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

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  środek
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The subject of this article is the problem regarding the use of non-criminal measures as a response to offenses, as well as an assessment of the effectiveness of such responses from the point of view of the possibility of implementing offenders to comply with the established legal order and principles of social coexistence. In connection with the non-criminal measure being applied to the perpetrator, however, there is a problem regarding the final termination of the offender's liability. Hence, the article discusses whether the application of such a measure against the perpetrator of the offense gives the case - of its kind - "status of res judicata" or whether it is still possible to institute legal proceedings against a given person and impose a specific penalty, including imposing a fine in the form of a criminal mandate.
PL
Przedmiotem niniejszego artykułu są: problem dotyczący możliwości stosowania środków pozakarnych jako sposobu reagowania na wykroczenia oraz ocena skuteczności takich reakcji z punktu widzenia wdrożenia sprawców wykroczeń do przestrzegania ustalonego porządku prawnego i przyjętych zasad współżycia społecznego. W związku z zastosowaniem wobec sprawcy środka pozakarnego pojawia się jednak problem dotyczący zakończenia kwestii odpowiedzialności sprawcy wykroczenia. Stąd w artykule podjęte zostały rozważania dotyczące tego, czy zastosowanie takiego środka wobec sprawcy wykroczenia kończy sprawę, czy też nadal możliwe jest wszczęcie przeciw danej osobie postępowania sądowego i wymierzenie jej określonej kary, w tym nałożenie grzywny w formie mandatu karnego.
EN
The contemporary truth which applies to journalists (as required by the Council of Europe standards and domestic law) reflects differences between the essence and criterion of Aristotelian truth (material truth – veritas est adaequatio rei et intellectus – ad Aristotle, The Metaphysics IV.7. [1011b 26‒27]), and its practical implementation (objective truth – in medio stat veritas – ad Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics II.7. [1108a 19‒20]). A journalist is obliged to reconstruct the objective truth (the truth ascertainable by a man who meets the Roman law standard of diligentia boni patris familias, here referred to as diligence expected of a responsible journalist) and not the material truth. Nonetheless, a substantial discrepancy between this journalistic truth and the material truth will constitute a sufficient reason for statutory rectification. As regards the assessing statements, as well as the satirical ones, the proof of truth is only required if the assessment is a conclusion derived from descriptive statements, i.e. the factual basis, and that conclusion must be logical (proportional and therefore just). Satire may not contain words commonly considered as offensive. If a satirical statement is to enjoy the legal protection, it cannot amount to a mere personal attack. Regardless of the fact that satire is a negative assessment and an exaggerated one, it must derive from application of facts, meaning that it must reflect the reality and in that sense it can neither attack human dignity nor contain any discriminatory statements, as confirmed by the latest case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Analogical conclusions can be reached upon reading the works of Romanian satirists, for instance Horace.
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.