lithuanian legislation and compares them with relevant requirements set forth in the practice of European Union Court of Justice.

By an amended information, in a recent Washington case, respondent was charged with the crime of perjury in the first degree, the information alleging that respondent came before a notary public for the purpose of giving his deposition which was to be used in a pending civil case, that he was sworn according to law to tell the truth, and that he thereupon testified falsely with the intent that his testimony as written in the deposition be used in that civil case. It affirmatively appeared, both from the allegations of the original information and from the state's admission in open court, that the deposition was never subscribed by respondent. The superior court sustained respondent's demurrer and dismissed the prosecution. Upon the state's appeal, it was held that the demurrer had been properly sustained.

Like other contributors to this Nova Scotia issue of the Law Journal I was asked to comment upon any interesting developments, whether in cases or legislation, that had occurred in a particular area of law, in my case criminal law, since the time of the last "round-up". 1 When I began I intended to do as I had been asked; and there were, indeed, a number of matters which I felt to be worthy of comment. 2 1 was waylaid, however. I came across a case in which the Appeal Division of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court took a position which so strongly offended my "sense of injustice" that I abandoned my former efforts and decided to focus on the issues which the Court's position raises. The decision to which I refer is Dunn v. The Queen;3 the position which I will analyze concerns mistake of law.

It is not a crime to attempt to commit most federal offenses. Unlike state law, federal law has no generally applicable of attempt. Congress, however, has outlawed the attempt to commit a substantial number of federal crimes on an individual basis. In doing so, it has proscribed the attempt, set its punishment, and left to the federal courts the task of further developing the law in the area. This is an abridged version of CRS Report R42001, Attempt: An Overview of Federal Criminal Law, by Charles Doyle, without the footnotes, attributions, citations to authority, or appendix found in the longer report.

As a former editor of the predecessor to this journal, namely Merkourios, it gives me great pleasure to write the editorial for the 81st issue of the Utrecht Journal of International and European Law ("UJIEL") on 'General Issues in International and European Law'. After first providing a general overview of the materials contained in this issue, I will briefly highlight some of the main points made in, the five articles, the case note, two book reviews, and the interview.