Temat: teoria kary - Katalog OPAC zbiorów

Skocz do pozycji: 1.

Tytuł:: Odpowiedzialność karna a determinizm antropologiczny
The Theory of Punishment and the Problem of Determinism
Autorzy:: Peno, Michał
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/698586.pdf
Data publikacji:: 2014
Wydawca:: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:: polityka kryminalna
teoria kary
criminology
theory of punishment
determinism
criminal responsibility
Opis:: Much has been written recently about the problem of justifying punishment in the context of anthropological determinism and incompatibilism. However, the problem of the relationship between determinism, on the one hand, and the theory of punishment, on the other, is multi-dimensional. This article focuses on criminal responsibility in a world of determinism. It is mostly an attempt to review the basic concepts and issues in the philosophy of responsibility and compare them with the concepts and issues of the criminal law as broadly defined. The starting point is the observation that if the thesis of determinism is true and it is not possible to reconcile determinism with human freedom, then it will be particularly difficult to justify punishment. Prima facie, this applies to retributionism, although a more thorough analysis leads to the conclusion that various utilitarian approaches will also have to be significantly modified to allow for determinism. Punishment can obviously implement certain goals and be useful in some way without necessarily being just (it can even be cruel and/or immoral). Punishment may be formally fair (like revenge) and constitute “an eye for an eye.” However, if people do not have free will, then they are not responsible for their misdeeds. This is problematic as they do not deserve revenge and their behaviour does not merit condemnation. However, it is possible to apply different measures which are closer to the sui generis of preventive measures. This paper attempts to demonstrate that there is a link between criminal punishment and moral responsibility. This follows from the fact that punishment is marked by moral condemnation and only a morally responsible person can be condemned. Excluding moral responsibility therefore makes it impossible to condemn a perpetrator. The distinguishing feature of, and (indirectly) the moral justification for, criminal punishment are thereby eliminated. In particular, from a retributionist viewpoint, punishment can only be justified if the wrongdoer is morally responsible for his/her actions (in the sense that he/she can be accused of having upset the moral order). If the perpetrator is not morally responsible, it is difficult to morally justify the legitimacy and practice of punishment. Furthermore, the premise about moral responsibility is a prerequisite for justifying punishment in any case involving the notion of guilt. A lack of moral responsibility in a world ruled by determinism does not necessarily mean that people should not be punished for wrongdoing. Nor does it mean that there are no arguments in favour of maintaining the practice of punishment. The basic question is what views – empirical or emotional – should be given priority in the science of criminal law. The answer lies in the demand for minimalism in the criminal law and for a reflective analysis of the foundations of criminal responsibility.
Źródło:: Archiwum Kryminologii; 2014, XXXVI; 109-132
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:: Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Skocz do pozycji: 2.

Tytuł:: Punishing white-collar offenders. Theory and function
Karanie sprawców w “białych kołnierzykach”: Teoria i funkcja
Autorzy:: Uhl, Andrzej
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1375354.pdf
Data publikacji:: 2021-02-02
Wydawca:: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:: white-collar crime
punishment theory
sentencing rationales
just deserts
przestępczość
przestępczość gospodarcza
teoria kary
funkcje prawa karnego
sprawiedliwa odpłata
Opis:: The most prominent sentencing theories, also known as justifications for punishment, were developed long before white-collar crime entered mainstream criminology. Not surprisingly, the literature still focusses on the phenomenology of white-collar crime rather than on the issues of punishment. As a growing number of respectable offenders face criminal prosecution or even incarceration, the application of traditional sentencing rationales proves problematic in practical, ethical, and terminological terms. The article first explains how the debate on punishing upper-world offenders in Europe is inhibited by the offence-based nomenclature of economic crime or ‘collaring the crime, not the criminal’. Thereafter, a review and discussion of relevant English-language literature on the subject is offered, leaving open some questions as to its applicability to the Central-eastern European context. White-collar offenders were traditionally viewed as the perfect target for general deterrence, yet the body of evidence challenges this hypothesis. The theory of positive general prevention seems promising with regard to reinforcing business ethics and counteracting the spiral effect. It is hardly clear what the rehabilitation of middle-class convicts should mean in practice, while incapacitation is reinvented as business debarment and the loss of licences. There is often a glaring discrepancy between retributive and preventive ends in white-collar cases, which also features the political dimension of class inequalities in the criminal justice system. A short excursus provides insight into neoliberal criticisms of punishing white-collar offenders, revealing its unintentional similarities to penal abolitionism. Finally, empirical findings on subjects relevant to punishment theories, such as fair sentencing, public attitudes, and the effectiveness of deterrence, are reviewed with special attention given to Central and Eastern European research.
The most prominent sentencing theories, also known as justifications for punishment, were developed long before white-collar crime entered mainstream criminology. Not surprisingly, the literature still focusses on the phenomenology of white-collar crime rather than on the issues of punishment. As a growing number of respectable offenders face criminal prosecution or even incarceration, the application of traditional sentencing rationales proves problematic in practical, ethical, and terminological terms. The article first explains how the debate on punishing upper-world offenders in Europe is inhibited by the offence-based nomenclature of economic crime or ‘collaring the crime, not the criminal’. Thereafter, a review and discussion of relevant English-language literature on the subject is offered, leaving open some questions as to its applicability to the Central-eastern European context. White-collar offenders were traditionally viewed as the perfect target for general deterrence, yet the body of evidence challenges this hypothesis. The theory of positive general prevention seems promising with regard to reinforcing business ethics and counteracting the spiral effect. It is hardly clear what the rehabilitation of middle-class convicts should mean in practice, while incapacitation is reinvented as business debarment and the loss of licences. There is often a glaring discrepancy between retributive and preventive ends in white-collar cases, which also features the political dimension of class inequalities in the criminal justice system. A short excursus provides insight into neoliberal criticisms of punishing white-collar offenders, revealing its unintentional similarities to penal abolitionism. Finally, empirical findings on subjects relevant to punishment theories, such as fair sentencing, public attitudes, and the effectiveness of deterrence, are reviewed with special attention given to Central and Eastern European research. Najważniejsze teorie kary zostały sformułowane na długo zanim przestępczość "białych kołnierzyków" wkroczyła do kryminologii głównego nurtu. Literatura przedmiotu wciąż skupia się raczej na fenomenologii tego typu przestępczości niż na kwestiach karania. Przy wzrastającej liczbie skazanych lub nawet uwięzionych sprawców z klasy średniej i wyższej zastosowanie istniejących teorii kary napotyka na problemy natury praktycznej, etycznej i terminologicznej. Artykuł wyjaśnia, jak oparta na cechach czynu nomenklatura "przestępczości gospodarczej" utrudnia naukową dyskusję na temat karania "białych kołnierzyków". Następnie zaprezentowany jest przegląd prac anglosaskich i ich omówienie w kontekście środkowo- i wschodnioeuropejskim. Sprawców w "białych kołnierzyków" uważa się powszechnie za właściwych adresatów prewencyjnej funkcji kary, co jest jednak tylko częściowo potwierdzone w badaniach empirycznych. Teoria prewencji pozytywnej wydaje się z kolei obiecująca w aspekcie utwierdzania etycznych postaw w biznesie i przeciwdziałania efektom spiralnym. Pozostaje niejasne, co mogłaby oznaczać resocjalizacja "białych kołnierzyków", podczas gdy funkcja uniemożliwiająca spełniona jest przez środki w postaci zakazu prowadzenia działalności gospodarczej. Wymóg sprawiedliwości często koliduje z względami prewencji, co ma swój wymiar polityczny w postaci nierówności klasowych w systemie sprawiedliwości karnej. W krótkim ekskursie omówiona zostaje neoliberalna krytyka karania "białych kołnierzyków" - krytyka przywołująca w sposób niezamierzony argumenty zbliżone do postulatów abolicji penalnej. Przy szczególnym uwzględnieniem prac z Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej podsumowane są także wyniki badań empirycznych w obszarach istotnych z punktu widzenia wybranych teorii kary: spójności orzekanych kar, postaw społecznych czy skuteczności prewencji.
Źródło:: Archiwum Kryminologii; 2020, XLII/2; 27-47
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:: Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Informacja

Wyszukujesz frazę "teoria kary" wg kryterium: Temat

Źródło danych

Dostawca treści

Kolekcja

Rok wydania

Wydawca

Temat

Autor

Typ dokumentu

Język