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

Results found: 14

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
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Margizens. Exclusion and state violence towards the Romanian Roma community in Poland

100%
Klaus W.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2021
|
issue XLIII/2
63-89
PL
Społeczność rumuńskich Romów jest obecna w większych polskich miastach od początku lat 90. XX wieku. Chociaż ich pobyt uważany był za czasowy, okazało się, że niektórzy przedstawiciele tej grupy mieszkają w Polsce od ponad 20 lat. Przez większość tego czasu byli oni jednak niewidoczni dla polskich władz. Pojawiali się w orbicie ich spojrzenia jedynie sporadycznie i przede wszystkim w związku z próbami usunięcia ich – czy to wydalenia z Polski, czy też eksmisji z zajmowanej przez nich przestrzeni. W niniejszym tekście chciałbym opisać sytuację rumuńskich Romów mieszkających w jednym z polskich miast – we Wrocławiu. Na ich przykładzie chcę pokazać sposoby wykluczania przedstawicieli tej społeczności zarówno ze społeczeństwa jako całości, jak i z przestrzeni publicznej. Opiszę proces marginalizacji rumuńskich Romów (jako przykład działań antyromskich), jak również używannie przepisów prawnokarnych do dyscyplinowania członków tej społeczności i korygowania ich zachowań – tych które polskie społeczeństwo uznało za niewłaściwe lub których po prostu nie chce oglądać. Pokażę zatem, jak wygląda proces wykluczania Romów z zarówno z przestrzeni publicznej, jak i z prywatnej (czy półpublicznej), podam przykłady uprzedzeń oraz przemocy motywowanej ksenofobią, której sprawcami są przedstawiciele polskiego społeczeństwa, opiszę także generalny brak wsparcia dla Romów – ze strony społeczeństwa, instytucji publicznych czy policji. Wszystkie te praktyki i działania prowadzą do pozbawienia przedstawicieli pochodzącej z Rumunii społeczności romskiej mieszkających we Wrocławiu poczucia bezpieczeństwa, bowiem policjanci są przez nich postrzegani (oraz zachowują się) raczej jako oprawcy, którzy przeganiają ich z publicznych miejsc, w których żebrzą, nakładają na nich grzywny oraz konfiskują pieniądze zarobione na ulicy. Jednocze śnienie zapewniają żadnej ochrony przed ksenofobiczną przemocą ze strony społeczeństwa – czy też, by być bardziej precyzyjnym, uznali, że nie będą występowali w roli osób strzegących tę społeczność. Wzmożona kontrola oraz przemoc ze strony przedstawicieli instytucji publicznych wobec społeczności rumuńskich Romów wynika z postrzegania ich (i naznaczenia ich) jako nie-członków społeczności, jako obcych, wobec których mogą być stosowane inne zasady niż w stosunku do przedstawicieli polskiego społeczeństwa.
EN
A Romanian Roma community has been present in the largest Polish cities since the beginning of the 1990s. Although their presence was initially perceived as temporary, some members of this group have now been living in Poland for more than 20 years. However, for much of that time they have been invisible to the authorities, with only occasional exposure, and the main reasons for intervention were an attempt to remove them from the country, or from territory they were living on. In this paper, I would like to describe the situation of Romanian Roma in one Polish city, Wrocław. On their example I present different levels of exclusion from the community and space, describe the process of marginalisation (as a part of anti-Roma practices), as well as the tendency to use criminal law to discipline behaviours which society considers to be inappropriate and which it does not want to see. I’m thus presenting problems of evictions from public and private spaces, cases of prejudice followed by xenophobic attacks performed by representatives of Polish society and general lack of support neither from the general public, social institutions or police. Those practices lead to dep ravation of sense of security of the Roma population in Wrocław as police officers are perceived by them (and behaves) rather as oppressors who chase beggars away, fine them and confiscate money they earned on the street. And they fail in protection Roma community against xenophobic violence form the host society – or to be more precise they decided to abdicate from this role. The control of and state’s violence against the Roma community is made possible by labelling them as non-members of society, as strangers – persons to whom we can apply different rules than to ourselves.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Sprawcy przemocy motywowanej uprzedzeniami wobec cudzoziemców

100%
Klaus W.
Biuletyn Kryminologiczny
|
2016
|
issue 23
57-78
PL
Na poziom uprzedzeń i ksenofobii w społeczeństwach wpływa nie tyle liczba imigrantów, którzy mieszkają w danym kraju, a raczej poczucie zagrożenia, jakie panuje w danym społeczeństwie przed napływem imigrantów. Stąd poziom uprzedzeń jest wyższy w tych społeczeństwach, które są bardziej homogeniczne. Potwierdzają to wyniki badań nad polskimi uprzedzeniami w stosunku do muzułmanów czy ogólnie wobec imigrantów. Badania kryminologiczne pokazują silny związek między ksenofobicznymi postawami rodziny sprawców a popełnianiem przez nich czynów na tle uprzedzeń. Sprawcami tych czynów są przede wszystkim działający w grupie młodzi mężczyźni (poniżej 25 lat), a podstawowymi motywacjami ich czynów jest poszukiwanie wrażeń (połączone ze spożyciem alkoholu) czy też specyficznie rozumiana próba ochrony społeczeństwa przed napływem Obcych. Ważnym motorem działań sprawców jest także przekonanie, że za pokrzywdzonymi nikt się nie ujmie – ani policja, ani społeczeństwo. The level of biases and xenophobic attitudes in a society is influenced mostly by the fear towards immigrants and their influx instead of the real number of immigrants residing in a particular country. That’s why the level of bias towards the Others is much higher in homogeneous societies. The results of Polish opinion polls research on bias attitudes of our society towards Muslims or immigrants echo these findings. In the criminological research we find strong relations between xenophobic attitudes of the family of the perpetrator and acts of bias violence committed by the latter. Biased crimes are usually committed by young males (under 25 years old), and the main motivation of their actions is either thrill (usually connected with the consumption of alcohol) or specifically understood defence of their community from the Others and their presence. An important factor of the perpetrators’ behaviour is also the conviction that no one will stand up for the victims, neither the police, nor the society.
EN
The level of biases and xenophobic attitudes in a society is influenced mostly by the fear towards immigrants and their influx instead of the real number of immigrants residing in a particular country. That’s why the level of bias towards the Others is much higher in homogeneous societies. The results of Polish opinion polls research on bias attitudes of our society towards Muslims or immigrants echo these findings. In the criminological research we find strong relations between xenophobic attitudes of the family of the perpetrator and acts of bias violence committed by the latter. Biased crimes are usually committed by young males (under 25 years old), and the main motivation of their actions is either thrill (usually connected with the consumption of alcohol) or specifically understood defence of their community from the Others and their presence. An important factor of the perpetrators’ behaviour is also the conviction that no one will stand up for the victims, neither the police, nor the society.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Criminalisation of Beggars: the Causes and Consequences of the Phenomenon

100%
Klaus W.
Contemporary Central and East European Law
|
2019
|
issue 1 (133)
132-141
EN
All authorities desire to control various aspects of their subjects’ lives. Those in power claim to do it in the name of protecting the peace and safety of all citizens. For one of groups perceived to be the most dangerous is the one whose members evade formal or informal social control – they do not work, do not have a family or are estranged from them, they have no permanent home. Therefore, to make sure that no one is out of the reach of governmental control, criminal law is utilised against them and whole ways of life, and the everyday behaviours of vagrants and homeless people began to be criminalised. And this process is still ongoing. The law thus punishes a person for their personal identity, and not for specific improper or harmful behaviour undertaken by them. In this paper I would like to analyse the problem of criminalisation of beggars throughout Polish history, and present how it impacted (and still impacts) upon the lives of the poorest and the most excluded parts of Polish society.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Wczesna przestępczość nieletnich i jej skutki

100%
Klaus W.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2006
|
issue XXVIII
203-218
EN
The object of study was prohibited acts committed by children up to 13 years  old which caused a reaction of the justice system. The results of the research deny a common belief, also popularised by the mass media that the age of juveniles who committed serious crimes is rapidly falling down. In fact, in most cases we deal with petit crimes.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Działalność wychowawcza sądu rodzinnego wobec nieletnich – pomiędzy ideami a praktyką

100%
Klaus W.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2008
|
issue XXIX-XXX
331-347
6
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Integracja-marginalizacja-kryminalizacja, czyli o przestępczości cudzoziemców w Polsce

100%
Klaus W.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2010
|
issue XXXII
81-155
EN
21st century is said to be the century of migration. Owing to the newest technologies people migrate easier and quicker. They also decide to change their place of residence more often – now not only within their countries but also outside it. Greater European integration and resulting increased facility in travelling within the EU facilitate this process. Yet, the most important cause of migration is the drive to improve living conditions. This is the main reason why foreigners from across the globe come to Europe – better life for them and their families. At present in the old EU countries migrants already constitute ten percent of society or even considerably more (according to UN data 14.1% in Spain, 13.1% in Germany, 10.7% in France, 10.4% in the UK), while in Poland this percentage is only 2.2% (although according to more credible OECD data, in 2008 it was as little as 0.2%). The number of foreigners legally residing in Poland permanently in 2009 was 92,500 (Office for Foreigners data), and the number of foreigners legally working in the country was almost 175,000 (Ministry of Labour and Social Policy data). One should also take into account a considerable number of foreigners residing in Poland illegally, estimated by researchers to be between 50 and 450 thousand. Moreover, the Border Guard data show an increase in the number of visitors to Poland – in 2009 7,2 million foreigners crossed Polish borders (which is a 5% increase compared to 2008). However, there are also threats related to migrations and they are of interest to sociologists and criminologists. Foreigners often remain on the margin of society and, as it happens in all marginalised social groups, some of them can turn to crime. Criminal activity of foreigners can be diverse, majority of it being common crimes committed against other foreigners. Organised crime crossing national borders is also a problem, particularly its most dangerous variety, human trafficking. Migrations involve also a clash of cultures which can lead to many previously unknown crimes (like e.g. honour murders, juvenile marriages, or reappearance of vendetta murders). Foreigners as “aliens” in the society often evoke fears, one of them being fear of serious crime – 2008 opinion poll by CBOS indicated that over 90% of Poles are afraid of such treat from foreigners. Yet fear of immigrants has much more in common with unrest and social instability brought by immigrant to the lives of residents than with actual risk of crime. It is worth to recall that one of first criminological studies carried out already in 1920s by Clifford Shaw indicated that crime is related to environment people live in, not to their race or nationality. Looking at the statistics, one may have an impression that [in Poland] there is no problem with foreign delinquency. Suspected foreigners in the peak moment in 2001 constituted 1.3% of all offenders and in 2008 only 0.41%.
7
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Zawieranie małżeństw polsko-cudzoziemskich w celu obejścia przepisów legalizacyjnych

100%
Klaus W.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2016
|
issue XXXVIII
269-319
EN
In a changing and increasingly globalized world, in which migration is on the rise, more and more frequently marriages are being entered into between people of different nationalities, and also, often enough, of different confession or ethnicity. Many scholars claim that the widespread nature of this phenomenon may, in fact, attest to a high level of integration of the migrants into the society and their resultant social acceptance. On the other hand, various studies reveal that in numerous societies mixed marriages are not generally approved of. Marriage may be perceived very differently, depending on the actual perspective or an approach opted for when putting it under closer scrutiny. For some, its key component will consist in the relationship between two individuals forming it, others will be happy to see rather as a primary building block of a society, a kind of social nucleus, others still, first and foremost in business terms. Finally, marriage may also be looked upon as a means of controlling and oppressing women. In different domains of the law, the institution of marriage is bound to be perceived very differently. In terms of immigration law, marriage is perceived first and foremost as an instrument for the legalization of a foreign national’s residence in another country. Marriage may also be looked upon as a certain source of risk, including that to public security. The very fact of its conclusion may be considered a criminal offence, e.g. in the case of forcing someone into entering into such a relationship. A number of countries face a recognized problem of the so-called forced marriages. In terms of immigration law, the problem consists in making an instrumental use of the institution of marriage in order to legalize one’s residence in the country. This is referred to as a marriage of convenience, or paper marriage, fictitious union, sometimes also referred to as fake marriage. Under Polish law, they are subsumed under the term “marriages contracted in order to circumvent the legislation in place,” i.e. presumably the Foreign Nationals Act. There are various definitions of virtual marriages to be found in the literature on the subject. They are referred to as relationships in which at least one of the partners contracts a marriage with no intention of pursuing true married life whatsoever. Other definitions highlight a purely instrumental use of the institution of marriage in order to achieve certain benefits, usually with a view to being granted a bona fide residence status, but also for the purpose of escaping from oppressive family relations or cultural pressures exerted by a social group to which they happen to belong. Relevant EU provisions recommend that the Member States introduce mechanisms for the monitoring of mixed marriages and make references to specific cases whereupon a fictitious marriage might well be suspected. Polish legal regulations have been duly adapted to them (provisions of Article 169, Foreign Nationals Act). The number of cases in which provincial governors agreed that a marriage had been contracted in order to circumvent the legislation in place is not high. Over 10 years, only 1,178 of such cases have been identified throughout the country, which accounted for just over 2% of all decisions on legalizing a foreign national’s residence in the country in connection with contracting a mixed marriage. The paper presents the results of a representative sample of residence legalization cases, whereupon provincial governors found marriages to have been contracted under false pretences in the period spanning 2009–2013. A total of 138 of such cases were examined. A vast majority of the surveyed marriages subsequently found to be fictitious was based on the paradigm most popular in the Polish context, i.e. a female Polish citizen marrying a foreign national (72% of cases). Most often, such marriages were contracted by Nigerian nationals, followed by Armenians, Turks, and Ukrainians. The residence in Poland of around a half of the expats might be regarded as a short-term one (as it would not last in excess of 3 years), another 25% might can be described as medium-term migrants, and the remainder, the long-term ones, since they had lived in Poland country for over 10 years. Nigerians and foreign nationals from South Asia and the Mediterranean countries did not usually spend more than three years in Poland, whereas our eastern neighbours and the Armenians tended to stay for at least 4 years, and frequently more than 10 years. A vast majority of married couples, almost 70% of all cases, first met in Poland. In 13% of the cases, they met in another EU country – usually during a longer sojourn of female Polish citizens in that country, or, in a single case, a male Polish citizen. Most foreign nationals marrying Polish women (69%) were over 26 and under 40. There were relatively few older ones, i.e. those over 40 years of age. The average age of female Polish citizens married by them was different, though, as the group of younger ones, i.e. up to 30 years of age, seemed to be dominant. The group of older women, i.e. over 50 years of age, also is quite prominent. In very few cases it was possible to determine during the residence legalization procedure that the spouses had concluded a formal agreement regarding the fictitious nature of their marriage, which would also have its financial aspect: a Polish national was due to receive money in exchange for contracting marriage to a foreign national. Such an aspect was encountered in 15 cases only, and most often the information came from a Polish national who felt cheated out of the payment of the amount originally promised to him/her. When determining the fictitious nature of a marriage, the officials were often aided by the spouses themselves – in 2/3 of the cases under investigation at the time of filing an application for the legalization of residence, they no longer lived together (although sometimes it was due to the fact that the husband still lived abroad having just applied for the right to claim residence in Poland, yet such cases were rather few, as was indicated above). Following an on-site verification whether a married couple actually lived together for the duration of the administrative proceedings, it transpired that in up to 91% of the cases they did not, including the 42 cases, when one of the spouses explicitly described the relationship as over. Polish citizenship as a ‘commodity’ has steadily grown in value in view of the attendant opportunity to obtain legal residence in other EU countries and contracting employment without the need for any permits. Hence, many people are ready to go to any lengths to obtain such a highly prized document. Consequently, the phenomenon of marriages of convenience is expected to rise. On the other hand, this particular type of motivation for contracting marriage by foreign nationals is, and most likely will remain rather hard to detect, so we might just as well acknowledge this as a hard fact of life. There will always be various ways to circumvent legal regulations. While constructing the legislation aimed at preventing fictitious marriages, it should be considered how much effort and resources we are prepared to allocate to preventive measures, to what extent they are expected to be effective (since often they are not, despite the substantial expenditures incurred), and to what extent we can afford to limit the citizens’ rights in this particular respect. When making incursions into someone’s family life and interfering with their marital relations, this is definitely an issue of paramount importance. Finally, it should be borne in mind that marriage is a kind of social contract, and that it has always been so. Marriage out of love is a relatively new concept, and related to a larger extent to a cultural fabric of the global North. In other cultures, marriage has often retained its historical character. One simply needs to acknowledge and accept it as a fact of life when shaping migration policy.
8
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Wstęp

63%
Klaus W., Włodarczyk-Madejska J.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2020
|
issue XLII/2
5-5
9
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Introduction

63%
Klaus W., Włodarczyk-Madejska J.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2020
|
issue XLII/2
7-7
10
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Przestępstwo nielegalnego przekroczenia granicy w ujęciu historycznym, teoretycznym i praktycznym

63%
Klaus W., Woźniakowska-Fajst D.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2015
|
issue XXXVII
191-222
EN
Historical analysis of the issue of illegal crossings of national borders shows that theinstruments of criminal law reactions are more characteristic for totalitarian countriesthan democratic ones. In the case of Poland, over the course of the last few decadesa substantial change has taken place in the goal of protecting borders. Until the endof the 1980s, attempting to prevent its own citizens from leaving was the priority,while now the border controls are concentrated on stopping citizens from third-worldcountries entering.The offence stipulated in article 264 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code penalises anact involving perpetrators illegally crossing Polish borders and do so by using specifiedforms of actions in the form of deceit, violence, threats or in co-operation with otherpeople. Awareness of the perpetrator in relation to the eventual location of the bordermust be based on their knowledge in this field. Here it should refer to normalisedpatterns and the so-called good model citizen, who should possess knowledge bothrelated to cultural norms and to certain facts (e.g. the layout of Poland’s borders). Thismodel is well enough confirmed in the case of Polish citizens. But it is harder to applydirectly to foreigners, specifically those coming from another cultural background.Due to this, determining the guilt of foreigners when it comes to committing crimeson the territory of our country relies on checking and accounting for the concretepersonal facts of the perpetrator, specifically their level of familiarity with Polish legaland socio-cultural norms, while taking into consideration their education, nationalorigin, profession, etc. A lack of appropriate awareness about the perpetrator, resultingfrom a lack of proper knowledge and information, would be the same as making anerror about the factual or legal meaning of the act. The effect of such an error wouldbe an inability to assign intentional fault to the perpetrator for committing the givenact. From 1 July 2015, in agreement with article 28 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code,a person who remains in justified error about the circumstances constituting thehallmarks of a criminal act, has not committed a crime at all.The authors of the article draw attention to the most commonly occurring forms ofactivities by perpetrators from article 264 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code, namely theillegal crossing of borders in co-operation with other people. This co-operation must beunderstood as various forms of collaboration between various people while committinga crime, often fulfilling various roles in this procedure. There is little to dispute the factthat responsibility for this will be assumed by an appropriate accomplice, and thereforethe agreement of several people in relation to the shared committing of a crime. Toconclude, all parties must have awareness that other people will be participating incommitting the crime, and articulate their will (intention) in the joint action. A lack ofagreement in this sense would therefore exclude any collaboration.From a procedural point of view, for an illegal border crossing to qualify as a crime,and not a misdemeanour, the fact must be proven that the accused crossed the border “in co-operation with other people”. In the opinion of the article’s authors, withoutproof of such circumstances, one cannot talk about a crime being committed at all. Perusal of court records raises objections about how this provision is being used inpractice. In none of the analysed recorded situations did border controls attempt toprove the circumstances of co-operation as a reasonable premise for accepting a groupcrossing the border. In some cases, the issue seems questionable.It is clear that the Polish state, in the name of its own interests, tries to ensure theflow of migrants is legal and controlled. But doubt from the article’s authors inspiresmaking use of the instruments of criminal law to aid this goal. Punishments, whichmight be placed upon perpetrators of illegal border crossing crimes, do not play a rolein most cases. One cannot speak about retaliation (because it is not an act which wouldarouse any social emotions and demand retaliation), nor speak about the resocialisationof perpetrators (since it is hard to treat the fact of crossing a border as violatingfundamental social values, and moreover the perpetrator is a foreigner and it is not inthe interest of the Polish state to reintroduce them to society but to expel them fromthe republic’s territory). Finally, it seems fruitless to argue about the preventative roleof punishments, since this perfectly serves the administration’s reaction (in the formof the practice of using detention and expulsion from institutions as well as a ban fromentering Poland’s territory).The position that it is not necessary to launch criminal proceedings againstthose people smuggled across the border was expressed in the so-called Declarationfrom Doha accepted in 2015, issued as a summary of the 13th UN Congress. In itsverdicts, the EU Court of Justice draws attentions to how it is inappropriate to imposepunishments on illegally-residing third world citizens that deprive their freedom solelyon the grounds that they have stayed without a valid reason in the territory of that state,contravening orders to leave that territory in a specified timeframe.In relation to the above, it is the belief of the authors that a justified recommendationwould be to withdraw from the frequently-used article 264 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code, so that proceedings can be conducted in cases related to the illegal crossing ofborders.
11
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Związki między wiktymizacją oraz ubóstwem i wykluczeniem społecznym

63%
Klaus W., Woźniakowska-Fajst D.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2012
|
issue XXXIV
43-89
EN
Since the emergence of criminology as a science, one of the main problems taken up by criminologists was the relations between poverty and crime. Initially, the studies aimed to work out actions to prevent crime and to protect the rest of the society from the marginalized, the excluded and the poor. It was pointed out that that the group called the underclass was marked by criminal deeds of its members, alcohol abuse, family disruption, single parenting, dependence on social security, and physical abuse in families. Only until later, with the development of victimology, the other side started to be observed – the description of the underclass is true as much in the case of perpetrators as it is in the case of victims. It has been proved that poverty and marginalization are related to a higher risk of becoming a victim of a crime. In case of poverty and social exclusion, one can speak of a cause-effect relationship but undoubtedly this can work in both directions – poverty usually adds to social exclusion while social exclusion (particularly more severe, like e.g. ostracism) can lead to poverty. Already at the time of emergence of victimology it was observed that victimization does not concern all members of a society to the same degree. Some social groups become crime victims more often than others. Certain categories of people were recognized as particularly vulnerable to wrongful deeds. In 1947 Hans von Hentig drafted up the first categorisation of persons who were at an increased risk of victimization. It included particular categories of people whose psychological, physical, and behavioural features predispose them to the role of a victim. The author listed larger social groups (eg. young people or women) but also such groups which are included in the context of social exclusion today. He claimed that, among others, mentally ill, retarded, substance dependant are particularly vulnerable to victimisation because their limited perception of situation makes them an easier target to theft, con or fraud. He listed immigrants who are in cultural conflict and rejected by the majority as „aliens”, the poor, and people with emotional problems as all these weaknesses could be easily used by criminals. Other minorities faced similar problems. Social inequality touches upon them in a greater degree and this increases the risk of victimisation. Today, we speak of victimisation of minorities also in the context of prejudice-motivated crimes and the elderly are one of the most vulnerable groups. Benjamin Mendelsohn accented not individual features of victims but their behaviour in cer-tain situational context. According to the author, persons whose behaviour infringes principles of social co-existence and, as a consequence, who put themselves at risk of marginalization, are exactly those who can easily become victims. Living apart from the society and contrary to its rules after all influences the risk of victimization.
12
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Zakład Kryminologii INP PAN z perspektywy współczesnej

51%
Buczkowski K., Klaus W., Woźniakowska-Fajst D.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2008
|
issue XXIX-XXX
49-63
13
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Profesor Zofia Ostrihanska (22.02.1926–24.11.2017)

33%
Buczkowski K., Czarnecka-Dzialuk B., Klaus W., Kossowska A., Rzeplińska I., Szulecka M., Włodarczyk-Madejska J., Wiktorska P., Woźniakowska-Fajst D., Wójcik D.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2018
|
issue XL
5-9
14
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Profesor Anna Kossowska (7.03.1943–4.06.2019)

33%
Buczkowski K., Czarnecka-Dzialuk B., Klaus W., Rzeplińska I., Szulecka M., Włodarczyk-Madejska J., Wiktorska P., Woźniakowska-Fajst D., Wójcik D., Wzorek D.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2019
|
issue XLI/2
7-14
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.