Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Wyszukujesz frazę "wykroczenia." wg kryterium: Wszystkie pola


Wyświetlanie 1-6 z 6
Tytuł:
Polityka karna w sprawach o wykroczenia w początkach lat dziewięćdziesiątych
Penal Policy in Cases of Transgressions in the Early Nineties
Autorzy:
Szumski, Jerzy
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/699084.pdf
Data publikacji:
1995
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
polityka karna
wykroczenia
1990-1994
dane statystyczne
penal policy
transgressions
statistical data
Opis:
  The paper describes and appraises the policy of prosecution and punishment in cases of transgressions in the years 1990‒1994, i.e. after the systemic transformations in Poland. It is a continuation of a study of penal policy carried out while the former Code of Transgressions was still in force; the aim now is to draw a comparison between the old and new tendencies in the practice of prosecution and punishment. The comparison, however, encounters specific difficulties. The first reason for this is that a full judicial control over decisions of transgression boards was introduced and the boards were submitted to the Ministry of Justice supervision. The second reason is that the statistical data gathered now by that department are much scantier as compared to those formerly gathered by the Ministry of Internal Affairs while the transgression boards were still subordinated to it. In the seventies, a systematic aggravation of the penal policy took place. Admittedly, that policy was then temporarily mitigated with the birth of Solidarity; yet after the imposition of martial law in 1982, followed by the passing of the 1985 act, penal policy once again grew repressive, this time much more so. Then, at the close of the past decade, as a result of social pressure, penal policy was quite distinctly liberalized. To show the transformations of that policy in the nineties, it has usually been compared to the tendencies found in both a “repressive” year of 1987 and a “liberal” one of 1988. As follows from analysis of the prosecution policy measured by the number of motions for punishment submitted to transgression boards, the number of such motions was greatly reduced in the years 1990-1994 as compared to preceding decades. The fact considered that recorded crime went up distinctly in that period, as probably did also the number of petty infringements of the law – that is, transgressions – this reduction can be interpreted as a limitation of the scope of prosecution with respect to such acts. On the one hand, this resulted from a lowered activity of the police, on the other hand – from the force’s aim towards improving their image in society. A similar trend could be found in the case of police orders the number of which was also reduced. Characteristically, the average fine imposed by police order amounted to not even a half of the statutory upper limit. This notwithstanding, a draft amendment of the code of transgressions was published in the Spring of 1994 which suggested that the limit be raised tenfold; the draft also provided for an identical raise in the upper limit of fine as a main penalty, This solution was sharply criticized by the present author as its actual implanentation would result in a general aggravation of economic repression. The structure of transgressions for which the boards imposed punishment in the nineties underwent a rather significant change: the number of persons brought before the boards for traffic transgressions went up considerably (to about 70%) while that of persons guilty of disturbance of public order went down. This latter trend should be seen as advantageous since the formerly mass-scale prosecution of perpetrators of such acts, most of them alcohol dependent, was generally considered futile. Also liberalized was the structure of penal measures imposed on all perpetrators of transgressions. Admittedly, fine remained the prevalent response (about 95% of decisions); yet the proportion of the strictest measures (arrest and limitation of liberty) went down distinctly, and that of the most lenient ones (reprimand and renouncement of inflicting punishment) went up. The fact considered that the penalty of arrest was limited to the minimum and imposed chiefly on persons guilty of the acts that are to be classified as offenses under the draft of the Penal Code, the proposed preservation of that penalty in the future Code of Transgressions cannot be praised. This same conclusion is also true for conditional suspention the execution of arrest which is nearly a dead institution in practice. As clearly follows from statistical data used in the present analysis, changes in the structure of penal measures imposed reflected a mitigation of penal policy. Instead, no data are gathered as to the severity load of those measures. This situation is bound to provoke criticism, chiefly because of the lack of data on the amounts of fines. Fines being the most frequently imposed measures, their amounts constitute the basic index of punitiveness of the boards’ decisions. The fact considered that the statutory amount of fine was last raised in 1992 while nominal wages showed a regular upwards trend, the conclusion is justified that we in fact dealt with what was perhaps an unintended mitigation of the actual severity of economic repression. As follows from the principles of rational penal policy, the provions legal in force have to be to be amended. Due, however, to pauperization of society, the raise in the maximum statutory fine cannot be as drastic as suggested in the above-mentioned draft amendment of 1994. This might well lead to revival of the once pursued practice of using fines as an instrument of adding to the budget. The statistical data under analysis also provide no information on the imposition of additional penal measures, the sole exception being prohibition of operating motor driven vehicles. All that can be observed is a very serious growth in the proportion of this latter penalty which was due to a mass prosecution of perpetrators of petty traffic offenses. Characteristically, though, the incidence of imposition of this measure on such persons (those additionally guilty of drunken driving included) has been on a regular decrease. Also astonishing is the fact that despite the introduction of judicial review of the boards’ decisions (which had been postulated for many decades by the scientific circles), no statistical data are gathered showing the extent to which penal policy pursued by those boards is actually corrected by courts. Admittedly, it follows from the findings of the solo relevant research project conducted in the nineties that today as in the past, courts usually tend to reduce the penalties imposed by transgression boards (the penalty of prohibition of operating motor driven vehicles in particular). What remains unknown, though, is both the general number of persons who demand that their cases be examined by courts and the actual decisions of those courts. Although penal policy in cases of transgressions grew slightly more severe in 1990‒1994, its present liberalization as compared to the two preceding decades is generally seen as favorable. What probably accounts for this liberalization is the exclusion of transgression boards from under the supervision of Ministry of Internal Affairs and the resulting deprivation of the head of that particular Ministry of the right to issue instructions as to the sentencing policy which invariably increased its punitiveness. Thus an instrument of pressure was abolished which limited the discretion of members of transgression boards. This shows that respect for the independence of those appointed to apply tbe law may result in a reduction of repressiveness even with no legislative changes in the system of penal measures. This is not to say, though, that – still  based on rigorous provisions as it is – the system does not require a possibly prompt amendment.
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 1995, XXI; 135-152
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Wnioski wynikające z badań
Autorzy:
Batawia, Stanisław
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/699226.pdf
Data publikacji:
1974
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
sprawca przestępstwa
sprawca wykroczenia
nadużycie alkoholu
perpetrator of an offence
malfeasant
abuse of alcohol
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 1974, VI; 108-127
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Sprawcy wykroczeń o zakłócenie spokoju publicznego w stanie nietrzeźwym
Intoxicated Individuals Responsible for Breaches of the Peace
Autorzy:
Łojko, Elżbieta
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/699222.pdf
Data publikacji:
1974
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
spokój pibliczny
sprawca wykroczenia
nadużycie alkoholu
public peace
malfeasant
abuse of alcohol
Opis:
This work discusses the results of investigations conducted by the Polish Academy of Sciences Department of Criminology, concentrating contraventions (petty misdemeanours) committed in Warsaw by “disturbance of public peace or by giving rise in a state of intoxication to indignation in a public place or place of work”. Such contraventions were covered by Art. 27 of the 1954 Act on Fighting Alcoholism, which provides for three months of imprisonment or a fine of 4,500 zlotys. As from 1972, the new Contravention Code makes the following provisions for such offences (Art. 51). Para. 1. Whoever disturbs peace, public order or night rest with shouting, noise, alarm signals or other disorder or gives rise to public indignation is liable to two months imprisonment, a fine up to 3,000 zlotys, or a reprimand. Para. 2. If the act designated in para. 1 is of the nature of hooliganism or if the offender committed it while intoxicated he is liable to three months imprisonment, to limitation of personal freedom, or to a fine (up to 5,000 zlotys). The average number of those annually convicted in Poland of disturbing the peace while intoxicated amounted between 1970-1972 to ca. 167,930, and between 1965-1967 to ca. 122,900. The average annual number of individuals convicted in Warsaw between 1970-1972 amounted to ca. 14,730, and between 1965 and 1967 ‒ to 11,800. Investigations were conducted in 5 out of 7 Penal Administrative Commissions (bodies of citizens empowered to deal with contraventions), under the auspices of the Boards of People’s Councils and involved some 900 men, convicted in 1967 of the contraventions indicated above. Data concerning all of them were collected from official records of convictions and prison terms up to the end of 1972. A random sample of 300 (out of those 900) were investigated as regards further sentences passed by Penal Administrative Commissions during the years 1967-1972 for new cases of breach of the peace while intoxicated, information as to time spent in detoxication centre (where drunks are held until sober), and police records of arrest in public places in a state of intoxication of those investigated. Data obtained concerning the number of cases tried by Penal Administrative Commissions cannot be considered as complete. The age of individuals who committed relevant offences in 1967 was as follows: 17-20 ‒ 10.8%    (96),            35-39 ‒ 14.6%            (127), 21-24 ‒ 11.2%  (100),             40-44 ‒ 10.3%           (90), 25-29 ‒ 17.8%  (158),             45-49 ‒ 6.5%  (58), 30-34 ‒ 19.5%  (175),            50 and over ‒ 9.3% (83).             Note that the group from 40 years old and above is more numerous (26%) than the group aged 17-24 (22%). The average age of those investigated in 1967 was 33 years, the median ‒ 32 years. The average age of those investigated in 1972 was 38 and the median ‒ 37. During the five years between 1967 and 1972 out of the 300 men of the random sample, 59% were only once charged with disturbing public order while intoxicated, 17% ‒ twice, 9% ‒ 3 times and 16% ‒ 4 times or more. But taking into account additional information about detainments in detoxication centre, arrests by the police in public places while intoxicated, and also criminal records, it appears that during the cource of five years only 20% of those investigated, who were only once charged before a Penal Administrative Commission for disturbing public order, did not, while intoxicated, get into such trouble as involved police intervention. Note that 34% of those tried once by the Penal Administrative Commission has been convicted by the court, and as many as 71% of those tried at least twice. Conviction by regular courts of those investigated will be discussed briefly at the end of this summary. Taking into account, in addition to, arraignments before a Penal Administrative Commission, only detainment in detoxication centre and arrest by the police for being intoxicated, the situation is as follows: ‒ among those arraigned before a Penal Administrative Commission only once for disturbing public order, arising out of intoxication, further cases of police intervention on grounds of insobriety were recorded during the course of five years as concerning 53%; ‒ among those twice convicted by a Penal Administrative Commission, police intervention more than twice was recorded as regards 81% of those investigated; ‒ among those convicted three times by a Penal Administrative Commission, police intervention more often than three times was recorded as regards 96%, and among those convicted four times and more by Penal Administrative Commission, there were none with less than 5 cases of police intervention. Police intervention at least as many as six times was depending on the number of convictions for contravention due to intoxication (1, 2, 3 and 4 and more convictions by the Penal Administrative Commission) as follows: 12% ‒44% ‒69% and 92%. Police intervention at least as many as ten times necessitated by intoxication ‒ 5% ‒ 10% ‒ 19% and 50%. 4l% kept altogether out of a detoxication centre during the fiveyear period, 20% were there once, 9% ‒ twice, 15% ‒3-4 times and 15% ‒ 5 times or more. Among those investigated who kept altogether out of a detoxication centre was a significantly larger percentage of people with only one case of arraignment before a Penal Administrative Commission. Among those appearing on the records of detoxication centre there were also some who had in addition been arrested by the police for intoxication (without having been sent to detoxication centres). Note that, together with the increase in the number of convictions by a Penal Administrative Commission, there is also a marked growth in the percentage of those conveyed to detoxication centre ‒ from 50% to 73%. Taking into account data on offenders tried by courts from the time they were 17 years old till 1972, when their average age amounted to 37 years, it was found, that 50% of those who disturbed public order while intoxicated, had not yet been convicted by courts, 19% had been convicted once, 19% ‒ 2-3 times and 12% ‒ at least 4 times, There is a significant difference between those not convicted and those convicted by a court, depending on the number of their arraignment in a Penal Administrative Commission. While 75% of those investigated who had not been convicted by a court had been tried by a Penal Administrative Commission only once, this applied only to 40% of those who had been convicted by a court; only 5% of those not convicted and 27% of those convicted by a court had been arraigned before a Penal Administrative Commission 4 times or more. Together with the number of triars by penal Administrative Commission there is a decrease also in the percentage of persons not convicted by a court, while the percentage of individuals convicted once increases from 16 to 24, of those convicted 2-3 times ‒ from 13 to 28 and of those convicted 4 times and more ‒ from 5 to 27. Examination of the age at which those investigated were first convicted by a court, revealed that in the group of those convicted 1-3 times by a court, 25%  had been sentenced for the first time at the age of 17-20 years, 25% at the age of 21-24. Of those convicted 4 times or more, 38% had been sentenced for the first time when 17-20 years old and 26% at the age of 21-24. Thus, there were more recidivists with multiple convictions among those arraigned for the first time when still under 21. As many as 38% of those convicted less than 4 times and 19% of those convicted 4 times or more were arraigned for the first time after the age of 30. Note that only 18% of delinquents between 17 and 20 had been charged in the Juvenile Court while under 17. Although as regards the group of recidivists convicted 4 times and more it was found that there had been convictions at an earlier age than was the case with those convicted 1-3 times, nevertheless this initiation was markedly later than was the case with the typical multiple recidivists who were previously investigated by the Polish Academy of Sciences Department of Criminology. Among those recidivists as many as 67% had been previously convicted when under 21; among those who disturbed public order while intoxicated and were convicted by court, the corresponding percentage is 37%. The structure of offences of the individuals investigated, is highly characteristic of people who systematically consume alcohol to excess. Among the offences for which those investigated were convicted by courts less than 4 times, only 24% were qualified as offences against property, while as many as 46% were offences involving aggression (as a rule physical aggression) ‒ with a predominance of minor assaults without causing any bodily harm and slight bodily injuries or assaults on policemen, as a rule committed under the influence of alcohol. Even among offences of which were convicted recidivists who had already previously been sentenced at least four times, not more than 33% stole, while as many as 51% committed offences involving aggression (of the kind of those already referred to). Offences against the person committed by all those investigated were usually (80%) minor assaults and slight bodily injuries; not more than 13% lead to serious crimes of this type. In analysing data on offences committed by those investigated it should be borne in mind that 52.5% of the total of those responsible for breaches of the peace while under the influence of alcohol had not been previously convicted by a court and approximately 20% have been convicted only once.   *   The research here discussed, covering a five-year period after a hearing in 1967 before a Penal Adrninistrative Commission and serving as a starting point for further studies, revealed trends of some practical importance: ‒ together with the growing number of trials of breach of the peace while under the influence of alcohol, there is an increase in the numer of individuals investigated who were brought to detoxication centres, in the frequency of such occasions, and in other interventions by the police; moreover records show a growing percentage of those convicted by courts and of recidivists, convicted four times or more; – the percentage of individuals investigated who have to be taken to the detoxication centres shows an increase from 50% in the case of those only once arraigned before a Penal Administrative Commission to 71% with the case of those arraigned twice, and 73% of those charged at least three times in the Commission; – as from the second trial of an individual before a Penal Administrative Commission an intensified deterioration is to be observed in behaviour as a result of excessive consumption of alcohol; this justifies classifying such individuals as excessive drinkers, in many cases already on the verge of alcoholism or even already alcoholics.
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 1974, VI; 51-69
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Sprawcy przestępstw i wykroczeń systematycznie nadużywający alkoholu
Excessive Drinkers and Alkoholics Convicted of Offences and Contraventions
Autorzy:
Szelhaus, Stanisław
Łojko, Elżbieta
Batawia, Stanisław
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/962245.pdf
Data publikacji:
1974
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
sprawca przestępstwa
sprawca wykroczenia
nadużycie alkoholu
perpetrator of an offence
malfeasant
abuse of alcohol
Opis:
The printed elaborations, in this part of the Archives, contain the re sults of research conducted by the Department of Criminology, Institute of Legal Sciences, Polish Academy of Sciences  anfddeal with three categories of people: ‒ 564 offenders were qualified as having committed acts of hooliganism in Warsaw, in 1964, in an inebriate state, acts combined with physical aggression on people unknown to the offender; further delinquency of these offenders is checked during the course of eight years; ‒ approximately 900 who were in 1967 charged with “disturbance of  public peace or indecent behaviour in a public place,, (Art. 27, decree on fighting alcoholism); out of a random sample of 300 delinquents charged with these offences, information was obtained regarding their further appearances in court  (Penal Administrative Commission) for the period of five years (till the end of  1972), arrests by the police while intoxicated and court convictions; ‒ 500 men and 250 women, listed in detoxication centres at least three times (women twice), during the period of over 5 and a half years till the second half of 1970, about whom information was gathered, regarding also other arrests by the police while intoxicated, ending up in the detoxication centre, as well as information about their court convictions; with part of  the cases information was obtained about the follow-up period of the investigated during the years 1971-1973. The above-mentioned three categories were taken into account, because research was to embrace only those offenders who while committing the offence were intoxicated. These examinations were to reveal the dimensions of heavy drinking and of their delinquency. Research conducted by the Department of Criminology so far which took into account alcoholism, dealt with people, mainly from among young adult and adult recidivists marked by serious social degradation. Efforts were made to find out whether and since when they were drinking alcohol to excess and to what extent they were alcoholics. Taken into account was the category of recidivists, revealing symptoms of alcoholism. This research concentrated on various individuals where one actually could expect the possibilities of frequent or systematic heavy drinking, but in regard to whom no information was available regarding the frequency of deviations in the behaviour of the investigated under the influence of alcohol, as well as data about their delinquency, neither its intensification nor the type of offences committed. Despite the fact that it was impossible in the studies presented here to conduct individual psychological and medical examinations, or environmental research, nevertheless the collected large amounts of material seem to enable us to get an idea about the phenomenon of a large scope and social significance. Together with the increase in excessive drinking of alcohol in many countries there also emerges the category of people having conflicts with the penal code while intoxicated and of people charged with disturbance of public peace. There are relatively few studies of this large population, committing as a rule minor offences. Initiating such research the Department of Criminology, Institute of Legal Sciences, Polish Academy of Sciences intended above all to find out how often various categories of persons, committing typical offences connected with drunkenness, are “problem drinkers” with intensified symptoms of deviations in behaviour and how many of them have already to be considered alcoholics. Such findings can be most significant when planning campaigns, aimed at revealing at an early stage cases requiring the interference of institutions set up to fight alcoholism, in order to prevent in such a way the spreading of certain offences and crimes.
Publikacja posiada następującą strukturę: Wstęp I. Stanisław Szelhaus: Sprawcy przestępstw o charakterze chuligańskim II. Elżbieta Łojko: Sprawcy wykroczeń o zakłocenie spokoju publicznego w stanie nietrzeźwym III. Stanisław Batawia: Osoby niejednokrotnie przebywające w izbie wytrzeźwień IV. Stanisław Batawia: Wnioski wynikające z badań
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 1974, VI; 15-123
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Główne kierunki polityki karnej realizowanej przez kolegia do spraw wykroczeń w latach 1972–1989
The Main Directions of Penal Policy Pursued by Transgession Boards in the Years 1972–1989
Autorzy:
Szumski, Jerzy
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/698530.pdf
Data publikacji:
1993
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
polityka karna
środki karne
wykroczenia
penal policy
penal measures
contraventions
Opis:
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.
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 1993, XIX; 107-131
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Polityka karna sądów w sprawach o wykroczenia (w świetle danych statystycznych)
Penal Policy of Courts in Offence Cases (In the Light of Statistical Data)
Autorzy:
Jakubowska-Hara, Jolanta
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/698734.pdf
Data publikacji:
2008
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
polityka karna
dane statystyczne
prawo wykroczeń
środki penalne
sądy
penal policy
statistical data
delinquency
courts of law
offence cases
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 2008, XXIX-XXX; 507-518
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
    Wyświetlanie 1-6 z 6

    Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies