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

Results found: 15

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  środki karne
help Sort By:

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

Katalog środków karnych w świetle nowelizacji kodeksu karnego ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem zakazu prowadzenia pojazdów

100%
Vachev V.
Studia Iuridica
|
2016
|
vol. 65
109-120
EN
This article focuses on presenting the changes implemented to the systematics of penal measures resulting from the amendments made to the Penal Code in 2015. The author pays particular attention to the legislator’s decision to remove confiscation, obligation to pay damages/compensation and punitive damages contained in the catalogue of penal measures in art. 39 of the Penal Code and transferring them to a new chapter „Va” of the Penal Code, which thereby differentiates two new categories of penal measures. The main part of the text concentrates on presenting and analysing the implemented changes within the scope of the regulation of penal measures with regards to the interdiction on driving vehicles (art. 42 of the Penal Code), which are primarily based on extending time limits and the grounds to impose this measure.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego z 19.02.2020 r., I KA 10/19

75%
Szeleszczuk D.
Prawo w Działaniu
|
2022
|
issue 49
EN
This comment on the judgment is about degradation. Degradation is an important element of the sanctions system in Polish military criminal law. The author accepts the position of the Supreme Court on this punishment. In the presented study, based on the verdict of 19 February 2020, as well as previous verdicts of the Supreme Court, the premises for its adjudication and the function of degradation were analyzed. The article is also intended to indicate the practical and theoretical problems that the application of this punishment entails.
PL
Przedmiotem glosy jest degradacja, funkcjonująca jako istotny element systemu sankcji w polskim wojskowym prawie karnym. Autor przyjął stanowisko Sądu Najwyższego wyrażone w orzeczeniu z 19.02.2020 r., odnośnie tego środka karnego. Opierając się na powyższym wyroku oraz na innych orzeczeniach Sądu Najwyższego, dokonał gruntownej analizy przesłanek orzekania oraz funkcji degradacji. Opracowanie ma na celu wskazanie praktycznych i teoretycznych problemów, jakie pociąga za sobą stosowanie tej kary.
3
Content available remote

Środki karne w świetle nowelizacji Kodeksu karnego z dnia 20 lutego 2015 r.

75%
Szeleszczuk D.
Studia Prawnicze KUL
|
2015
|
issue 4 (64)
75-88
PL
Przedmiotem opracowania są zmiany wynikające z nowelizacji Kodeksu karnego z 20 lutego 2015 r. w zakresie środków karnych. Autor analizuje konsekwencje tych zmian. Najistotniejszą z nich jest wyodrębnienie rozdziału 5a, gdzie umieszczono przepadek i środki kompensacyjne w postaci nawiązki i obowiązku naprawienia szkody.
EN
The subject of the article are changes to the penal measures resulting from the amendment of the Criminal Code of 20 February 2015. The author analyzes the consequences of these changes. The most important of them is to isolate Chapter 5a, where the forfeiture and compensation measures in the form of exemplary damages and the obligation to repair the damage are placed.
RU
Предметом анализа являются изменения в результате внесения поправок в Уголовный кодекс от 20 февраля 2015 г. в сфере карательных мер. Автор анализирует последствия этих изменений. Наиболее важным из них является введение главы 5а, где находятся положения, касающиеся конфискации и компенсационных мер в виде избытка и обязанности возмещения ущерба.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

„Rejestr pedofilów” jako pozakodeksowy, obligatoryjny środek karny

75%
Stankieiwcz J.
Zeszyt Studencki Kół Naukowych Wydziału Prawa i Administracji UAM
|
2018
|
issue 8
241-255
PL
W artykule przeprowadzono analizę rozwiązań środków ochrony z ustawy o przeciwdziałaniu zagrożeniom przestępczością na tle seksualnym (ustawa p.z.p.s.). przez pryzmat środków karnych z Kodeksu karnego. Analiza struktury Rejestru Sprawców Przestępstw na Tle Seksualnym wykazała podobieństwo do środka karnego w postaci podania wyroku do publicznej wiadomości. Szczególne obowiązki, które nakłada na pracodawców ustawa p.z.p.s. budzą z kolei słuszne skojarzenia ze środkiem karnym w postaci zakazu prowadzenia działalności związanej z wychowaniem, leczeniem, edukacją małoletnich lub z opieką nad nimi. Analogiczność między rozwiązaniami ustawy p.z.p.s. a Kodeksem karnym jest tak głęboka, że w istocie „szczególne środki ochrony” z tej ustawy powinny być postrzegane jako quasi środki karne. Wprowadzone rozwiązania pozostają nowoczesne jedynie w zakresie formy (tzw. publiczny „rejestr pedofilów”), jednakże materialnie są one kopią rozwiązań od lat funkcjonujących.
EN
In the article there is made an analysis of solutions of protection measures under the Act on Counteracting Threats to Sexual Crimes (the Act) within the context of penal measures from the Penal Code. As a result of the research of the structure of the Register of Sex Offenders, there is a similarity to the criminal measure in the form of making the judgment public. Special obligations imposed on employers under the Act are appropriately associated with a penal measure in the form of a ban on conducting activities related to the upbringing, treatment, education of juveniles or taking care of them. The analogy between the solutions of the Act and the Penal Code in fact leads to a conclusion that „special protection measures” under the Act should be perceived as quasi criminal measures. Innovative measures introduced to the penal system remain modern only in terms of form (the so-called public „register of pedophiles”), but materially they are a copy of solutions that have existed for years.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Zakaz prowadzenia działalności związanej z wychowaniem, leczeniem, edukacją małoletnich lub z opieką nad nimi jako nowy środek karny

71%
Melezini M., Sakowicz A.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2008
|
issue XXIX-XXX
567-580
6
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Główne kierunki polityki karnej realizowanej przez kolegia do spraw wykroczeń w latach 1972–1989

71%
Szumski J.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
1993
|
issue XIX
107-131
EN
The paper characterizes the evolution of penal policy with respect to per peetrators of transgressions, pursued in Poland by elected agencies attacbed to the state administration and called “transgression boards”. In the years 1972–1989, their decisions were supervised by the Minister of Internal Affairs. Most of the discussion, based on statistical materials, concerns changes in the structure and dynamics of penal measures applied by the boards. The measures have been defined as all legal reactions applicable upon the finding the perpetrator’s guilt. The present paper does not deal with all of those measures, though: for lack of statistical data, tukets imposed by the penal prosecution agencies and the possible reactions on part of those agencies if they renounce moving the case to the board for punishment according to the principle of  expediency of prosecution could not be discussed. Penal policy has been characterized against the background of amendments introduced in the period under analysis and of instructions issued by the Minister of Internal Affairs that shape the boards’ decisions. After 1982, such instructions usually aimed at aggravating repression. The statutory catalogue of penal measures contained in the transgressions code is relatively extensive. The most severe measure is detention which amounts to deprivation of liberty for up to 3 months. As stated in the code, it should be applied in exceptional cases only. In the first decade of validity of the code, detention was imposed in l–l.5 % of all decisions which meant the deprivation of liberty of 9,00–10,000 persons. It is therefore doubtful whether detention was indeed treated as an exceptional measure by practicians. In the next years, it was imposed much less often. The penalty of suspended detention played any role in the practice of transgression boards. As shown by studies, those who applied law  treated suspended detention as a separate penal measure to replace other measures not involving deprivation of liberty rather than a way of limiting the use of immediaste detention. Also disappointed were the  expectations related to another new measure, formally more severe than fine, that is limitation of liberty which was to “educate through work”. According to the legislators’ assumptions, that penalty was to  be the main alternative to detention; in practice, it was imposed rather often  (about 5% of all measures applied) but served mainly as a substitute for fine. The basic measure applied to perpetrators of transgressions was fine, imposed on 90% of cases of those punished by the boards. According to provisions of the Transgressions Code, though, a substitute penalty of detention can be imposed in the case of justified doubts as to the possibility of execution of fine. For this reason, it was found advisable in the present analysis to treat this form of fine as a measure different in quality from fine imposed without a substitute penalty which could in no case lead to imprisonment. Also research findings encouraged the treatment of these two kinds of fine as separate penal measures: the substitute penalty was treated in practice as a specific method of aggravating repression, and imposed in defiance with provisions of the Code. Owing to this approach it could be evidenced that the proportion of fines combined with the threat of deprivation of liberty (another measures designed as exceptional) went up rapidly in mid-1910s to become stabilized at about 20% of all decisions of the  transgression boards. The abuse of that measure, also designed as exceptional, was accompanied mainly by less frequent fines without a substitute penalty. At the same time, the proportion of the two most lenient measures, that is admonition and renouncement of inflicting punishment, went down regularly and amounted to a mere 2% of decisions despite the broad applications of those measures contained in the Code. This reflects the practicians’ tendency to use the aggravating legal solutions much more often than those which mitigate penalty; this led to increased repressiveness of penal policy. Beside the above-mentioned reactions, the Transgressions Code provides for a number of measures called additional penalties which are to accompany the principal ones. They can also be applied as self-standing measures in specific situations. Yet the agencies that apply law never availed themselves of this latter possibility. Instead, additional penalties were lavishly imposed (particularly the witholrawal it driving licence and the penalty of making the sentence publicly known) which led to accumulation of repressions suffered by the punished person. This is why the serious growth in the number of additional penalties, after the legal changes introduced in mid-l980s and instructions issued by the Minister of Internal Affairs in particular, was still another proof of the aggravation of penal policy with respect to perpertrators of transgressions. Characteristically, the Polish Transgressions Code combines the application of some of the non-custodical measures with the threat of deprivation of liberty in the case of failure in the execution of those measures. This concerns the above-mentioned fine but also, in definite conditions, the limitation of liberty and suspended detention. In practice, the threat of imprisonment was used very often, the total proportion of the three above measures becoming stabilized, after an initial growth, at about 20–25% of decisions which mainly resulted from excessive imposition of fines with a substitute penalty of detention. Most importantly, though, that threat was realized with respect to every fifth or sixth person in that group. As a result, the average of 20–25 thousand persons a year were imprisoned despite the fact that a measure not involving deprivation of liberty had originally been applied to them. A paradoxical situation arose where persons sentenced to the principal penalty of detention constituted a small percentage of those imprisoned by force of decisions of the transgression boards, while most served a substitute penalty due to a failure in the execution of the previously applied non-custodial measure. Still another expression of the growing repressiveness of penal policy was the greater and greater involved in the most frequently imposed penalty of fines in both of its forms: due to amendments of the Transgressions Code, the amound of fine went up a quicker pace than the average wages in socialized economy during most of the 1980s. A statutory solution concerning transgression that was most vehemently critized by the doctrine was the most limited judicial supervision over  decisions of the transgression boards. The appel instance were boards of  the second instance; only decisions imposing detention and limitation of liberty could be appealed against to the court. Thus judicial supervision concerned neither the substitute penalties which involved deprivation of liberty nor the most acute ban on driving motor vehicles. Meanwhile as shown by experimental findings, 6–15% of persons punished by the boards were acquitted by the court to which they complained, and a non-isolation measure was  substituted for deprivation of  liberty in over one-third of the cases. This shows that courts saw decisions of the boards not only as essentially defective but also as excessively repressive. This latter conclusion is rather symptomatic the fact considered that penal policy pursued by courts with respect to offenders was sewere, too. What has also to be stressed when characterizing the decisions in cases of transgressions is the frequent use of the statutory possibility of deciding in expedited proceedings and proceedings  by writ of payment. From the viewpoint of rational penal policy, that tendency deserves to be criticized as protection of the defendant’s basic processual guaranties suffers statutory limitation in those modes of procedure, and the speed and simplification of proceedings affect the individualization of punishment. Also of importance was the fact that the frequent decisions in expedited proceedings served as a specific form of aggravation of represion since – as shown by research findings – the penalties imposed in that mode were more severe than in the ordinary proceedings. Analysis of the evolution of decisions of the transgression boards has led to the conclusion that throughout the period under analysis, penal policy was regularly aggravated which was largely influenced by punitive instructions of the Minister of Internal Affairs. The only periods of mitigation of penalties were  the years 1981 and 1989: this resulted mainly from social conflicts and public opinion pressure on reduction of repressiveness of the penal system. For this reason, the 1989 amendment of the Transgression Code, forced by systemic changes, which deprived the Minister of Internal Affairs of his original control over decisions of the transgression boards and submitted all of those decisions to judical review brings the hope for liberalization and rationalization of penal policy in cases of transgressions.
7
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Prawnokarny zakaz wstępu na imprezę masową

63%
Kania A.
Studia Prawnicze: rozprawy i materiały
|
2018
|
issue 1(22)
97-113
EN
This article aims at analysing the punitive measure in the form of a ban on participation at mass events in the view of the criminal law. The study refers to not only the ratio legis of implementing that institution but also to the statutory prerequisites determining the justifiability of adjudicating that measure. Further, the article also presents possible forms of the said ban, as well as the legal consequences related to the infringement thereof. In the end notes, the study highlights the basic interpretation diffi culties related to the application of the discussed regulation. Furthermore, the article expresses the view that ensuring security during mass events requires, in fact, the application of a number of mechanisms, both of a legal and an extralegal nature.
PL
Celem niniejszego artykułu jest prawnokarna analiza środka karnego w postaci zakazu wstępu na imprezę masową. W opracowaniu tym odwołano się nie tylko do ratio legis wprowadzenia tej instytucji, lecz także do ustawowych przesłanek determinujących zasadność orzeczenia tego środka. W dalszej kolejności wskazano również możliwe postacie omawianego zakazu, a także konsekwencje prawne związane z jego nieprzestrzeganiem. W ramach uwag końcowych zasygnalizowano z kolei podstawowe trudności interpretacyjne, które wiążą się ze stosowaniem omawianej regulacji. Ponadto, wyrażono pogląd, iż zapewnienie bezpieczeństwa podczas imprez masowych wymaga w istocie zaangażowania szeregu mechanizmów zarówno o charakterze prawnym, jak i pozaprawnym.
8
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

STOSOWANIA ŚRODKÓW ZABEZPIECZAJĄCYCH PO ORZECZENIU KARY I ŚRODKÓW KARNYCH

63%
Góralski P.
Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny
|
2012
|
vol. 74
|
issue 2
59-70
EN
The paper discusses the issue of admissibility and advisability of combining, within criminal code regulations, selected types of protective measures with penalties and punitive measures in a follow-up manner, i.e. after the application of penalties or punitive measures. The first issue considered is the application of protective measures after serving an imprisonment sentence. The author suggests that medicinal protective measures be systematically applied before the period of imprisonment in the case of sexual offenders. Following the imprisonment penalty, some other, non-medicinal protective measures should be applied. Another issue discussed in the paper is the possibility of applying non-isolation protective measures after the application of punitive measures and a proposed change within that area.
PL
W artykule autor omawia kwestię dopuszczalności i celowości łączenia w przepisach kodeksu karnego stosowania określonych rodzajów środków zabezpieczających z karami i środkami karnymi w sposób następczy, to jest po uprzednim wykonaniu kar lub środków karnych. W tym zakresie omówiono najpierw zagadnienie realizowania środków zabezpieczających po wykonaniu kary pozbawienia wolności. Autor proponuje, aby lecznicze środki zabezpieczające były konsekwentnie realizowane przed wykonaniem kary pozbawienia wolności – na przykład w przypadku sprawców przestępstw seksualnych. Po wykonaniu kary pozbawienia wolności powinny być realizowane nowe środki zabezpieczające o charakterze nieleczniczym. Drugim zagadnieniem omówionym w artykule jest możliwość stosowania nieizolacyjnych środków zabezpieczających po wykonaniu wobec sprawcy przestępstwa środków karnych i propozycje zmian w tym zakresie.
9
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Pojęcie apelacji i kasacji co do środka karnego w postępowaniu w sprawach o przestępstwa skarbowe i wykroczenia skarbowe – glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego z 8.02.2019 r., IV KK 295/18

63%
Łukowiak B.
Prawo w Działaniu
|
2022
|
issue 51
EN
In the commented judgment, the Supreme Court took the view that the forfeiture of devices used for gaming machines imposed in the proceedings in fiscal offenses and fiscal misdemeanor cases does not constitute a penal measure, and therefore the cassation appeal against the ruling in the part regarding the penalty is not considered directed against forfeiture under extension of the scope of the appeal based on Article 447 § 2 of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure. The paper presents arguments for this position to be considered erroneous and analyses the differences in the regulation of penal measures under general and fiscal criminal law and proposes the necessary legislative changes.
PL
W komentowanym orzeczeniu Sąd Najwyższy stanął na stanowisku, że wymierzony w postępowaniu w sprawie o przestępstwo skarbowe przepadek urządzeń służących do gry na automatach nie stanowi środka karnego, w związku z czym kasacja wniesiona przeciwko orzeczeniu w części dotyczącej kary nie obejmuje rozstrzygnięcia dotyczącego przepadku w trybie rozszerzania zakresu zaskarżenia na podstawie art. 447 § 2 Kodeksu postępowania karnego. W pracy tej przedstawiono argumenty na rzecz uznania tego stanowiska za błędne oraz przeanalizowano różnice w zakresie regulacji środków karnych na gruncie powszechnego prawa karnego i prawa karnego skarbowego, a także wskazano propozycje niezbędnych w tym względzie zmian w ustawodawstwie.
10
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Zmiany w zakresie środków karnych w świetle nowelizacji Kodeksu karnego z 13 czerwca 2019 r.

63%
Szeleszczuk D.
Studia Prawnicze KUL
|
2019
|
issue 3
183-207
EN
Changes in penal measures resulting from the amendment to the Penal Code of 13 June 2019 constitute the subject matter of the article. The author analyses the consequences of those changes. The authors of the amendments to the act declared that the level would increase the protection of children through criminal law, which was their main motive. The article reveals various errors and disad­vantages of the legal framework adopted, which do not allow for a positive as­sessment of the above mentioned amendment. The article also raises the issues related to changes accounting for a criminal measure in the form of a driving ban. The article refers to the amendments to the Criminal Code, which resulted in sig­nificant strengthening of criminal liability for transport crime. The author gives a critical review and demonstrates the fallacy of certain provisions and their in­consistency with other Code stipulations. Furthermore, taking such radical meas­ures – contrary to what the amendment authors pointed out – is not justified by the increasing crime rate. The author is critical about the proposed amendments, emphasising their excessive repressiveness, which is not reasoned by the need to protect traffic safety.
PL
Przedmiotem artykułu są zmiany środków karnych wynikające z nowelizacji Kodeksu karnego z 13 czerwca 2019 r. Autor analizuje konsekwencje tych zmian. W ocenie projektodawców głównym celem ma być podniesienie poziomu ochrony dzieci poprzez prawo karne. Artykuł ujawnia różne błędy i wady przyjętych rozwiązań prawnych, które nie pozwalają na pozytywną ocenę wyżej wspomnianej nowelizacji. Artykuł porusza także kwestie związane ze zmianami w zakresie środka karnego w postaci zakazu prowadzenia pojazdu. Artykuł odnosi się do zmian wprowadzonych do Kodeksu karnego, które spowodowały znaczne zwiększenie odpowiedzialności karnej sprawców przestępstw komunikacyjnych. Autor dokonuje krytycznej analizy i pokazuje wadliwość niektórych przepisów oraz ich niespójność z innymi rozwiązaniami kodeksowymi. Co więcej, podejmowanie tak radykalnych środków - wbrew temu, co zauważyli autorzy noweli, nie jest uzasadnione poziomem i dynamiką przestępstw komunikacyjnych. Autor krytycznie odnosi się do proponowanych poprawek, podkreślając ich nadmierną represyjność, która nie jest uzasadniona potrzebą ochrony bezpieczeństwa w komunikacji.  
11
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

System środków penalnych w projekcie kodeksu wykroczeń

62%
Szumski J.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
1994
|
issue XX
53-78
EN
This paper discusses and appraises changes in the system of penal measures in the draft of the Transgressions Code, and to some extent also in the draft of the Code of the Execution of Penalties. A great variety of problems are discussed: the author concentrates on a broad definition of a penal measure, treating as such measure each legal reaction to the fact of transgression, made by a competent agency upon identification of the perpetrator. The discussion concentrates on the draft’s division into penalties and penal measures. Also discussed are other reactions included in the code that can be applied to the perpetrator but do not belong to either of the above two categories. The autor carries out a critical analysis of the solutions concerning penalties, penal measures, alternatives to punishment, and the main  directives as to the severity of penal measures. Taken into account in the analysis have been, on the one hand, the praiseworthy regulations, most of which result from acceptance by authors of the draft of postulates, made for a long time by the doctrine and aimed toward the   rationalization and humanization of Polish law on transgressions. On the other hand, the analysis paints out those solutions which the author finds to be redundant or improperly formulated With respect to reactions that are termed “penalties” the author declares himself a resolved opponent of arrest: in his opinion, that penalty should not be imposed on perpetrators of the pettiest transgressions, the more so as some of the offences specified in the draft code are not threatened with deprivation of liberty at all. Here, the practice of deciding in cases of transgressions is brought to mind where arrest was usually imposed for disturbances of public order or peace committed by intoxicated persons; most of such perpetrators were alcoholics, and  their short-term imprisonment was in fact a specific preventive measure. The author also expresses his support of the renouncement of the institution of conditional suspention of the penalty of arrest (should even arrest be preserved in the future code): in practice, instead of limiting the use of arrest, that institution was treated as a self-standing reaction, a substitute for the penal measures not involving deprivation of liberty. On the other hand, the author praises the elimination from the draft of the penalty of limitation of liberty which fails to come up to expectations as an alternative to arrest and only causes serious problems with its execution. As regards, further, the penalty of fines ‒ the basic reaction towards perpetrators of transgressions ‒ the author considers the pros and cons and declarls himself in favor of the system of daily rates. Aware of the controversial nature of this suggestion, he justifies it mainly with the need for the unification of the system of imposition of fines in penal law and the  law on transgressions. The author praises the solution where only the court is empowered to impose arrest in default of paying a fine. In principle, he also praises the way this sphere ‒ the main weak point of decisions in cases of transgressions so far ‒ has been regulated in the draft of the Code of the Execution of Penalties. Here, arrest as a substitute for fines is treated as the last resort, and many solutions are Offerd to cause the payment of a fine; fines can even be defanted on if then cannot be paid for reasons beyond the convicted person’s control, and it proves impossible or inexpedient to carry out that penalty in another way. The author believes, however, that some of the solutions suggested in the draft of the Code of the Execution of Penalties have not been formulated with sufficient precision. As far as penal measures are concerned ‒ under the draft of the Transgressions Code, they include with deawal of a driving license, forfeiture of property, and payment to the injured person or for a public purpose ‒ the author criticizes mainly the limited possibilities of their application as self-standing measures: they can only be applied in the case of renouncement of inflicting a punishment. This solution is in fact a preservation of the possibility, criticized by scientific community, of the accumulation of different penal measures, and leads to unnecessary aggravation of punishment. On the other hand, the author praises many other novel solutions related to penal measures, including in particular a considerable mitigation of the statutory application of a most annoying withdrawal of a driving license; in his opinion, however, that ban should be optional and not obligatory. The author also praises the regulation of forfeiture of propesty, mainly because of the ban on its application if the decision to impose it were out of proportion with the seriousness of the transgression. Besides, the author fully approves of the renunciation of the former additional penalty, the “ban on pursuit of definite activity or performance of functions requiring a license”, and also of the labelling measure of publication of the sentence. In the sphere of general directives of the imposition of penal measures, the draft is based on the concept which combines elements of just retribution (proportional to guilt) and special prevention. The former directive is to define the maximum degree of severity of reaction under penal law, while the latter should influence the choice and extent of the penal measure applied. Unlike the draft of the Penal Code, the draft of the Transgressions Code does not include the directive of general prevention. The present author praises this omission and supports the opinion, popular in scientific community, that general prevention should be included in the statutory sanctions while its aims can be achieved within the directive of just retribution. With respect to the latter, the author argues that reaction of penal law should be commensurate not only with the guilt but also with the seriousness of the act; he also stresses that compensation for the damages done to the injured person should become an integral part of just retribution, and acquire an important position in the future Transgressions Code. Further discussion concerns alternatives to punishment, that is: (1) renunciaton of inflicting punishment, and (2) refusal to start proceedings before the boards for the adjudication of transgressions where the case is referred to other agencies (e.g. place of employment or school) for application of so-callcd educational measures. Under the draft, renunciation of inflicting punishment may consist both in a complete renunciation of applying any penal measure, and in rcnunciation of imposing a penalty which is combined with the application of another penal measure. In the author’s opinion; this solution has to be modified. The very name of the institution concerned here can hardly be squared with the  possibility of applying a penal measure, often one ‒ e.g. withdrawal of a driving license ‒ that is actually more severe than a penalty such as a small fine. For this reason, the author’s suggestion aims at a situation where renunciation of inflicting punishment would consist only in abandonment of the application of any measures whatever. Instead, the possibilities of application of self-standing penal measures should be much extended and regulated by separate provisions. The other of the above-mentioned institutions, whose regulation violates the principle of definiteness of reaction under penal law, should be eliminated altogether. What also speaks for this solution is the fact that the institution concerned is based on a belief in the effectiveness of educational actions which has not been verified empirically; moreover, its application may expose the offender to consequences more severe (e.g. dismissal from work) than those resulting from proceedings before the beards for the adjudication of transgressions. In the final part of the paper, the author comments on the general conception of the Polish reform of broadly conceived penal law. He proclaims himself in favor of the opinion, found in literature, that Polish law has to be amended radically (based on the suggestions contained in the draft), and that the work on its codification have to proceed parallel to its amendment; they must also be given sufficient time to be completed.  
12
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Działalność wychowawcza sądu rodzinnego wobec nieletnich – pomiędzy ideami a praktyką

45%
Klaus W.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2008
|
issue XXIX-XXX
331-347
13
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Wymiar kar kościelnych w kontekście salus animarum

45%
Wroceński J.
Sympozjum
|
2016
|
issue 2(31)
9-40
EN
In his paper, the author considers the question of the dimension of ecclesiastical penalties in the context of the salvation of souls. He reaches the conclusion that the law of the Church and the power of punishment are closely associated with the same nature and mission of the Church which was established by Christ, not only as a spiritual community linked by supernatural bonds but also as a visible community, which, for the realization of its salvific mission (salus animarum), has at its disposal various means, including the power to inflict penalties. Ecclesiastical penalty always entails some diminution or even deprivation of rights that belonged to a person because of the state of life in the Church. The Church and, more precisely, those who stand at the head of communities apply penalties under the authority of Christ. The infliction of ecclesiastical penalties is effectuated within the triple function of the power of governance, i.e. legislative, executive, and judicial. However, criminal sanctions are inflicted on condition of external violation and it must be a violation of some penal statute, general or particular, or penal regulation. In addition, there must be significant sanity as a result of intentional or unintentional guilt. If it lacks any of the above-mentioned elements, it is not possible to impose of a criminal sanction in the Church in a particular case. Although this principle is absolute, still it permits an exception. Namely, the legislator allows punishment also for exceeding the legal provision that is not backed by a criminal sanction under two conditions: if the special gravity of the offense demands punishing and if, at the same time, the need to avoid scandal or to repair it is urgent. This is always done in the context of the salus animarum.
14

Reforma czy rewolucja? Nowy kształt środków zabezpieczających

38%
Kładoczny P.
Studia Iuridica
|
2016
|
vol. 65
175-188
EN
The Act of 20 February 2015 amending the Penal Code and certain other acts introduced a completely new model of protective measures (środki zabezpieczające). The article contains a critical analysis of the principles that lay at the foundation of the legislator’s move to create the current solutions, namely wide application of non-custodial protective measures, execution of those measures only after the execution of the imprisonment sentence and application of protective measures to convicts sentenced to non-custodial punishment. The author also analyses the consequences of applying these principles in particular provisions and the controversy concerning the compliance of the new normative solutions with the Constitution. The author also points to the doubts whether the advantages of extending the application of protective measures will balance the weakening of the guaranteeing function of criminal law.
15
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Merytoryczne przesłanki orzekania kar i innych środków wobec wielokrotnych recydywistów

36%
Janiszewski B.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
1986
|
issue XIII
109-139
EN
The aims of the present study have been: 1) to ascertain the actual conditions of the courts' decisions applying penalties and other measures towards multiple recidivists; 2) to determine the present penal policy towards this category of convicted persons; 3) to compare this policy with the assumptions included in the Penal Code in force. Punishment imposed upon multiple recidivists is regulated by the provisions of Art. 60, para. 2 and 3 Art. 61 of the Penal Code. Their formulation is as follows: on a perpetrator sentenced twice in the conditions specified in para. 1 (special basic recidivism), who has served altogether at leat one year of deprivation of liberty and in the period of 5 years after the serving of the last penalty commits again an intentional offence with the purpose of obtaining a material benefit or of a hooligan character, similar to at least one of the previously committed offencęs, the court shall impose a penalty within the limits of from three times the lowest sanction, but not less than 2 years, up to the highest statutory sanction increased by one half, and if the highest statutory sanction is not higher than 3 years: up to 5 years deprivation of liberty. The increase of the lowest statutory sanction provided in para. 1 or 2 shall not apply, when the offence is a serious offence; in this case the court shall consider the commission of the offence in the conditions specified in para 1 or 2 as a circumstance increasing the penalty. In particularly justified cases when even the lowest penalty imposed on the basis of Art. 60. paras 1 or 2 would be incommeasurably Severe by reason of the motives for the action of the perpetrator, his traits and personal conditions as well as his way of life before the commission and his behaviour after the perpetration of the offence, the court when imposing the penalty may refrain from applying the rules specified in Art. 60. paras 1 or 2; in these cases the court shall take into consideration the commission of the offence in the conditions specified in Art. 60, para 1or 2 as circumstances influencing increasing the penalty. With regard to a perpetrator sentenced in the conditions specified in Art. 60, para. 2 he court shall adjudge protective supervision; if adjudging this supervision is not sufficient to prevent recidivism, the court shall adjudge .the commitment of the sentenced person to a social readaptation centre. (Art. 62, para. 2). The present work has been based on the author's own research and to a minimum extent only on the analysis of the national statistical data. The point of departure for the study of the actual conditions of the courts decisions were the conditions specified in the Penal Code now in force. The conditions specified in Art. 61 of the Penal Code and related to the offender only have been assumed to form the ratio legis of special recidivism in the Polish penal legislation. If, however, when aplying this provision, the courts prefer the conditions related to the most recent act of the offender, this mignt be an indication of their different attitude towards the aim of punishment in the case of the discussed category of offenders. The existence of such divergences between the conditions of application of Art 61 of the Penal Code as included in the law on the one hand, and those applied by the courts on the other hand  has been one of the hypotheses verified in the present study.  The study has been based on the examination of court records. All the accessible records of criminal cases (230) have been included in it, in which Sentences were passed with regard to multiple recidivists (under Art 60. para. 2  and Art. 61 in connection with Art. 60, para. 2 of the Penal Code) in the District Court of the city of Poznań in the years 1975-1981. The question arised whether this could be treated as an equivalent to a random sample of the national population of convicted multiple recidivists. As shown by a comparison of distributions in question are highly convergent. A questionnaire to investigate the ourt records consisted of 41 questions concerning the convicted recidivist, his previous offences and criminal record, his last offence and the content of the last sentence. The impact of a number of variables on the application of Art. 61 of the Penal Code, on the length  of the prison sentence and on the decision of commitment to a social readaptation centre has been analysed in succession. Conclusions from the study are as follows: 1. In the application of Art.61 of the Penal Code ,the predominating part is played by the conditions connected with the degree of socil danger of the act and with its legal label. The conditions connected with the person of the perpetrator seem to have a much smaller effect. The reason of this state of affairs may be seeked in the fact that the court is obligated by Art. 60, para.2 of the Penal Code to impose long-term penalties of deprivation or liberty regardless of the degree of social danger (seriousness) of the offence which may be trivial in particular cases. Therefore, it is not to be wondered at that in these cases the courts apply Art. 61 of the Penal Code so as to impose a lower or more lenient penalty in order to make it commeasurable with the offence. The following conditions have been found to exert the greatest influence on the length of sentences to deprivation of liberty under Art. 60, para. 2: firstly, the legal appraisal of the offence and the related content of the instructions for meting out punishment specified in Art. 60, para. 2 of the Penal Code, and secondly, the degree of social danger of the offence. The character of the offence and the appraisal of its social danger influence the sentence too, including the type of penalty, when Art. 61 of the Penal Code is applied by the court. This is probably a further result of following the same conditions already when deciding on the application of Art. 61 of the Penal Code. When adjudging the commitment of convicted persons to a social readaptation centre, the courst were guided by the conditions connected with intense symptoms of demoralization of these persons and with a previous application of various penal measures towards them; thus the conditions were formally the same as those to be found in the Penal Code. At the same time, conditions connected with the recently committed offence were left out of account here. One should be particularly careful when interpreting the findings in this case aS the decisions in question may be conditioned by the courts' various attitudes towards the practical functioning of the centers, and by different purposes of their adjudgement in definite cases. The length of the perod for which commitment to a social readaptation centre was adjudged has appeared to increase with the length of the sentence to deprivation of libety. Admittedly, outright conclusions as to the need for amendments of the provisions of the Penal Code in its part concerning recidivists do not follow immediately from the findings of the present study. These findings have. however, demonstrated the degree to which the instructions for meting out, punishment specified in Art. 60, para. 2 of the Penal Code sever the relation between the offence and punishment, as  well as the fact that the corrective function of punishment imposed upon multiple recidivists - officially assumed by the legislator-has a fictious character in practice. In consequence, Art. 61 of the Penal Code is used in discord with its purpose; it is applied to adjust the adjudicated punishment to the seriousness of the offence committed.
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.