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

Results found: 9

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  kara dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Pełnoletniość więzienna – strategie adaptacji do długoterminowej izolacji na podstawie analizy przypadków trzech kobiet najdłużej odbywających karę dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności w Polsce

100%
Ejchart-Dubois M., Markowska M.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2017
|
issue XXXIX
249-272
EN
According to Polish Penitentiary Service statistics, there were 2131 women serving sentences in Polish prisons as of January 2016, 400 of whom had been convicted for homicide. 13 were serving life sentences. The article describes our research on three women who were the first to be sentenced to life imprisonment in Poland and have already served 19 years of their sentences. During this time, each was transferred to another penitentiary facility at least a couple of times, and changed cells and cellmates several times. Each encountered several dozen educators, psychologists, wardens, and prison directors. This long period also saw significant changes in their family status. The places where they were confined and the people they had met impacted the way each functioned in prison. Our research consisted in an analysis of court records: the sentences, expert, psychiatric and psychological opinions, as well as other documents produced during the course of criminal proceedings, including media reports and prison records (personal file B). Open interviews with the women were a vital component of the study – we met with each inmate at least once and conducted a three-hour interview at her place of detention. The study was carried out between May 2015 and February 2016.By analysing the material collected, we created a criminal profile of each of the women, who had spent the last 19 years in prison. We described the evolution of their attitudes towards the crime and the trial, as well as their outlook as it had evolved throughout their time in prison; their life goals, and the influence of external circumstances (such as their place of confinement and the type of contacts each had with the outside world) on their lives and life plans. It proved extremely difficult to say who these women are. They have not confessed to the crimes for which they were sentenced and have spent a great part of their lives in prison, living without the prospect of being released at any specific time. Their functioning in prison does not match any of the adaptation strategies described in the literature on the subject. The aim of our research was also to determine the purpose of life imprisonment. The question becomes particularly important as the date approaches when these women, the first to be sentenced to this extreme form of punishment, will acquire the right to apply for parole. Our analysis of the way these women have been serving their life sentences shows that Prison Service officers consider the main purpose of life imprisonment to be isolation. This view is not surprising, yet one must ask whether after 20 years in prison one would not do well to reconsider the hierarchy of goals that are to be served by imprisonment. It is beyond doubt that the way the women have been serving their sentences has been influenced by their attitude to the crime and by the fact that none of them had ever admitted her guilt. At the same time none of them denies her responsibility as a participant of the event. Because none of the women studied had ‘killed someone with her own hands’, they are in a convenient psychological position. They do not have to come to terms with having deprived another human being of life, although they do not deny their complicity. Their attitude to the committed crimes might prove decisive when applying for parole. Our research does not provide unequivocal answers to the questions we set out to answer, yet it proves that serving very long sentences should involve planning. The way the women function shows that they themselves largely organise their time in prison, seek work as well as educational, cultural and sports opportunities. The restraint shown by the prison authorities in offering such activities comes from the fact that a life sentence means that working with this category of inmates can always be put off till later. This was evidenced by the vague and general formulation of the goals each of the female inmates had in her individual programme. The place of detention is another important factor when it comes to quality of life in prison. Penitentiary facilities differ in terms of their architectural arrangements, the conditions of imprisonment, but also in terms of the types of activities offered, the possibility of taking up work and study, and the relations between prison staff and inmates. By observing their attitude today, we can conclude that each woman has put her time in prison to a different use. We don’t know what the prison administration and penitentiary court will make of this when the convicts apply for parole. To assess whether the inmates have changed it will not be enough to examine their behaviour and the number of times applications were put in to reward or punish them. We need intensive work with the inmates, in-depth observation and an examination of their personalities, which should be carried out by a qualified psychologist. Yet such opinions are lacking in the penitentiary records of the studied inmates. It is difficult to plan an adequate course of action without assessing the inmates’ current deficits and needs. The studied women each chose a different path for herself. M.R. is succumbing to unconscious degeneration and resignation. She is calculating; she knows how to survive in prison, yet she deeply resents this place. M.O. is the most uncertain and emotionally unstable, one doesn’t know what to expect of her, but as long she does not absorb the attention of the prison staff, they show little interest in her. M.Sz. is the ‘safest’ from the standpoint of the Prison Service; her attitude often evokes surprise that one can be doing so well in prison with a life sentence. One might get the impression that she is acting, but is it possible to pretend for almost 20 years?Because life imprisonment has no fixed term, it seems rational to treat it as a chance to improve one’s life, even if one never leaves the prison walls. This task requires making the inmates feel responsible for every possible area of their lives. Each of the examined women put the opportunities available to her to a different use. The quarter century after which they will be able to apply for a court review of their punishment is a long time, which they, for most part, have not taken full advantage of.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Wokół propozycji zmiany górnej granicy kary pozbawienia wolności oraz rezygnacji z kary 25 lat pozbawienia wolności

100%
Melezini M.
Ius Novum
|
2022
|
vol. 16
|
issue 3
7-26
EN
The article analyses and evaluates the proposal to amend the regulations concerning the penalty of deprivation of liberty that consists in the eradication of the fixed penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment from the catalogue of penalties laid down in Criminal Code and exceeding the upper time limit of the penalty of deprivation of liberty from up to 15 to up to 30 years. The article presents the opinions of the doctrine and the judicature on the nature and function of the penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment and other penalties of deprivation of liberty, points out practical difficulties indicated in the literature that are connected with the imposition of the fixed penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment in case of perpetrators cooperating in the commission of crime, and presents proposals to amend the regulations by means of successive CC amendment bills from 2000 up to now, as well as the opinion of the doctrine on the proposed changes. The considerations presented in the article lead to the conclusion that neither the proposal to eliminate the fixed penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment nor exceeding the so-called standard penalty of deprivation of liberty to 30 years deserves approval.
PL
Przedmiotem opracowania są analiza i ocena propozycji zmian uregulowań dotyczących kary pozbawienia wolności, których istota polega na eliminacji z katalogu kar Kodeksu karnego punktowej kary 25 lat pozbawienia wolności oraz na podwyższeniu górnej rodzajowej granicy terminowej kary pozbawienia wolności z 15 lat do 30 lat. W tym zakresie przedstawiono stanowisko doktryny i judykatury na temat charakteru i funkcji kary 25 lat pozbawienia wolności i terminowej kary pozbawienia wolności, wskazano podnoszone w piśmiennictwie trudności praktyczne związane z wymierzaniem punktowej kary 25 lat pozbawienia wolności, powstające na tle wymierzania kar w wypadku sprawców współdziałających w popełnieniu przestępstwa, oraz przedstawiono propozycje zmian dotyczących uregulowań przez kolejne projekty nowelizacji k.k. począwszy od 2000 r. do chwili obecnej, a także zapatrywania doktryny na temat zgłoszonych propozycji. Artykuł ma charakter krytyczny wobec proponowanych zmian. Przeprowadzone w artykule rozważania prowadzą do konkluzji, że ani propozycja eliminacji kary 25 lat pozbawienia wolności, ani wydłużenie tak zwanej zwykłej kary pozbawienia wolności do 30 lat nie zasługują na aprobatę.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Prizonizacja a skazani na karę dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności

75%
Klimczak J.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2017
|
issue XXXIX
231-248
EN
The article is based on my master’s thesis and addresses the issue of the prisonisation of inmates serving life sentences. Ever since Donald Clemmer introduced the idea of prisonisation, different interpretations of this phenomenon have been proposed. In particular, prisonisation has been described as a negative process, forcing a convict to become a ‘good prisoner’, incapable of fending for him or herself outside the penitentiary walls. According to Clemmer, long-term sentences contribute to a greater degree of prisonisation. Hence life prisoners are doomed to it. Is this a bad thing? In my view, prisonisation cannot be treated as a purely negative phenomenon. Given the unlimited duration of life imprisonment, I decided to formulate my own definition of this concept. By prisonisation I mean a process that the inmate has to face upon entering prison. It is a way of contributing to the conditions found on arrival: the inmate with his or her personality and past experiences plus the prison environment (other inmates and prison staff). Let me emphasise that everyone influences everyone else to some degree in a prison environment. The purpose of the research described in the article was to see how prisoners serving life sentences ‘prisonise’. My division of inmates according to the length of the served sentence was supposed to reflect the meaning of time in their lives – whether the inmates ‘blended into’ the penitentiary system as time went by.I assumed that the way prisoners sentenced to life coped in prison depended on how they assessed their chances of obtaining parole. This is important because looking ahead into the future determines how a convict serves their sentence, i.e. how the process of their prisonisation will unfold. Secondly, I assumed that in the case of ‘life’ prisoners, prisonisation was a desired process. Assuming that such inmates will spend all of their life in prison, it is difficult to conceive of prisonisation not taking place. Moreover, lack of prisonisation would pose a serious difficulty in serving the sentence. Taking into account the time factor in prisonisation, I determined that my research had to reflect the experience of inmates at different stages of their sentences. I divided a group of 15 convicts into five sub-groups of three. I set point ‘zero’ for my calculations at the date of the final judgment condemning each individual to life. Thus emerged a picture of inmates sentenced to life imprisonment across different time windows.I conducted 15 open interviews with inmates serving life sentences using my own questionnaire. I also examined the penitentiary records (part B) of inmates who had agreed to be interviewed. This was necessary in order to reconstruct the inmates’ ‘pre-sentence’ and prison past as well as their present circumstances.Assuming that the actions and behaviour of life prisoners are determined by their perception of how likely they are to be released on parole, I developed the following categories:A. Blending into prison – the inmate puts down roots in prison. He/she feels well as a prisoner and sees no other place for him/herself. B. Sponger – uses his/her time in prison as he/she likes, insofar as possible. Doesn’t want to talk about the future and has no specific view on this matter. Focuses on him/herself in the present; the future will bring what it will.C. Light at the end of the tunnel – the inmate knows that the tunnel he/she is in is very long. This is why he/she realizes that he/she must simply inch through it (or march forward). He/she may make plans or find activities to bide the time. Nevertheless, there is a light at the end of the tunnel – a distant one, but a light nonetheless. D. I’m not here – the prisoner does not agree with the nature of the sentence they are serving or even questions their guilt with regard to the crime. He/she does not accept him/herself in the prisoner role and does not see prison as a place to live. He or she devises plans that help him/her survive, while being in denial of having to spend the rest of his/her life in prison. Clings to the world of freedom and feels him/herself a part of it.The ‘light at the end of the tunnel’ category appeared most frequently (7 out 15 interviewees in every group, i.e. at every stage of their sentence). This shows that at every stage of serving their sentence and regardless of the time they have already spent in prison, inmates want to maintain and nourish the hope that they will one day be free. Of course they adapt to prison life and even become ‘good prisoners’, yet one cannot say unequivocally that prisonisation kills their desire to live beyond the prison walls. Further, I present four important factors related to prisonisation:• Time – when serving an unlimited sentence it is extremely important to be active in prison. It is also interesting how inmates change with the passage of time. • Prison subculture – being part of a subculture is supposed to be a factor that increases prisonisation, but it turned out that the interviewees were not interested in being part of such a group. • The Prison Service and the inmate – the interviewees receive positive assessments and are regularly rewarded by their supervisors. Meanwhile, in the interviews the inmates said that there was no point resisting the Prison Service and that they saw benefits to maintaining good relations with staff.• Contacts with the outside world – the inmates maintain contacts with family through every possible channel – by phone, via visits or letters. Family is important for most of them. Sometimes they also have contacts with new acquaintances from outside the prison. There is no doubt that all of the inmates in the studied group of 15 are ‘prisonised’ in some way. They have adapted to the daily prison schedule and learned the rules. What is important, it is not possible to pigeonhole them depending on the length of their sentence. We would do well to recall Clemmer’s position that the process of prisonisation (and its consequences) depend first and foremost on an individual’s personality. It is therefore extremely important to consider every case in its individuality when reviewing parole applications.
4

Kara dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności w polskim systemie prawnym. Problemy i wątpliwości

63%
Nowicka I.
Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Finansów i Prawa w Bielsku-Białej
|
2014
|
issue 3
66-81
PL
Artykuł ukazuje karę dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności w polskim systemie prawnym z uwagi na fakt, iż jest ona integralną składową dyskusji dotyczącej polityki kryminalnej, sprawiedliwościowego bądź też nie jej charakteru. Tak jak pozostałe kary długoterminowe niesie za sobą wiele problemów teoretycznych jak i praktycznych, co w artykule starano się zaznaczyć, m.in. poprzez przedstawienie historyczne, kształtowanie się umiejscowienia tej kary w obecnie obowiązującym kodeksie karnym czy też ukazanie wyników przeprowadzanych badań.
EN
The paper presents the punishment of life imprisonment in the Polish legal system as an integral component of the discussion on criminal policy. Just like other long-term penalties, it entails many problems of theoretical and practical nature, as the paper attempts to highlight by presenting historical development of this penalty, discussing its place in the current penal code or showing the results of research.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Selected issues concerning a new approach to the idea of punishment in the light of Act of 13 June 2019

62%
Melezini M.
Ius Novum
|
2020
|
vol. 14
|
issue 2
38-54
PL
Artykuł podejmuje problemy rozległych zmian przepisów kodeksu karnego w ujęciu ustawy z 13 czerwca 2019 r. Przedmiotem rozważań uczyniono najważniejsze rozwiązania wprowadzone w części ogólnej kodeksu karnego w obrębie kar i instytucji wymiaru kary. Dotyczyły one: wyeliminowania kary 25 lat pozbawienia wolności z katalogu kar; wydłużenia z 15 lat do 30 lat górnej granicy terminowej kary pozbawienia wolności; podwyższenia dolnej granicy grzywny oraz kary ograniczenia wolności; modyfikacji treści art. 37a k.k. dopuszczającego możliwość orzeczenia grzywny lub kary ograniczenia wolności zamiast kary pozbawienia wolności; ogólnych dyrektyw sądowego wymiaru kary oraz katalogu okoliczności obciążających oraz łagodzących; orzeczenia kary dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności bez możliwości warunkowego zwolnienia skazanego. Przeprowadzona analiza doprowadziła do konkluzji, że przestawione rozwiązania nie zasługują na aprobatę.
EN
The article discusses the issues concerning extensive amendments to the provisions of the Criminal Code laid down in the Act of 13 June 2019. It considers the most important solutions introduced to the General part of the Criminal Code in the field of penalties and sentencing. These concern: elimination of the penalty of deprivation of liberty for 25 years from the catalogue of penalties; increasing the maximum limit of the penalty of deprivation of liberty for a period determined by court from 15 years to 30 years; modification of the content of Article 37a CC admitting a possibility of imposing a fine or the penalty of limitation of liberty instead of the penalty of deprivation of liberty; general directives on judicial sentencing decisions and the catalogue of aggravating and extenuating circumstances; and imposition of the penalty of life imprisonment without a possibility of conditional release. The analysis carried out leads to a conclusion that the proposed solutions do not deserve approval.
6
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Warsztaty dla więźniów skrajnie długoterminowych – prawo do drugiej szansy dla skazanych i pierwsze kroki dla studentów

62%
Klimczak J., Kłapeć M.
Biuletyn Kryminologiczny
|
2017
|
issue 24
137-150
EN
Paper discusses the project „Prisoners extremely long-term sentenced - the right to a second chance” conducted at the Institute of Social Prevention and Resocialization of the University of Warsaw in 2014–2016. The program was targeted at prisoners who were sentenced for 25 years in prison or life imprisonment. On the other hand, it was also aimed at students. They took part in prison workshops organized by the authors of the project. In this way, students had the opportunity to get to know the prison institution and work with prisoners. The implementation of the project clearly showed that cooperation between the academic environment and the Prison Service is not only possible but also very important.
PL
Artykuł prezentuje projekt „Więźniowie skrajnie długoterminowi – prawo do drugiej szansy”, który został zrealizowany przy udziale studentów i absolwentów Instytutu Profilaktyki Społecznej i Resocjalizacji Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego w latach 2014–2016. Projekt był skierowany do więźniów prawomocnie skazanych na karę dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności oraz skazanych na karę 25 lat pozbawienia wolności. Jest to grupa skazanych, dla której oferta Służby Więziennej jest ograniczona. Praca z nimi stanowi pole do podejmowania inicjatyw ze strony osób spoza zakładów karnych. Adresatami projektu byli ponadto studenci IPSiR UW. Udział w projekcie miał im stworzyć możliwość pracy z więźniami oraz wykorzystania wiedzy uzyskanej podczas wykładów i ćwiczeń w praktyce. Projekt składał się z trzech części: fakultetu „Więźniowie dożywotni - prawo do drugiej szansy” realizowanego ze studentami, cyklicznych warsztatów w zakładach karnych oraz pracy korespondencyjnej prowadzonej ze skazanymi uczestniczącymi w programie. Realizacja projektu pokazała wyraźnie, że współpraca między środowiskiem akademickim a Służbą Więzienną nie tylko jest możliwa, ale też bardzo potrzebna. Paper discusses the project „Prisoners extremely long-term sentenced - the right to a second chance” conducted at the Institute of Social Prevention and Resocialization of the University of Warsaw in 2014–2016. The program was targeted at prisoners who were sentenced for 25 years in prison or life imprisonment. On the other hand, it was also aimed at students. They took part in prison workshops organized by the authors of the project. In this way, students had the opportunity to get to know the prison institution and work with prisoners. The implementation of the project clearly showed that cooperation between the academic environment and the Prison Service is not only possible but also very important.
7
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Kara nieredukowalnego dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności (art. 77 § 3 k.k.) jako przykład nowej recydywy jurydycznej?

51%
Tyburcy T.
Studia Prawnicze: rozprawy i materiały
|
2023
|
vol. 33
|
issue 2
123-152
EN
The Act of 7 July 2022 amending the Act – Criminal Code and certain other acts introduced into the Criminal Code the possibility for the court to impose the sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of parole (Article 77 § 3 and 4 of the Criminal Code), which constitutes a novelty in Polish criminal law and is widely criticised by the legal community. The legislator has provided two grounds for the optional imposition of life imprisonment without possibility of parole. The article discusses Article 77 § 3 of the Criminal Code is based on formal grounds: a previous final conviction for a specific type of crime (against life and health, freedom, sexual liberty, public security or of a terrorist nature) for life imprisonment or imprisonment for a period of not less than 20 years. It introduces a new form of juridical (legal, special) one-time recidivism. Fulfilment of its prerequisites, however, does not tighten the limits of life imprisonment, but the possibility of imposing it with the prohibition of conditional release.
PL
Ustawa z dnia 7 lipca 2022 r. o zmianie ustawy – Kodeks karny oraz niektórych innych ustaw wprowadziła do Kodeksu karnego możliwość wymierzenia przez sąd kary nieredukowalnego dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności, czyli z zakazem warunkowego przedterminowego zwolnienia (art. 77 § 3 i 4 k.k.), co stanowi novum w polskim prawie karnym i jest powszechnie krytykowane przez środowisko prawnicze. Ustawodawca przewidział dwie podstawy do fakultatywnego orzeczenia kary nieredukowalnego dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności. Artykuł omawia art. 77 § 3 k.k., który opiera się na przesłankach formalnych, tj. uprzednim prawomocnym skazaniu za określony rodzaj przestępstwa (przeciwko życiu i zdrowiu, wolności, wolności seksualnej, bezpieczeństwu powszechnemu lub o charakterze terrorystycznym) na karę dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności lub karę pozbawienia wolności na czas nie krótszy niż 20 lat. Wprowadza nową postać recydywy jurydycznej (prawnej, specjalnej) jednokrotnej. Spełnienie jej przesłanek nie powoduje jednak obostrzenia granic kary dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności, lecz możliwość wymierzenia jej z zakazem warunkowego zwolnienia.
8
Content available remote

Extreme criminal penalties - death penalty and life imprisonment in the Polish penal and penitentiary system

45%
Klimczak J., Niełaczna M.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
2020
|
issue XLII/1
225-252
PL
In the article we analysed how the introduction and application of life imprisonment in the period of transformation has impacted the development of the penitentiary system to date. We answered how and why the legislature eliminated the death penalty from the catalogue of penalties in the Polish Penal Code of 1997, and replaced it with life imprisonment. We took into account the statistics on life sentences passed in Poland. We present the evolution of the prison system, which for a quarter of a century had to cope with this difcult category of prisoners by fnding new legal solutions and applying international standards. We also discussed some conclusions of the scholarly study ‘Te best of the worst and the still evil: Prisoners serving life sentences’, which has been conducted since 2014 by our research team. Te study focuses on the management and application of this extreme punishment in Poland, the adaptation of prisoners with life sentences to the isolation and social dimension of imprisonment.   W artykule przeanalizowałyśmy wpływ wprowadzenia i wykonywania kary dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności w okresie transformacji na dotychczasowy rozwój systemu penitencjarnego. Przedstawiłyśmy to, jak i dlaczego ustawodawca usunął karę śmierci z katalogu kar w polskim kodeksie karnym z 1997 r. i zastąpił ją dożywotnim więzieniem. Przedstawiłyśmy analizę statystyki orzekania kary dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności w Polsce od daty jej wprowadzenia. Zaprezentowałyśmy ewolucję systemu więziennictwa, który przez ćwierć wieku musiał poradzić sobie z tą trudną kategorią skazanych poprzez sięganie po nowe rozwiązania prawne i standardy międzynarodowe. Omówiłyśmy także niektóre wnioski z badań naukowych „Najlepsi z najgorszych i źli stale. Więźniowie dożywotni” – prowadzonych od 2014 r. przez nasz zespół badawczy. Badania koncentrują się na zarządzaniu i wykonywaniu tej ekstremalnej kary w Polsce, przystosowaniu więźniów do izolacji i społecznym wymiarze więzienia.
EN
In the article we analysed how the introduction and application of life imprisonment in the period of transformation has impacted the development of the penitentiary system to date. We answered how and why the legislature eliminated the death penalty from the catalogue of penalties in the Polish Penal Code of 1997, and replaced it with life imprisonment. We took into account the statistics on life sentences passed in Poland. We present the evolution of the prison system, which for a quarter of a century had to cope with this difcult category of prisoners by fnding new legal solutions and applying international standards. We also discussed some conclusions of the scholarly study ‘Te best of the worst and the still evil: Prisoners serving life sentences’, which has been conducted since 2014 by our research team. Te study focuses on the management and application of this extreme punishment in Poland, the adaptation of prisoners with life sentences to the isolation and social dimension of imprisonment.
9

Papież Franciszek o prawie karnym

38%
Grześkowiak A.
Studia z Zakresu Nauk Prawnoustrojowych. Miscellanea
|
2016
|
vol. VI
47-70
PL
W nauczaniu Papieża Franciszka można odnaleźć tematy związane z prawem karnym. Na ich podstawie można zrekonstruować poglądy Papieża na zasadnicze problemy prawa karnego takie jak sprawiedliwość karna, cechy i zasady prawa karnego, prawo karne naprawcze, istota kary, rodzaje kar. Podjął też temat kary śmierci, potępiając zdecydowanie jej stosowanie. Podobnie potępił stosowanie kary dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności, nazywając ją ukrytą kara śmierci. Krytycznie ustosunkował się do zjawiska populizmu karnego. Wypowiada się również na tematy związane z typami rodzajowymi przestępstw, m.in. takimi jak zbrodnie niewolnictwa, handel ludźmi, korupcja, przestępczość zorganizowana, przestępstwa narkotykowe. Wszystkie te tematy oświetlał w perspektywie Ewangelii i tysiącletnich doświadczeń Ludu Bożego.
EN
In the teaching of Pope Francis one can find issues connected to criminal law, on the basis of which it is possible to reconstruct Pope’s views on the most fundamental subjects connected to it, including penal justice, rules and features of criminal law, corrective penal law, as well as the essence and varieties of penalties. The matter of death penalty has also been addressed and concurrently categorically condemned. Similarly, exercising life imprisonment and the phenomenon of criminal populism have been disapproved of. All these issues have been considered through the perspective of the Gospel and the experiences of the people of God.
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.