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

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  criminal law,
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The main aim of this article is to introduce the concept of culture/cultural defence into the framework of current debates over multiculturalism. Culture defence is a rela-tively new legal strategy, which seeks to strengthen its own position as a formal strategy in criminal law, mainly in the common law system. It is based on the cognitive assump-tion that culture affects individuals’ perception of social reality to that extent that indi-viduals could lack the capacity to act with the full ignorance of culturally given norms. The concept of culture defence will be juxtaposed to the different approaches to multicul-turalism itself: to the concept of John Rawls’s theory of justice, to the concept of politics of difference as introduced by Charles Taylor, and to the politics of multiculturalism proposed by Will Kymlicka. This article reveals the question of legitimacy of culture defence as a crucial question bounded up with political philosophy, not exclusively em-braced by the philosophy of law.
Zeszyty Prasoznawcze
|
2014
|
vol. 57
|
issue 1
55-75
EN
On November 5th, 2009, the Polish Parliament passed an amendment to the Penal Code, introducing a new preventive measure against pedophilia perpetrators, commonly known as chemical castration. The amended Article 95a, section 1a of the Penal Code concerns, among others, a mandatory referral of the perpetrator of rape of a minor under the age of 15 to outpatient treatment or placement in a closed institution, where they will undergo pharmacological and psychotherapeutic treatment aimed at reducing sex drive. The amendment has been widely criticized by professionals; doctors, sexologists, and criminologists, who underlined ineffectiveness and possible adverse health consequences of the so-called chemical castration, not to mention how its mandatory nature violates the basic rights of the individual.Nevertheless, this law has an extremely large popular support: according to a Millward Brown SMG / KRC survey lab, 79% of Poles approved of the amendment. It is also worth noting that the first announcement of the introduction of the above-mentioned Act took place on September 9th, 2008, and thus on the same day on which the media revealed the so-called Polish Fritzl case, whose perpetrator, Krzysztof B. is currently held imprisoned for sexual abuse of his daughter. The topic of this paper is to answer whether and to what extent the introduction of the so-called ‚chemical castration act’ was infl uenced by the phenomenon of penal populism, and what the role played by media was in this process. It is a research attempt to determine how the Polish media report the allegations of pedophilia crimes and whether the manner of reporting could have infl uenced the public opinion about this kind of crimes and the political decisions about the employed ways of combating it.
EN
In the Hungarian legal system, the anti-hate speech rules of media law provide an ad-ditional (administrative) proceeding for the media authority in parallel with proceedings under criminal law and civil law. The media authorities, over the past twenty years, have consistently set media law sanctions at a lower intervention threshold than criminal law did, and in many cases, they established media law violation in cases where criminal proceedings for incitement against a community were not initiated or ended in acquittal. The fundamental aim of media law regulation is to shape media content and the edit-ing practices of media players with a view to ensure respect for human dignity, and to prevent media from becoming an ‘amplifier’ of hateful communications. In the first four-teen years of the Hungarian media regulation, the scope of interpretation concerning anti-hate speech media law restrictions developed gradually. The authority reacted not only to individual cases, and individual communications, but also carried out targeted investigations in cases that can be described as a phenomenon in the media coverage. Besides reviewing news and information programmes, it also acted against hateful con-tents of the entertainment programmes. The new media regulation, which entered into force in 2011, partially amended the content of the former anti-hate speech regulation: in addition to the provisions of “incitement to hatred”, the former category of “offending or prejudiced content” was replaced by the prohibition of “exclusion”. The practice of the media authority has not changed as regards the assessment of the media law standard, as the authority has continued to apply it differently from the criminal law standard, con-sidering it as a lower intervention threshold. However, in comparison with pre-2010 practice, the authority initiated considerably fewer proceedings and its approach in terms of law enforcement became less characterised by adjudicating problems that can be de-scribed as phenomenon in the media coverage, no targeted proceedings of this kind were initiated. Its practice can be characterised by a couple of high profile cases with extreme sanctions, which attract great attention. These cases are important as they designate the boundaries of public communications, but in this way, media law measures are not really suitable for making any substantial changes to the characteristics of the media coverage.
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.