Suchergebnisse

Emperor Dušan's Code is the most important legal document of medieval Serbia, which is often considered to be the early Serbian "constitution". It is largely based on the Byzantine legal tradition, which entailed a rigorous system of criminal sanctions and diverse forms of punishment: death penalty by hanging and burning, mutilation of body parts, blinding, branding, scorching, cruel corporal punishment (beating, flogging), imprisonment, severe fines, confiscation of property, exile or banishment and dislocation as a form of collective punishment for the subjects. In this article, the author of presents and analyzes relevant provision of Dušan's Code, dealing with the envisaged criminal sanctions and different forms of punishment which were imposed on the perpetrators of criminal offences. The research methodology is based on normative, dogmatic and historical methods. Based on this analysis and comparison with the positive criminal legislation of the Republic of Serbia, the author concludes that Dušan's Code prescribed much more rigorous criminal sanctions, particularly given the fact that the current legislation law does not envisage death penalty and severe corporal punishment.

AbstractRandomized experiments that examine the effectiveness of criminal sanctions suggest that they may increase crime, decrease crime, or have no effect. To better understand these disparate findings, we need to more carefully examine the types of sanctions being tested, in terms of their severity, certainty, and celerity (speed), and the types of offenses and offenders involved.

The criminal law is concerned with the pursuit of human objectives through the various structures and methods of social organization. Many commands that are embodied in the criminal law appear as prohibitions, which can be satisfied by inaction. "Do not use dangerous drugs" is an example. The thesis of this article is that criminal penalties are inappropriate as a means of achieving conformity to politically-inspired standards of "correct" behavior insofar as the recreational use of cocaine is concerned. As with all prohibitions, the one against cocaine has not worked. A prime argument of the drug prohibitionists, that whatever may be wrong with the present drug laws, they do help to curtail the use of "dangerous" drugs, has not been realized.

This paper aims to explores the provision of aggravating criminal sanction that protects environment in environmental legislation. By focusing on the four laws as its primary data source, this study employed doctrinal legal research. The results showed that the weight accorded to criminal sanctions inenvironmental legislation, has varied. The PPLH Law provides for the amplification of criminal threats directed at corporations by adding 1/3 (one-third) of the criminal sentence. Only companies are subject to the penalty aggravation provisions of the Mining Law, and they are only imposed with one-third of the maximum criminal provision of fines. In the PPPH Law, the imposition of criminal threats weight is simply related to the quantity component. If the culprit is a corporation or official, the criminal sanction aggravation is increased by one-third. In Plantation Law, if the offender is a corporate or a government official, then the criminal punishment is intensified. The environment is protected through acts prohibited by environmental legislation, but the criminal threat weight is not directed toward environmental preservation. Existing penalty aggravations are confined to only two types of criminal penalties: jail and fines, both of which have no direct connection to environmental protection. As a result, weighting criminal sanctions refers to the changing quality and quantity issues in order to safeguard the environment. The transition from criminal sanction to treatment, or from one type of treatment to another, was the focus of quality considerations, while the twofold criminal fine system was the focus of quantity element.

The author first discusses various issues concerning the punishment of imprisonment (deprivation of liberty), especially short-term sentences of imprisonment, and cites the criminal law theories on the issue. Then, the author explains the importance of alternatives to the punishment of imprisonment and their place in the Criminal Code of Montenegro. In the context of alternative criminal sanctions, the author focuses on fines, community service order and cautionary measures (suspended sentence and judicial admonition). It is stressed that alternative criminal sanctions have a significant place in the system of criminal sanctions and may be a relevant tool for replacing short-term imprisonment sentences. The author concludes that despite a wide registry of alternative criminal sanctions, imprisonment can never be completely abolished. Yet, for some criminal offenses and some offenders, the punishment of imprisonment is inadequate and, in specific circumstances, it should better be replaced with other criminal sanctions.

Recently enacted sentencing guidelines were designed to reduce disparity and to increase the average sanction for white‐collar offenders. Whether these outcomes will be achieved, however, depends on how closely judges adhere to the new guidelines. We cannot yet determine how the guidelines will be implemented but can learn much about judicial behavior by studying past sentencing practice.This paper examines sentences imposed on criminal antitrust offenders from 1955 to 1980. Judges are appointed for life and ostensibly are "independent" of the political process. The data suggest, however, that judges do not operate in apolitical vacuum. When Congress increased the status of antitrust violations from misdemeanor to felony in 1974, judges responded by doling out higher penalties–even for offenders not subject to new higher statutory maximums. In addition, the paper shows that Republican judges tend to impose harsher antitrust penalties than do Democratic judges, and that sentencing behavior apparently is influenced by a judge's prospect of promotion to a higher court position. These findings have important policy implications both for the judicial selection process and for ensuring that the judicial branch follows congressional wishes.