Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 10

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

Wybrane problemy profesjonalizacji organów probacyjnych i klasyfikacji sprawców oddanych pod dozór do grup ryzyka

100%
Stańdo-Kawecka B.
Nowa kodyfikacja prawa karnego
|
2014
|
vol. 33
11 - 39
EN
A large prison population and high costs of the prison service contribute to rising interest in problems concerning effective correctional interventions and reduction of reoffending. In recent years, efforts aiming at reducing reoffending have resulted in many countries in significant reforms of national probation systems. Professionalization of probation agencies in order to improve their effectiveness has focused on two processes: risk assessment as well as implementation of interventions targeting dynamic risk factors (risk management). In Poland, the requirement to assess the offenders’ risk of reoffending was introduced in 2013 by the order of the Minister of Justice. The purpose of this regulation was to adjust — at least to aminimal extent — Polish probation officers’ activities to model of functioning of probation agencies in the United States, Canada and Western Europe, as well as to recommendations included in the European probation rules. Unlike these countries, the probation service in Poland does not have structured risk assessment tools. The order issued by the Minister of Justice provides for only the classification of supervised offenders into risk groups based on arbitrary, rigid and controversial criteria which has little in common with building the probation service focused on risk management in the meaning of current European standards.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Populacja więzienna w Polsce w pierwszym roku pandemii COVID-19

100%
Stańdo-Kawecka B.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2021
|
issue XLIII/2
127-149
EN
Persons deprived of their liberty in penitentiary institutions are among the groups most exposed to SARS-CoV-2 infection. One of basic ways to limit the development of the epidemic in these institutions is to reduce the number of prisoners. The first case of COVID-19 was diagnosed in Poland on 4 March 2020. Unlike in some European countries, after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was no preventive release of prisoners in order to limit the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in prisons. In March 2020, the Polish parliament passed legal provisions which introduced a special break in the enforcement of prison sentences due to the epidemic threat and widened the possible use of electronic monitoring as an alternative way to serve prison terms. These new solutions did not contribute to a significant increase in the number of prisoners released from prisons. In the period from March to December 2020, the prison population in Poland dropped by more than 10%, however, this mainly resulted from a reduced number of admissions to penitentiary institutions. The article discusses the limitations of the use of particular measures in order to reduce the overall number of prisoners.
PL
Osoby pozbawione wolności w jednostkach penitencjarnych zaliczane są do grup szczególnie narażonych na zakażenie SARS-CoV-2. Jednym z podstawowych sposobów ograniczania rozwoju epidemii w tych instytucjach jest zmniejszenie liczby więźniów. Pierwszy przypadek COVID-19 zdiagnozowano w Polsce 4 marca 2020 r. Inaczej niż w niektórych krajach europejskich, po wybuchu pandemii COVID-19 nie zastosowano prewencyjnego zwolnienia osób skazanych lub tymczasowo aresztowanych i skazanych w celu ograniczenia rozprzestrzeniania się SARS-CoV-2 na terenie więzień. W marcu 2020 r. parlament uchwalił przepisy prawne, które wprowadziły szczególny rodzaj przerwy w wykonaniu kary pozbawienia wolności z powodu zagrożenia epidemicznego i rozszerzyły podstawy stosowania dozoru elektronicznego jako alternatywnego sposobu odbywania kary pozbawienia wolności. Nowe rozwiązania nie przyczyniły się do istotnego wzrostu liczby więźniów zwalnianych z zakładów karnych. Ponad 10–procentowy spadek populacji więziennej w Polsce w okresie od marca do grudnia 2020 r. wynikał głównie z mniejszej liczby osób przyjmowanych do jednostek penitencjarnych. W artykule dyskutowane są ograniczenia dotyczące stosowania poszczególnych środków w celu zmniejszenia liczby uwięzionych.
3

Racjonalizacje kar wolnościowych i rola kuratora sądowego — uwagi na tle generycznej kary ograniczającej wolność skazanego w Polsce oraz w Anglii i Walii

100%
Stańdo-Kawecka B.
Nowa kodyfikacja prawa karnego
|
2016
|
vol. 40
47-61
EN
In Poland in the last years the provisions regulating the content of both the penalty of liberty limitation and the manner of its implementation were significantly changed. In 2015 the penalty was converted into generic penalty. Generic community penalty also exists in other countries, including England and Wales. Unlike Poland, the introduction of the penalty to the English criminal justice system was preceded by multiannual and multidirectional changes in the areas of justifications for community penalties and the model of probation activities. In the last decades the changes resulted from the adaptation of community sanctions and measures to current trends in the criminal policy, such as managerism, punitivism and ‘new resocialization’. At the same time, the traditional role of the probation officer connected with the offender support and help on the basis of mutual trust was remodeled. In England, generic community penalty is a coherent element of the criminal justice system. In Poland, the legislator did not provide courts with a broad scope of information about the accused person which would allow the purposeful choice of components of the generic penalty. As a result, in the Polish criminal justice system the generic community penalty seems to be based more on the intuition of judges than on bright and clear prin­ciples of its imposition.
4

Paradygmaty karania a badania osobopoznawcze sprawców przestępstw

100%
Stańdo-Kawecka B.
Nowa kodyfikacja prawa karnego
|
2019
|
vol. 51
27-44
EN
In contemporary penology, efforts have been made in order to integrate knowledge about the criminal penalty developed within various scientific disciplines. One of the complex, multidisciplinary penological problems is the impact of paradigms of punish­ment on the diagnosis of offenders. The development of the concept of the diagnosis of offenders took place during the period of the domination of the positivist paradigm in criminal law and criminology. Currently, the development of the risk paradigm can be noticed. It causes, among others, a resignation from the traditional, clinical method of diagnosing offenders in favor of a risk and needs assessment by means of structured tools. The need for using such tools in the criminal justice system has increasingly been raised in the Polish scientific literature.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Założenia modelowe i standardy międzynarodowe dotyczące nieletnich sprawców przestępstw

100%
Stańdo-Kawecka B.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2008
|
issue XXIX-XXX
417-430
6

O znaczeniu fundamentalnych zasad karania w polityce karnej — uwagi na tle przyczyn i skutków „masowego uwięzienia” w Stanach Zjednoczonych

100%
Stańdo-Kawecka B.
Nowa kodyfikacja prawa karnego
|
2017
|
vol. 43
509-522
EN
In the last century, in the United States, there was a significant change in the paradigms of punishment. In the 1970s the ideology of rehabilitation collapsed and reforms, which aimed at restoring justice in punishment and reduction of the prison population, were initiated. In the next decade, the movement aiming at liberal reforms lost the social and political support and was replaced with the repressive criminal policy. At the same time, a rapid increase in the prison population started which has been referred to in the criminological literature as the phenomenon of mass incarceration. After four decades of continuous growth in the number of persons deprived of their liberty there is no doubt that the social and financial consequences of a repressive system of punishment proved to be dramatic. For this reason, issues concerning the restoration of justice and rationality in punishment have again been discussed in the United States. Many European countries also experienced the “punitive turn” in the criminal policy at the end of the 20th century, although its scale was incomparable with what happened in the United States. It does not mean, however, that American discussions on the philosophy of punishment and criminal policy are irrelevant for Europe. Multidimensional negative effects of the American policy of mass incarceration indicate the dangers resulting from ignoring the basic principles of punishment that protect against abuses of the state’s power to punish. Additionally, they encourage a serious discussion about the integration of punishment theories with the empirical knowledge on the results of sentencing and sentence enforcement.
7

Wykonywanie kary pozbawienia wolności w trzech systemach — uwagi krytyczne

100%
Stańdo-Kawecka B.
Nowa kodyfikacja prawa karnego
|
2016
|
vol. 39
109-131
EN
According to the 1997 Code of Execution of Sentences, prison sentences are enforced in prisons of different kinds and types, and moreover under different systems. In the doctrine of the penal executive law, critical assessment of certain criteria applied while directing prisoners to prisons of appropriate kind and type can be found. However, the need for the operation of prisons differentiated into various kinds and types has not been questioned. The concept of the enforcement of prison sentences under three different systems so far has not been examined in detail, despite the fact that it has been over a dozen years after it was introduced into the penitentiary practice. In this article the origins of differentiated systems of the enforcement of prison sentences will be presented as well as certain controversial aspects of this solution, including: the possibility to implement the therapeutic system outside the therapeutic unit, the unclear differences between the enforcement of prison sentences under the ordinary and programmed treatment system and a high proportion of recidivists serving their sentences under ordinary system without any sentence plan although it is a group of prisoners who have a number of criminogenic needs increasing the risk of re-offending.
8
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Neutralizacja normy „nie kradnij” w genezie przestępczości nieletnich

100%
Stańdo-Kawecka B.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
1994
|
issue XX
21-51
EN
The paper discusses the findings of a study aimed at an empirical verification of a well-known criminological concept: the Sykes and Matza concept of neutralization techniques from the classical trend of positivist criminology. What Sykes and Matza see as the factor of juvenile delinquency are mechanisms of justification of one’s own delinquent behavior. Reverting to functionalim, the authors assume a social consensus on the basic values and norms of behavior. Juvenile delinquents generally recognize the same values and norms as non-delinquent youth but, unlike that youth, they grow proficient in neutralizing those norms so as to prevent them from influencing their behavior. According to Sykes and Matza, norms are neutralized through finding and accepting justifications for one’s own deviant behavior. Five types of such neutralization techniques heve been distinguished according to the contents of those justifications: denial of responsibility, denial of injury, denial of the victim, condemnation of the condemners, and appeal to higher loyalties. In their conception of neutralization  techniques, G.M. Sykes and D. Matza mainly describe and classify the ways of excusing one’s own deviant behavior and provide but a perfunctory discussion of the mechanizm of neutralization itself. L. Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance proves useful in explaining the psychological mechanizm of neutralization of recognized norms. Assumptions of the conception of neutralization techniques and the theory of cognitive dissonance provided the grounds for hypotheses which were subsequently submitted to empirical verification. The subject was limited to neutralization of the rule “do not steal” interpreted as a ban appropriation on theft and a rule of respect for another person’s property. Criminologists have long questioned the desing of empirical study where achool youth are treated as non-delinquent and examined as a control group oppesed to juvenile delinquents in houses of correction or educational institutions. In the present study, three groups were examined: ‒ juvenile delinquents confined to a reformatory or home for detained juveniles by a judicial decision as perpetrators of offences against property (84 persons); ‒ school youth not involved in acts against another person’s property, called non-delinquent youth (70 persons); ‒ school youth involved in acts againts another person’s property, called actually delinquent (37 persons); The groups of “non-delinquent” and “actually delinquent” persons were distinguished from school youth by means of a self-report survey. Of the original hypotheses, only one was confirmed by the findings. The exemined groups appeared to differ significantly in their approval of the techniques of neutralization of the norm of honesty, the differences trending as expected. The lowest approval of statements expressing various excuses for breaches of another person’s property was found among the non-delinquent youth. The group that most often approves ot such excuses are wards of  reformatories and juvenile homes; however, they do not differ much in this respect from the actually delinquent youth. All of the examined groups have similar priorities as to the separate types of excuses. The type accepted most often is “condemnation of the condemners”. In particular, a statement that “the police and judges are corruptible and malicious”enjoys great popularity. The types  accepted least often, instead, are excuses consisting in “denial of injury” and “appeal to higher loyalties”. What could not be conformed are hypotheses as to absence of differences between the groups with respect to appraisal of one’s own honesty and acceptance of the rule “do not steal”. Non -delinquent youth appraise themselves much higher in terms of honesty than the remaining two groups. Wards of reformatories and juvenile homes, instead, appraise themselves somewhat lower than the actually delinquent youth. The non-delinquent youth show the strongest acceptance of the norm of honesty. The degree of acceptance of that norm among wards of reformatories is similar to that among actual  delinquents, the former showing a somewhat stronger acceptance of the rule “do not steal” than the actually delinquent group. Another hypothesis that was not confirmed concerned a tendency to neutralize the rule “do not steal” once it has been violated; the method used here was projection where the respondents were to complete unfinished stories.  Against expectations, the tendency to neutralize that norm once it has been violated appeared to occur much more often among school youth than among wards of reformatories and juvenile homes. Of the various methods of reducing the anxiety resulting from a breach of another person’s property, both groups of school youth most often suggested neutralization of the norm of honesty. Wards of institutions, instead, much more often mentioned methods other than neutralization of the violated norm: e.g., focus on the derived or potential profit, or focus on the absence of threat with any negative consequences from without. The study questioned the role of delinquent neutralizations as conceived by Sykes and Matza in the origin of juvenile delinquency.  Unforfunately, the findings could not be interpreted explicitly. According to the theoretical assumptions made, a number of possible explanations of the  findings can be suggested which at least party exclude one another. A new empirical study would be necessary to verify those explanations.
9

Zasada podmiotowego traktowania skazanych w kodeksie karnym wykonawczym z 1997 roku

100%
Stańdo-Kawecka B.
Nowa kodyfikacja prawa karnego
|
2019
|
vol. 54
239-263
EN
During the work on the draft of the 1997 Code of the Execution of Penalties (CEP) much attention was paid to the principle of the treatment of sentenced persons, and particularly those serving prison sentences, as subjects. In the Polish penological literature two dimensions of that principle were indicated. The first one referred to the strengthening of the sentenced person’s position in relation to enforcement authorities by means of precise regulations concerning his/her legal status and effective mechanisms for the protection of his/her rights. The second dimension meant the abandonment of forced rehabilitation and providing sentenced persons with the ability to decide freely whether they wanted to participate in correctional interventions. Undoubtedly, the 1997 CEP strengthened the legal status of a sentenced person. As regards the abandonment of forced rehabilitation, the legislator chose a compromise solution according to which the participation in correctional interventions was, as a rule, voluntary, but in some cases it was mandatory. Like in other countries, in Poland in the last decade the idea of the public protection against crime played an increasingly important role in the criminal policy. In the criminal justice system focused on risk management, the treatment of sentenced persons as subjects requires providing them with reliable information on the possible consequences of their decisions concerning the participation in offered correctional activities. Additionally, it requires providing them with adequate access to empirically proven correctional programmes as well as introducing a transparent system of risk assessment and monitoring during the execution of the imposed penalty or penal measure.
10
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Ochrona praw nieletnich przesłuchiwanych przez Policję - aspekty prawnoporównawcze i wyniki badań empirycznych

63%
Stańdo-Kawecka B., Kusztal J.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2015
|
issue XXXVII
159-190
EN
In recent years a growing interest in issues related to the protection of rights andsafeguards of ‘children in conflict with the law’ can be observed at the internationallevel. In the light of both the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Councilof Europe Guidelines on child-friendly justice, in cases concerning children in conflictwith the law, an important element of the system of justice is to provide them with a fairtrial in which their rights and safeguards are not minimised or denied under the pretextof the child’s best interest. The European Union is currently working on a proposalfor a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the proceduralsafeguards for children suspected or accused in criminal proceedings. The aim of theseworks is to set common minimum standards throughout the European Union on therights of children who are suspected or accused in criminal proceedings and childrensubject to European arrest warrant proceedings. One of the problems discussed in thecourse of works on the proposal for the directive is the issue of defining the scope of its application regardless of whether the proceedings in the cases of children in conflictwith the law are treated as ‘criminal proceedings’ under national law.During the period of work on the proposal, the European Commission funded aninternational research project focused on the protection of the rights of interrogatedjuveniles. The project entitled ‘Protecting Young Suspects in Interrogations: a studyon safeguards and best practice’ was coordinated by the University of Maastricht. Itaimed at comparing juvenile justice systems in five countries (England and Wales,Belgium, the Netherlands, Poland and Italy), with particular emphasis on the rights andsafeguards provided to juveniles suspected of breaking criminal law during their firstinterrogation connected with the alleged offence. Comparative legal analysis of juvenilejustice systems in the participating countries revealed that, as opposed to Poland, inall other countries the procedure applied in juvenile cases was principally the criminalprocedure. Moreover, unlike in Poland, it was commonly accepted that in the casesconcerning children in conflict with the law, respecting the child’s best interests didnot mean depriving them of the rights and safeguards granted to adults in criminalproceedings.In Poland, the proceedings in the cases concerning children in conflict with thelaw who are accused of displaying signs of demoralisation or committing a punishableact are regulated in a complicated and unclear way. Legislators assume combining theprocedural provisions included in the Juvenile Act, the provisions of civil procedureand, to a limited extent, the provisions of criminal procedure. Contrary to legislativeassumptions, the first interrogation of a juvenile suspected of punishable acts is mostoften conducted by the police before the institution of juvenile proceedings via thefamily court. Although this first interrogation is often decisive in the further courseof proceedings, the Juvenile Act does not contain detailed regulations in this regardand only briefly refers to the appropriate application of the provisions of the Code ofCriminal Procedure.Empirical research carried out in Poland as part of the project involved individual interviews with lawyers and focus group interviews with both police officers andjuveniles. The results of the research indicate that from the perspective of providingjuveniles with procedural rights and safeguards, current regulations are far fromsatisfactory. Because of the limited scope of the conducted research, it is difficult todraw generalised conclusions. However, the results undoubtedly allow the conclusionthat the issues regarding providing juveniles interrogated by the police with proceduralrights and safeguards ensured in international documents deserve much moreattention than has been paid so far. The results of the conducted empirical researchconstitute another argument for the need of an in-depth discussion on the necessary systemic changes in the Polish juvenile system of justice which is also supported by thejudgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the cases Adamkiewicz v. Poland and Grabowski v. Poland.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.