Suchergebnisse

Introduction: The text introduces an issue of journal Sociologija. Mintis ir veiksmas, which contains a number of papers presented in the Baltic Criminological Conference in 2006.

Crime related publications in mass media have big impact on the public understanding of crime situation, as well as of the strategy and tactics in current criminal policy. Due to this fact, the diffusion of this kind of information becomes a serious social and political problem in modern society. The article "Crime and Press in Lithuanian Society" analyses trends and structure of crime related publications in Lithuanian press, their inner ideology, and public attitude to crime related publications. The article points on the fact that publications in Lithuanian press are not adequate to the official description of crime situation in society, create distorted image of crime, and misinform public about the real state of affairs in criminal justice. In its turn, images of crime and criminal justice could negatively influence the implementation of effective democratic criminal policy in Lithuania.

Crime related publications in mass media have big impact on the public understanding of crime situation, as well as of the strategy and tactics in current criminal policy. Due to this fact, the diffusion of this kind of information becomes a serious social and political problem in modern society. The article "Crime and Press in Lithuanian Society" analyses trends and structure of crime related publications in Lithuanian press, their inner ideology, and public attitude to crime related publications. The article points on the fact that publications in Lithuanian press are not adequate to the official description of crime situation in society, create distorted image of crime, and misinform public about the real state of affairs in criminal justice. In its turn, images of crime and criminal justice could negatively influence the implementation of effective democratic criminal policy in Lithuania.

1989 m. birželio 27 d. Vilniaus universiteto Filosofijos katedros asistentas Arūnas Poviliūnas apgynė filosofijos mokslų kandidato disertaciją "Istorijos idėja filosofijoje". Disertanto mokslinis vadovas – doc. A. Lozuraitis, oficialieji oponentai – profesoriai J. Minkevičius ir R. Plečkaitis bei doc. T. Sodeika. Disertacijoje teigiama, kad teoriškai eksplikuota istorijos filosofijos koncepcija formuojasi tik Renesanso epochoje kaip antropocentristinės pasaulėžiūros padarinys. Analizuojama istorijos problema klasikinėje vokiečių filosofijoje (I. Kantas, G. Hegelis). Paskutinėje dalyje nagrinėjamas materialistinės istorijos sampratos susiformavimas.

Straipsnyje aptariami filosofiniai, istoriniai ir socialiniai korupcijos aspektai. Autoriai tiria, kaip korupciją suvokia skirtingos baudžiamojo teisingumo paradigmos – klasikinė, pozityvistinė ir konstrukcionistinė, kuriose korupcija atitinkamai interpretuojama kaip yda ir nuodėmė, blogas elgesys arba konfliktas tarp viešojo ir privataus intereso. Straipsnyje pateikiama analizė leidžia formuluoti išvadą, kad korupcijos kriminalizacija turi savo teisinę logiką ir yra priklausoma nuo konkretaus socialinio bei kultūrinio konteksto, todėl negali būti laikoma universaliu viešųjų ir privačių interesų konfliktų sprendimo įrankiu.

Introduction -- Part 1. East and Central Europe -- The Covid-19 Pandemic Crisis and its Impact on Crime Rates in Bulgaria -- Covid-19 and Crime in Serbia -- Pandemic and Infodemic in Lithuania -- Crime, Law Enforcement and Rule of Law in Time of the Covid-19 Pandemic in Poland -- Covid-19, Crime and Social Control in Slovenia -- Influence of Covid-19 Pandemic on Social Control, Crime Patterns and Life in Prison in Hungary -- Part 2. South Europe -- Crime, Criminal Policy and Social Reactions in Greece in the Era of Covid-19 -- The Covid-19 Pandemic in Italy: the Effects on Society and Crime -- Social and Criminal Impact of Covid-19 in Spain -- How did the Pandemics Shaped Crime and Justice in Portugal? -- Part 3. West and North Europe -- The Covid-19 Pandemic in Germany. Prevention Measures, Protest and the Impact on Crime Rates -- Covid-19: Policies, Trust and Crime in the Netherlands -- Patterns of Crime during the Covid-19 Pandemic in Belgium -- Violent Crime in Finland during the First Year of the Covid-19 Pandemic -- Violent Crime and Covid-19 in England and Wales -- Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Crime in Switzerland in 2020. A First Assessment -- Conclusion -- Index.

This volume analyzes the development of the reactions to Covid-19 by governments, the public and the crime patterns in 16 European countries. All countries are members of the European Union and share common European norms and values, but the Covid-19 pandemic can serve as an example of how these norms and values are interpreted differently with regard to peoples trust in public institutions, governmental control strategies, dealing with fear, anxiety and other emotional responses to the new virus, crime patterns and law enforcement priorities to prevent and combat them. The volume provides empirical data based on available statistics, media analysis and qualitative data from interviews and observations, and examines the similarities and differences in crime patterns and the consequences for local communities and law enforcement priorities.

The paper presents the results of sociological researches carried out within the frame­work of the project "Homicides in Lithuania: Criminological Research" carried out in 2012–2013 and supported by the Research Council of Lithuania. The sociological part of the project was intended to analyze the social factors that influence the homicides, as well as public attitudes toward the murders. In order to achieve this goal, there were reviewed the existing criminological theoretical insights on this issue, as well as ana­lyzed the empirical data on various social aspects of homicides. In the present publica­tion, the authors discuss the social, economic, and geopolitical contexts of homicides in Lithuania, present the sociological portrait of a murder based on the analysis of 894 criminal cases, and scrutinize various aspects of public attitudes towards homicides, murders, their victims, and the role of governmental institutions in the homicides' con­trol and prevention in Lithuanian society. The statistical analysis of homicides and other negative social and economic indi­cators among European states reveals Lithuania to belong to the so-called "post-Soviet cluster" that may indirectly point at the historical socio-political roots of homicides in the country. It could also explain the dramatically high rate of homicides in Lithuania and other Baltic countries as compared with the European Union states. The study of criminal cases in Lithuania demonstrates peculiarities in murderers' age and gender: in principle, only younger people commit group murders, among their victims there often are other men; women, differently than men, both in case of being a murderer or a victim, usually have close or family relations with the other participants of the crime incident. The results of a national survey show that respondents are able to differenti­ate murder's cases and the appropriate sanctions. Most of respondents believe that the reduction of the number of homicides in society is linked with a severe and effective execution of criminal penalties, but at the same time they also are in favor of the homi­cides' control and prevention program. ; Straipsnyje pristatomi projekto "Nužudymai Lietuvoje: kriminologinis tyrimas"1 pagrindu atliktų sociologinių tyrimų rezultatai. Projekto sociologinės analizės dalies tikslas buvo ištirti socialinius veiksnius, darančius įtaką nužudymams, taip pat visuomenės požiūrį į nužudymus. Siekiant šio tikslo buvo analizuojamos egzistuojančios kriminologinės teorinės įžvalgos šiuo klausimu (Čepas ir kt., 2013, p. 5–42), nagrinėjami empirinių tyrimų apie socialinius nužudymų aspektus rezultatai. Taip pat, remiantis baudžiamųjų bylų analize, buvo konstruojamas sociologinis žudiko portretas. Tyrimo metu buvo nagrinėjamas visuomenės narių požiūris į nužudymų problemas Lietuvoje.

Abstract. The perception of criminal justice in society is a controversial social problem. Traditionally, criminal justice issues have been treated as a matter of professional interest for criminologists, criminal justice experts and other professionals from related fields. But is expert knowledge the only valid kind when it comes to criminal justice topics? This question, though rhetorical, is aimed at stimulating discussion about the co-existence of different types of social knowledge on criminal justice, and their impact on various discourses concerning crime and punishment in society. In this article a group of researchers from Vilnius University makes use of phenomenological methods to analyse three different types of discourse on criminal justice: professional, political and public. The professional discourse on criminal justice is scrutinised from the perspective of penal law, the political discourse from the point of view of macroeconomics, while the public discourse is analysed using ideas drawn from psychology and media studies. The analysis of these discourses seeks to examine the social construction of criminal justice, and the particularities of its reception among professionals, politicians and a wider public.Keywords: criminal justice, discourses, economic circles, psychological reception, mass media. ; Santrauka. Kriminalinė justicija suprantama kaip socialinės kontrolės sistema, kuri per atitinkamą įstatymų leidybą, praktikas bei institucijas užtikrina nusikaltimų kontrolę ir prevenciją bei taiko poveikio priemones teisės pažeidėjams. Kriminalinės justicijos paskirtis demokratinėje visuomenėje atitinka jos narius vienijantį bendrą socialinį interesą – gyventi saugioje ir solidarioje visuomenėje, kurioje kiekvienam jos piliečiui yra užtikrinamas tinkamas saugumo lygis, paisoma jų teisių, o teisingumas vykdomas visiems vienodai ir teisingai. Nors Vakarų civilizacijos kriminalinės justicijos principams yra daugiau kaip du šimtai metų, jų įgyvendinimas visuomenėje nėra mechaninis ir priklauso nuo įvairių istorinių, kultūrinių, geografinių bei globalaus vystymosi aplinkybių. Straipsnyje, remiantis fenomenologinės sociologinės požiūriu, analizuojamos kriminalinės justicijos recepcijos konstravimo aspektai profesiniame lauke, jo sąsajos su makro (ekonomikos) bei mikro (psichologijos) socialiniais veiksniais, masinių medijų įtaka kriminalinės justicijos suvokimui visuomenėje. Atsižvelgiama ne tik į relevantiškas šiai problemai teorinius šaltinius, bet ir atliktos fokusuotų grupinių diskusijų rezultatus. Pirmame poskyryje analizuojami profesiniai teisiniai kriminalinės justicijos apibrėžimo aspektai, antrame – demonstruojami, kaip ekonominiai procesai gali keisti politinius kriminalinės justicijos tikslus. Trečias poskyris nagrinėja psichologinius veiksnius, kurie gali įtakoti paprastų žmonių sampratą apie kriminalinę justiciją. Ketvirtas poskyris pristato komunikacinius kriminalinės justicijos recepcijos visuomenėje aspektus.Pagrindiniai žodžiai:kriminalinė justicija, diskursai, ekonominiai ciklai, psichologinė recepcija, masinės medijos. Keywords: criminal justice, discourses, economic circles, psychological reception, mass media.ABSTRACT On Perceptions of Criminal Justice in SocietyThe perception of criminal justice in society is a controversial social problem. Traditionally, criminal justice issues have been treated as a matter of professional interest for criminologists, criminal justice experts and other professionals from related fields. But is expert knowledge the only valid kind when it comes to criminal justice topics? This question, though rhetorical, is aimed at stimulating discussion about the co-existence of different types of social knowledge on criminal justice, and their impact on various discourses concerning crime and punishment in society. In this article a group of researchers from Vilnius University makes use of phenomenological methods to analyse three different types of discourse on criminal justice: professional, political and public. The professional discourse on criminal justice is scrutinised from the perspective of penal law, the political discourse from the point of view of macroeconomics, while the public discourse is analysed using ideas drawn from psychology and media studies. The analysis of these discourses seeks to examine the social construction of criminal justice, and the particularities of its reception among professionals, politicians and a wider public.

Abstract. The perception of criminal justice in society is a controversial social problem. Traditionally, criminal justice issues have been treated as a matter of professional interest for criminologists, criminal justice experts and other professionals from related fields. But is expert knowledge the only valid kind when it comes to criminal justice topics? This question, though rhetorical, is aimed at stimulating discussion about the co-existence of different types of social knowledge on criminal justice, and their impact on various discourses concerning crime and punishment in society. In this article a group of researchers from Vilnius University makes use of phenomenological methods to analyse three different types of discourse on criminal justice: professional, political and public. The professional discourse on criminal justice is scrutinised from the perspective of penal law, the political discourse from the point of view of macroeconomics, while the public discourse is analysed using ideas drawn from psychology and media studies. The analysis of these discourses seeks to examine the social construction of criminal justice, and the particularities of its reception among professionals, politicians and a wider public.Keywords: criminal justice, discourses, economic circles, psychological reception, mass media.

It is suggested that the reader consider an earlier publication by the same authors with a similar theme: "Perceptions of criminal justice in society" (Dobryninas, A., Dobrynina, M., Česnienė, I., Giedraitis, V., Merkevičius, R. "On Perceptions of Criminal Justice in Society." Sociologija: Mintis ir veiksmas. 2012. Issue 2. pg. 222–238). This article empirically illustrates how criminal justice principles are used to understand different social groups' perspectives, what are the similarities and differences between these groups, how the intergroup communications about criminal justice issues form, and so on. The authors analyzed and summarized qualitative data (focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews with Lithuanian criminal justice experts, politicians, journalists, community leaders) and quantitative data (using a Lithuanian representative survey of the population and Lithuanian mass media content analy­sis), which was collected during 2012–2014. The first chapter is devoted to the social normative perceptions of criminal justice, the second – the economic and political aspects which influenced the understanding of criminal justice in society, and the third chapter – examines the influence of mass media on the Lithuanian Criminal Justice system's public image. It is concluded that a consensus on the implementation of the prin­ciples of criminal justice among different groups is possible only in part. While the needs are the same as the criminal justice system, decisions must be impartial, objective, humane, equal for all, but how to achieve such a consensus of opinions is very divided. The study participants indicated a variety of reasons that impede the achievement of a mutual understanding: financial constraints, lack of inter-institutional cooperation, party or individual interests take precedence over the interests of society, the role of the media and so on. It is also proposed to improve the current situation in the organization and promotion of communication and alignment of interest between different social groups that have to be done in cooperation with the mass media and other governmental and nongovernmental institutions. Key words: criminal justice; professional, political and public discourses, mass media. ; Santrauka. Siūlomas skaitytojui straipsnis yra tų pačių autorių publikacijos "Apie kriminalinės justicijos suvokimą visuomenėje" (Dobryninas, A., Dobrynina, M., Česnienė, I., Giedraitis, V., Merkevičius, R. "On Perceptions of Criminal Justice in Society", Sociologija. Mintis ir veiksmas, 2012/2, p. 222–38) tęsinys. Straipsnyje empiriškai iliustruojama, kaip baudžiamojo teisingumo principai suprantami skirtinguose socialinėse episteminėse grupėse, kokie yra panašumai ir skirtumai tarp šių grupių, kaip vyksta tarpgrupinė komunikacija kriminalinės justicijos klausimais. Analizuojami ir apibendrinami 2012–2014 metais Lietuvoje atliktų kokybinių (tai fokusuotos grupinės diskusijos ir pusiau struktūruoti interviu su Lietuvos kriminalinės justicijos ekspertais, politikais, žurnalistais, visuomenės lyderiais) ir kiekybinių (Lietuvos gyventojų reprezentatyvi apklausa ir Lietuvos masinių medijų turinio analizė) tyrimų rezultatai. Pirmame skyriuje nagrinėjami socialinės normatyvinės kriminalinės justicijos suvokimo ypatumai, antrame – analizuojami poliniai ekonominiai kriminalinės justicijos žinojimo aspektai, trečiame – nagrinėjama, kokią įtaką daro Lietuvos masinės informavimo priemonės kriminalinės justicijos įvaizdžiui visuomenėje. Daromos išvados, kad sutarimas dėl kriminalinės justicijos principų įgyvendinimo tarp įvairių visuomenės grupių įmanomas tik iš dalies. Nors visų poreikiai yra tie patys, t. y. kriminalinės justicijos sistemoje priimami sprendimaituri būti nešališki, objektyvūs, humaniški, lygūs visiems, tačiau nuomonės, kaip tokio sutarimo pasiekti, labai išsiskiria. Tyrimo dalyviai įvardija įvairias priežastis, kurios apsunkina tarpusavio susikalbėjimą: finansinius apribojimus, tarpinstitucinio bendradarbiavimo stoką, partinių ar individualių interesų viršenybę priešpriešiais visuomenės interesų, medijų vaidmenį ir pan. Taip pat siūloma gerinti esamą situaciją organizuojant ir skatinant komunikacinius ryšius bei interesų derinimą tarp įvairių socialinių grupių, panaudojant tiek masinių medijų, tiek kitų socialinių institucinių resursų galimybes. ABSTRACT SPECIFIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RECEPTION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN LITHUANIAN SOCIETYAbstract. It is suggested that the reader consider an earlier publication by the same authors with a similar theme: "Perceptions of criminal justice in society" (Dobryninas, A., Dobrynina, M., Česnienė, I., Giedraitis, V., Merkevičius, R. "On Perceptions of Criminal Justice in Society." Sociologija: Mintis ir veiksmas. 2012. Issue 2. pg. 222–238). This article empirically illustrates how criminal justice principles are used to understand different social groups' perspectives, what are the similarities and differences between these groups, how the intergroup communications about criminal justice issues form, and so on. The authors analyzed and summarized qualitative data (focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews with Lithuanian criminal justice experts, politicians, journalists, community leaders) and quantitative data (using a Lithuanian representative survey of the population and Lithuanian mass media content analysis), which was collected during 2012–2014. The first chapter is devoted to the social normative perceptions of criminal justice, the second – the economic and political aspects which influenced the understanding of criminal justice in society, and the third chapter – examines the influence of mass media on the Lithuanian Criminal Justice system's public image. It is concluded that a consensus on the implementation of the principles of criminal justice among different groups is possible only in part. While the needs are the same as the criminal justice system, decisions must be impartial, objective, humane, equal for all, but how to achieve such a consensus of opinions is very divided. The study participants indicated a variety of reasons that impede the achievement of a mutual understanding: financial constraints, lack of inter-institutional cooperation, party or individual interests take precedence over the interests of society, the role of the media and so on. It is also proposed to improve the current situation in the organization and promotion of communication and alignment of interest between different social groups that have to be done in cooperation with the mass media and other governmental and nongovernmental institutions. Key words: criminal justice; professional, political and public discourses, mass media. Pagrindiniai žodžiai: kriminalinė justicija; profesinis, politinis ir viešas diskursai; masinės medijos.

It is suggested that the reader consider an earlier publication by the same authors with a similar theme: "Perceptions of criminal justice in society" (Dobryninas, A., Dobrynina, M., Česnienė, I., Giedraitis, V., Merkevičius, R. "On Perceptions of Criminal Justice in Society." Sociologija: Mintis ir veiksmas. 2012. Issue 2. pg. 222–238). This article empirically illustrates how criminal justice principles are used to understand different social groups' perspectives, what are the similarities and differences between these groups, how the intergroup communications about criminal justice issues form, and so on. The authors analyzed and summarized qualitative data (focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews with Lithuanian criminal justice experts, politicians, journalists, community leaders) and quantitative data (using a Lithuanian representative survey of the population and Lithuanian mass media content analy­sis), which was collected during 2012–2014. The first chapter is devoted to the social normative perceptions of criminal justice, the second – the economic and political aspects which influenced the understanding of criminal justice in society, and the third chapter – examines the influence of mass media on the Lithuanian Criminal Justice system's public image. It is concluded that a consensus on the implementation of the prin­ciples of criminal justice among different groups is possible only in part. While the needs are the same as the criminal justice system, decisions must be impartial, objective, humane, equal for all, but how to achieve such a consensus of opinions is very divided. The study participants indicated a variety of reasons that impede the achievement of a mutual understanding: financial constraints, lack of inter-institutional cooperation, party or individual interests take precedence over the interests of society, the role of the media and so on. It is also proposed to improve the current situation in the organization and promotion of communication and alignment of interest between different social groups that have to be done in cooperation with the mass media and other governmental and nongovernmental institutions.
Key words: criminal justice; professional, political and public discourses, mass media.

It is suggested that the reader consider an earlier publication by the same authors with a similar theme: "Perceptions of criminal justice in society" (Dobryninas, A., Dobrynina, M., Česnienė, I., Giedraitis, V., Merkevičius, R. "On Perceptions of Criminal Justice in Society." Sociologija: Mintis ir veiksmas. 2012. Issue 2. pg. 222–238). This article empirically illustrates how criminal justice principles are used to understand different social groups' perspectives, what are the similarities and differences between these groups, how the intergroup communications about criminal justice issues form, and so on. The authors analyzed and summarized qualitative data (focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews with Lithuanian criminal justice experts, politicians, journalists, community leaders) and quantitative data (using a Lithuanian representative survey of the population and Lithuanian mass media content analysis), which was collected during 2012–2014. The first chapter is devoted to the social normative perceptions of criminal justice, the second – the economic and political aspects which influenced the understanding of criminal justice in society, and the third chapter – examines the influence of mass media on the Lithuanian Criminal Justice system's public image. It is concluded that a consensus on the implementation of the principles of criminal justice among different groups is possible only in part. While the needs are the same as the criminal justice system, decisions must be impartial, objective, humane, equal for all, but how to achieve such a consensus of opinions is very divided. The study participants indicated a variety of reasons that impede the achievement of a mutual understanding: financial constraints, lack of inter-institutional cooperation, party or individual interests take precedence over the interests of society, the role of the media and so on. It is also proposed to improve the current situation in the organization and promotion of communication and alignment of interest between different social groups that have to be done in cooperation with the mass media and other governmental and nongovernmental institutions.