Temat: criminal penalties - Katalog OPAC zbiorów

Skocz do pozycji: 1.

Tytuł:: Polityka karna w sprawach o przestępstwa z nienawiści w Polsce w świetle danych statystycznych
Polish criminal policy in cases of hate crime in light of statistical data
Autorzy:: Kozłowska, Patrycja
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/27316319.pdf
Data publikacji:: 2023
Wydawca:: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego
Tematy:: przestępstwa z nienawiści
przestępstwa motywowane nienawiścią
polityka karna
praktyka orzecznicza sądów
kary kryminalne
hate crimes
crimes motivated by hate
criminal policy
judicial practice
criminal penalties
Opis:: Negatywne skutki przestępstw z nienawiści oraz wynikające z nich zagrożenia uzasadniają potrzebę podjęcia skutecznych działań w celu przeciwdziałania im i eliminowania wszelkich ich przejawów z życia społecznego. W literaturze przedmiotu zwraca się uwagę na konieczność zintensyfikowania wysiłków, zmierzających do lepszego wykrywania, ścigania i karania sprawców tych przestępstw. Niniejszy artykuł został więc poświęcony zbadaniu, jak w latach 2008–2020 wyglądała realizacja polityki karnej w sprawach o przestępstwa z nienawiści w Polsce. Analizie poddano wybrane statystyki sądowe obrazujące liczbę skazań za przestępstwa z nienawiści, a także rodzaje kar kryminalnych orzekanych w odpowiedzi na ich popełnienie i wymiary bezwzględnej kary pozbawienia wolności. W tekście podjęto próbę uchwycenia różnic występujących w praktyce orzeczniczej sądów w analizowanym okresie.
The negative effects of hate crimes and the threats resulting from these acts justify the need to take effective actions to counter them and eliminate all their manifestations from society. The source literature notes the necessity to intensify efforts leading to more efficient detection, prosecution and penalisation of these crimes. In her article, Patrycja Kozłowska concentrates on the examination of the criminal policy in cases of hate crimes committed in Poland in 2008–2020. Selected court statistical data illustrating the number of convictions for hate crimes, the types of criminal penalties imposed on their perpetrators as well as the length of sentenced penalties of absolute deprivation of liberty have been analysed. Kozłowska also makes an attempt to capture differences in judicial practice becoming evident in the period under scrutiny.
Źródło:: Forum Polityki Kryminalnej; 2023, 1(5); 1-27
2720-1589
Pojawia się w:: Forum Polityki Kryminalnej
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Skocz do pozycji: 2.

Tytuł:: Przestępczość wielokrotnych recydywistów i stosowana wobec nich polityka karna
Crime among multi-recidivists, and penal policy towards them
Autorzy:: Siemaszko, Andrzej
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/699076.pdf
Data publikacji:: 1983
Wydawca:: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:: recydywista
stosowanie kar
polityka karna
przestępczość
więzienie
recidivist
application of penalties
criminal policy
criminality
prison
Opis:: In Poland in recent years, the number of people sentenced each year in what is know as „special multiple recidivism (Art.60 § 2) has been in the order of 1,500-1,700. This paragfaph of the Penal Code, which applies to offences against property and to acts of hooliganism, provides for a drastic stepping-up of penal Sanctions. Under the Penal Code, the minimum sentence for multi-recidivists in this category is two years' imprisonment, unless there are mitigating circumstances. Hence it may be concluded that the legislation regards this group of effenders as constituting a specially serious danger to law and order. The sudy described below was designed to elucidate if that is really the case. The subjects in this study were all multi-recidivists sentenced under this paragraph by the courts in five voivodships of Poland, in the years 1975 and 1976. Over 1,700 criminal cases brought against 131 persons were analysed. For technical reasoni, it was not possible to make a random sample. Nevertheless, if we take into consideration the fact that the subjects constituted 10% of all multi-recidivists convicted of special multiple recidivism within this period, as well as the fact that the main social and demographic data and the kinds of crimes committed by the multi-recidivists in our group are almost identical to such data in other investigations based on random samples, we can take it that the sample used in our study may be considered as representative of all the offenders convicted of crimes in what is known as „specual multiple recidivism”. The methods used was to analyse the court records and the data given in the register of convicted persons and in the register of prisoners. Efforfs were made to collect information from the records on all crimes committed by the recidivists in our group, right from the beginning of their criminal career. The study fell into the following headings: 1) basic socio-demographic data, 2) crime record, 3) structure of offences committed, 4) effectiveness of penal measures used, 5) the penal policy adopted towards our subjects in different periods. Finally, conclusions drawn from the present study, as well asfrom other studies of multi-recidivism are presented. Some basic characteristics of this group are as follows: The mean age of the subjects was 40, and their mean age at the time of the first conviction: 21. The percentage of multi-recidivists who began their criminal carrer being aged 25 and over was higher in this group than in other studies. The educational level of the men in this group was much lower than that of the male manual workers employed in the public economy. Nearly 4O% of the subjects had no trade, and among those who did work, most of their jobs consisted of the simplest manual work not requiring any qualifications. Yet it was found that only about 40% of the subjects had worked regularly before their first conviction, and that nearly 39%o had never worked at all. The average number of convictions per subject was 7. The mean length of prison sentence given was 31.9 months (that is, over 2.5 years), while the average stay in prison was 24.44 months, that is, just over two years. Out of 922 sentences, 43.1% did not exceed 18 months. The percentage of prison sentences of five years and over was only 6.6%. These facts may indicate that the offenders in this group had not committed serious crimes that were a real threat to law and order. But the sentences passed for the first two cases were statistically significantly lower than those imposed for later crimes. A similar statistically significant difference was noted as regards length of successive periods spent at liberty. After each period in prison, the periods at liberty became successively shorter. Nevertheless generally speaking the tempo of recidivism was very high in this group. Out of a total number of 818 periods spent in freedom, 11.4% had a duration not exceeding a month, while 40% did not exceed six months in duration. The percentage of periods of freedom that lasted for more than three years was barely 7.4% in this group. As for the structure of offenies committed by the subjects in this group, offences against property dominated, for 85.9% of the total number of 1,784 offences committed were offences of this type, offences against the person 3.48% of the total, offences against authority 3.48%, and offences against the family 1.23%. Theft of private property accounted for 50% of all the offences committed by the recidivists in this group. Serious crimes, such as rape, homicide, or robbery, constituted barely 2.2% of all the offences committed by this group, and by far the most were robberies. But even robbery, regarded as a serious crime, formed a tiny percentage of all the offences committed, for out of the total numbet of 1,784 offences, 37 were robberies. In more than 75% of the crimes against property, the sums obtained were no more than 5,000 zlotys, while in only 11% of the total cases did the sum obtained exceed 10,000 zlotys . Several methods were used to assess the effectiveness of imprisonment. The first method was to work out the correlation between the variable "time in prison” and the variable "time at in freedom". This correlation turend out to be nearly 0 (r = 0.02). This means that we can reject the hypothesis that there is a positive connection between length of imprisonment and time spent in freedom. The second method was to study the length of time spent in freedom after periods of imprisonment of various lengths: up to 6 months, from 7 to 12 month., from 1 to 2 years, from 2 to 3 years, and 3 years and over. Here, too, there was no significant correlation (X2 = 5.10; df = 12), which is below the level of significance. The third method was to try to find out if there was a significant diffence in duration of freedom between the recidivists sentenced to terms of up to 6 months, and those sentenced to three years and over. The aim of this method was to discover if what are regarded as long terms in prison are followed by longer terms in the outside world. In other words, it would be interesting to know if long-term incarceration has a deterrent effect. In this case, too, no significant statistical defferences were found (X2 = O,32; dt= 3, which is below the level of significance). Thus it would seem that in our group of subjects' length of time in prison had no effect at all on the tempo of recidivism. This was confirmed by analysis of the duration of the first stay in prison as compared with the subsequent time spent in freedom: (X2 = 2.80; df = 4, which is below the level of significance). There have been more and more frequent assertions of late, that the Polish criminal justice system has becoming more and more punitive. The present study tried to test whether these assertions are justified with reference to the population of multi-recedivists. Hence the period 1948-1978 was divided into five stages more or less corresponding to different phases of penal policy in Poland. These stages are as follows: Period I (l948-1955), Period II (1956-1960), Period III ( 1961-1965), Period IV (1966-1969), and Period V (197O-1978). The next step was to determine the character of penal policy towards recidivists during these various stages. As regards the length of the first prison sentences, the t test for the significance of the differences between the means showed that the mean duration of prison sentences in Period I (which was a very punitive period) was significantly greater than the duration of sentences passed in Period II and III. On the other hand, the mean duration of sentences passed in Periods I and IV showed no significant difference. This means that from the high figure un the "Stalin era”, the mean length of first prison sentences fell sharply in the next decade (especially in the „post October 1956" period), after which it gradually rose again, till in the period 1966-1969 it had reached a level not much lower than that of the "Stalin era". A similar analysis was made of the second prison sentences meted out. Our findings were that during the whole time under review there were no drastic changes of penal policy towards persons previously sentenced. (None of the differences between the means representing the duration of second prison sentences were statistically significant). The highest mean length of prison sentences was noted in Period I. There was a sharp fall in Period II, followed again by a gradual rise, until Period V, when length of sentence again was nearly as great as in Period I. Since similar results were obtained when the means of the length of third prison sentences in the various periods were compared, as well as the means for the length of all sentences meted out in all five periods (here the tendency we have been discussing was particularly evident), the hypothesis as to the steadily increasing punitive character of the punitive justice system in Poland would seem to be borne out by the evidence. Use of the means has this drawback: that with the exception of the standard deviation we have no other information about the sentences coming into different duration categories. For this reason we carried out an extra test, which consisted in comparing the distribution of sentences in the same five periods, but in categories with sentences of up to 1 year, from 1 year to 2 years, and sentences of two years and over. Here, too, the same tendency was found (X2=119.19; df = 8; p<0.01). The following conclusions were reached as a result of this study. The principles behind the paragraph of the Penal Code which deals with special multiple recidivism, and the construction of that paragraph, are wrong. Instead of being aimed maiunly at the perpetrators of serious crimes against person, as well as serious crimes against property, this paragraph in actual fact affects the perpretators of petty or very petty offences against property. On the whole these are habitual petty thieves, who offer no real serious threat to law and order. The result is that in the practice of punitive justice system even a very petty theft comitted in conditions of special multiple recidivism leads to a long term of imprisonment. The consequence is that it also leads to a formal increase of recidivism, for if the law were different, the case could be discontinued or suspended. Hence Art. 60 § 2 of the Penal Code should definitely be abrogated.
Źródło:: Archiwum Kryminologii; 1983, X; 23-54
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:: Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Skocz do pozycji: 3.

Tytuł:: Issues concerning adjudication and execution of a fine after the 2015 reform of criminal law
Autorzy:: Melezini, Mirosława
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1364614.pdf
Data publikacji:: 2018-06-30
Wydawca:: Uczelnia Łazarskiego. Oficyna Wydawnicza
Tematy:: a fine
criminal law reform
non-custodial penalties
ultima ratio of the penalty of
deprivation of liberty
substitute penalty
penal policy
kara grzywny
reforma prawa karnego
kary nieizolacyjne
ultima ratio kary
pozbawienia wolności
kara zastępcza
polityka karna
Opis:: The article discusses the issue of new solutions concerning a fine introduced to the Criminal Code and the Penalty Execution Code by an abundant amendment to criminal law of 20 February 2015. The discussion focuses on the analysis of regulations that, in compliance with the legislator’s assumptions, are to make a fine the basic means of penal response to petty and medium-gravity crimes. The article also attempts to present a preliminary evaluation of case law in 2014 and 2016. The confrontation of the 2015 criminal law reform assumptions with the practice made it possible to state that the significant changes that took place in case law in general go in the right direction and should be positively assessed. Undoubtedly, the importance of a fine in the penal policy considerably rose and its share increased from 21.3% to 34.1%. It has also been established that non-custodial penalties dominated the structure of sentences. They accounted for 55.4% of convictions. In conformity with the reform assumptions, the share of the penalty of deprivation of liberty with conditional suspension of its execution clearly decreased (from 67.4% to 43.3%). What is alarming, there is an increase in the percentage of the adjudicated penalty of absolute deprivation of liberty (from 12.1% to 15.1%). Finally, the article analyses selected issues concerning the execution of a fine, especially the new regulation laid down in Article 12a PEC and Article 48a PEC, which are aimed at raising the efficiency of fine execution and reducing the scope of application of the substitute penalty of deprivation of liberty.
Przedmiotem artykułu są nowe rozwiązania dotyczące grzywny, wprowadzone do kodeksu karnego i kodeksu karnego wykonawczego obszerną ustawą nowelizującą prawo karne z dnia 20 lutego 2015 r. Rozważania koncentrują się na analizie uregulowań, które zgodnie z założeniami ustawodawcy mają uczynić z kary grzywny podstawowy środek reakcji karnej na przestępstwa drobne i średniej wagi. W opracowaniu podjęto również próbę przedstawienia wstępnych ocen orzecznictwa sądów w 2014 r. i w 2016 r. Konfrontacja założeń reformy prawa karnego z 2015 r. z praktyką pozwoliła stwierdzić, że istotne zmiany, które nastąpiły w orzecznictwie sądów, zasadniczo zmierzają w dobrym kierunku i należy je ocenić pozytywnie. Nie ulega wątpliwości, że wydatnie wzrosło znaczenie grzywny w polityce karnej, której udział powiększył się z 21,3% do 34,1%. Ustalono też, że kary nieizolacyjne dominowały w strukturze kar orzeczonych. Stanowiły 55,4% ogółem skazań. Zgodnie z założeniami reformy wyraźnie zmniejszył się udział kary pozbawienia wolności z warunkowym zawieszeniem jej wykonania (z 67,4% do 43,3%). Niepokoi wzrost odsetka orzeczonych kar bezwzględnego pozbawienia wolności (z 12,1% do 15,1%). W końcowej części artykułu analizie poddano wybrane problemy związane z wykonywaniem grzywny, a w szczególności nowe uregulowania ujęte w art. 12a k.k.w. i art. 48a k.k.w., które mają na celu zwiększenie efektywności wykonywania grzywny i ograniczenie zakresu stosowania zastępczej kary pozbawienia wolności.
Źródło:: Ius Novum; 2018, 12, 2; 25-36
1897-5577
Pojawia się w:: Ius Novum
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Skocz do pozycji: 4.

Tytuł:: Implementation of the principle treating deprivation of liberty as ultima ratio in the practice of applying criminal law
Autorzy:: Melezini, Mirosława
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1360684.pdf
Data publikacji:: 2019-06-30
Wydawca:: Uczelnia Łazarskiego. Oficyna Wydawnicza
Tematy:: penalty of deprivation of liberty
penalty of deprivation of liberty with conditional
suspension of its execution
criminal law reform
practice of justice administration
penal
policy
non-custodial penalties
prison population
: kara pozbawienia wolności
kara pozbawienia wolności z warunkowym
zawieszeniem wykonania
reforma prawa karnego
praktyka wymiaru sprawiedliwości
polityka karna
kary nieizolacyjne
populacja więzienna
Opis:: The article discusses the issue concerning the implementation of the principle of treating a penalty of deprivation of liberty as ultima ratio in the practice of justice administration. The statutory solutions adopted in the original version of the Criminal Code of 1997 are the starting point of the analysis. It shows a new approach to the penalty of deprivation of liberty, which – as it was assumed – was to become a subsidiary penalty applied to petty crime. In practice, it turned out that an attempt to minimise the role of the penalty of deprivation of liberty in the penal policy was a failure, which resulted in a considerable size of prison population and a big number of offenders convicted and waiting for the penalty execution. A penalty of deprivation of liberty with conditional suspension of its execution adjudicated on a massive scale remained the basic means of penal response to petty crime. The diagnosis of the reasons for the actual situation became the basis for the criminal law reform of 2015. The article discusses the most important amendments to the provisions of the Criminal Code, which are to contribute to the increase in the importance of non-custodial penalties (a fine and a penalty of deprivation of liberty) and to limit the scope of application of the penalty of deprivation of liberty (its absolute type and with conditional suspension of its execution). The statistical overview of the penalty of absolute deprivation of liberty and the penalty of deprivation of liberty with conditional suspension of its execution presented in the article makes the author draw a conclusion that the penalty of deprivation of liberty is still treated as ultima ratio in the practice of justice administration. Despite a considerable decrease in the importance of the penalty of deprivation of liberty with conditional suspension of its execution in the penal policy and a growing share of non-custodial penalties in the structure of adjudicated penalties, the share of the penalty of absolute deprivation of liberty in all convictions is growing and the number of adjudicated and not executed penalties of absolute deprivation of liberty is also higher. That is why, the author expresses an opinion that failure in the implementation of the penal policy assumptions of the 2015 criminal law reform results from too drastic limitation of a possibility of applying the penalty of deprivation of liberty with conditional suspension of its execution. Therefore, she supports the proposals expressed in literature to extend grounds for adjudicating the penalty of deprivation of liberty with conditional suspension of its execution.
Przedmiotem rozważań jest realizacja zasady traktowania kary pozbawienia wolności jako ultima ratio w praktyce wymiaru sprawiedliwości. Punktem wyjścia analizy są rozwiązania ustawowe przyjęte w pierwotnym brzmieniu kodeksu karnego z 1997 r., ukazujące nowe podejście do kary pozbawienia wolności, która w założeniu miała stać się karą subsydiarną w odniesieniu do drobnej i średniej przestępczości. W praktyce okazało się, że próba zminimalizowania roli kary pozbawie- 68 MIROSŁAWA MELEZINI IUS NOVUM 2/2019 nia wolności w polityce karnej nie powiodła się, czego rezultatem był wysoki poziom populacji więziennej oraz duża liczba osób skazanych na karę pozbawienia wolności i oczekujących na jej wykonanie. Podstawowym środkiem reakcji karnej na przestępstwa drobne i średniej wagi pozostawała niezmiennie kara pozbawienia wolności z warunkowym zawieszeniem jej wykonania, orzekana na masową skalę. Diagnoza przyczyn zaistniałych niepowodzeń stała się podłożem reformy prawa karnego z 2015 r. W opracowaniu omówiono najważniejsze zmiany w przepisach kodeksu karnego, które mają przyczynić się do zwiększenia roli kar nieizolacyjnych (grzywny i kary ograniczenia wolności) i ograniczenia zakresu stosowania kary pozbawienia wolności (bezwzględnej i z warunkowym zawieszeniem jej wykonania). Prezentowany w opracowaniu statystyczny obraz bezwzględnej kary pozbawienia wolności oraz kary pozbawienia wolności z warunkowym zawieszeniem jej wykonania skłonił autorkę do wniosku, że kara pozbawienia wolności nadal nie jest traktowana w praktyce wymiaru sprawiedliwości jako ultima ratio. Pomimo wydatnego ograniczenia znaczenia kary pozbawienia wolności z warunkowym zawieszeniem jej wykonania w polityce karnej i rosnącego udziału kar nieizolacyjnych w strukturze kar orzeczonych, powiększa się udział bezwzględnej kary pozbawienia wolności wśród skazań ogółem oraz wzrasta liczba orzeczonych i niewykonywanych bezwzględnych kar pozbawienia wolności. Autorka wyraża pogląd, że na niepowodzenia w zakresie realizacji założeń politycznokryminalnych reformy prawa karnego z 2015 r. rzutują nazbyt drastyczne ograniczenia możliwości zastosowania kary pozbawienia wolności z warunkowym zawieszeniem jej wykonania. W związku z tym przyłącza się do zgłaszanych w piśmiennictwie postulatów rozszerzenia podstaw orzekania kary pozbawienia wolności z warunkowym zawieszeniem jej wykonania.
Źródło:: Ius Novum; 2019, 13, 2; 51-72
1897-5577
Pojawia się w:: Ius Novum
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Informacja

Wyszukujesz frazę "criminal penalties" wg kryterium: Temat

Źródło danych

Dostawca treści

Kolekcja

Rok wydania

Wydawca

Temat

Autor

Typ dokumentu

Język