Informacja

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

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "Penal policy" wg kryterium: Temat

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
Wyświetlanie 1-15 z 41
Tytuł:
„Lipcowa” nowelizacja Kodeksu karnego. Nowa filozofia prawa i wątpliwości konstytucyjne
“July” Amendment of the Criminal Code. New Philosophy of Law and Constitutional Concerns
Autorzy:
Daśko, Natalia
Bojarski, Janusz
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/27177682.pdf
Data publikacji:
2023-12-31
Wydawca:
Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
Tematy:
kodeks karny
polityka kryminalna
kara kryminalna
populizm penalny
criminal code
criminal policy
criminal punishment
penal populism
Opis:
The Act of July 7, 2022 introduced a thorough reform of criminal law. The effect of these changes is a significant tightening of criminal repression, e.g. in the form of extending the possible sentence of imprisonment from one month to 15 years to a period from one month to 30 years, lowering the age of criminal responsibility in special cases to 14 years or the possibility of imposing a penalty life imprisonment without the possibility of conditional early release. The changes that appeared in the Penal Code can be considered the next stage in the political struggle through activities known as penal populism. However, these changes can be viewed as the result of adopting a philosophy of criminal law different from the previous one and adopting the assumptions of neoclassicism in criminal law. However, some of these changes raise serious constitutional questions.
Ustawą z 7 lipca 2022 r. dokonano gruntownej reformy prawa karnego. Efektem tych zmian jest znaczne zaostrzenie represji karnej, np. w postaci wydłużenia możliwej do orzekania kary pozbawienia wolności z okresu od miesiąca do 15 lat, na okres od miesiąca do 30 lat, obniżenia wieku odpowiedzialności karnej w szczególnych przypadkach do 14 lat czy możliwości orzeczenia kary dożywotniego pozbawienia wolności bez możliwości warunkowego przedterminowego zwolnienia. Zmiany, które pojawiły się w Kodeksie karnym, można uznać za kolejny etap w walce politycznej poprzez działania określane mianem populizmu penalnego. Jednakże można na te zmiany spojrzeć jako na efekt przyjęcia odmiennej od dotychczasowej filozofii prawa karnego i przyjęcie założeń neoklasycyzmu w prawie karnym. Niektóre z tych zmian budzą jednak poważne wątpliwości konstytucyjne.
Źródło:
Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego; 2023, 6(76); 287-302
2082-1212
Pojawia się w:
Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
An evergreen or forgotten subject: relationship among crime, criminology and criminal policy
Autorzy:
Rzeplińska, Irena
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/26917632.pdf
Data publikacji:
2013
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
przestępczość
kryminologia
transformacja
polityka kryminalna
crime
criminology
transformation
policy of crime fighting by penal measures
Źródło:
Biuletyn Kryminologiczny; 2013, 20; 51-55
2084-5375
Pojawia się w:
Biuletyn Kryminologiczny
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Authorities and Society vs. Financial Crime in the Gomułka Period in Poland
Autorzy:
Jarosz, Dariusz
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1390765.pdf
Data publikacji:
2017-02-07
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
Tematy:
financial crime
meat scandal
penal policy in socialist Poland
Władysław Gomułka
Opis:
The pivotal motive behind financial crime in the real socialist states was the chronic shortage of goods and services. In the case of Poland under the Gomułka administration (1956-1970), a factor which contributed to the prevalence of practices considered economically criminal was, ironically, the liberalization of the government in the period following Władysław Gomułka’s rise to power. The procedure of issuing new licenses to private and co-operative manufacturing businesses fostered illegal practices, because the new businesses needed supplies of deficit resources. Private trade businesses struggled with similar problems. The authorities tried to prevent financial crime by concentrating on publishing new laws which allowed heavy punishment for those behind the biggest economic scandals. In this field, the penal policy was shaped by the top authorities of the communist party, and their decisions were binding for the institutions of the justice system. Such decisions of the top authorities of the Polish United Workers’ Party (PUWP) were behind the death sentence for Stanisław Wawrzecki, who was charged with fraudulence in meat trade in Warsaw. Poles’ attitude towards financial crime was not clear-cut. One the one hand, in their letters to authorities, many Poles expressed their support for severe punishment for those responsible for the biggest fraud, while others objected towards capital punishment for Wawrzecki. The information we have on the dynamics of confirmed financial crimes does not provide a clear answer whether it was actually related to the severity of the punishments.
Źródło:
Studia Historiae Oeconomicae; 2016, 34; 63-84
0081-6485
Pojawia się w:
Studia Historiae Oeconomicae
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Ciąża, poród i opieka nad dzieckiem w więzieniach Królestwa Polskiego (1815–1867)
Pregnancy, delivery, and childcare in the prisons of the Kingdom of Poland (1815–67)
Autorzy:
Bieda, Justyna
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/533281.pdf
Data publikacji:
2015
Wydawca:
Krakowska Akademia im. Andrzeja Frycza Modrzewskiego
Tematy:
child in prison
penal system in the 19th century
pregnancy in prison
woman in prison
imprisonment
penitentiary policy
dziecko w więzieniu
więziennictwo w XIX w.
ciąża w więzieniu
kobieta w więzieniu
kara pozbawienia wolności
polityka penitancjarna
Opis:
The origin of contemporary solutions concerning the children of the imprisoned should be sought in the days of the Kingdom of Poland, when the need to regulate the problem of pregnant women, delivery, and living conditions of mothers who remained in penal institutions together with their children, as well as the life of the minors who remained outside the prison during the imprisonment of the parents were regulated. Early in the 19th century, the condition of Polish prisons did not meet even the contemporary standards. The authorities of the Duchy attempted to introduce reforms, and prison law (literally: ‘arrangement of state prisons’) was drafted, yet the unstable situation in the country aggravated by the lack of funds did not allow its implementation. A breakthrough in the penal system in the Kingdom of Poland came with the visitation of some prisons in the capital city by Tsar Alexander I in 1818. The monarch’s dissatisfaction resulted in the intensive activity of central authorities aimed at reforming the conditions of serving the sentences. The changes encompassed the situation of imprisoned mothers and also their children in direct custody of a parent, and also those living outside the prison. Initially, a prisoner in pregnancy and childbirth was deprived of specific assistance, yet the custom of having midwives participating in deliveries developed in the 1830s, even though legal regulations concerning the question date back to as late as the 1850s. The improvement of the horrible sanitary conditions in newborn care had not taken place in Warsaw prison until the 1830s, while the first administrative rules ensuring breastfeeding women with better alimentation were issued a decade later.
Genezy współczesnych rozwiązań dotyczących dzieci osób pozbawionych wolności poszukiwać należy w latach Królestwa Polskiego, gdzie po raz pierwszy dostrzeżono konieczność uregulowania problemu kobiet ciężarnych i porodu oraz warunków bytowych matek przebywających wraz dziećmi w zakładach karnych, a także losów nieletnich, pozostających poza murami w czasie uwięzienia rodziców. Stan polskich więzień w początkach XIX w., nie spełniał nawet ówczesnych standardów. Władze Księstwa podjęły próby reform, przygotowano projekt ordynacji więziennej: Urządzenie więzień krajowych, jednakże niestabilna sytuacja kraju, a przy tym brak funduszy, nie pozwoliły na jego realizację. Przełom w system więziennictwa w Królestwie Polskim przyniosła wizytacja niektórych więzień stolicy w 1818 r. przez cara Aleksandra I. Niezadowolenie cara spowodowało intensywne działania centralnych władz rządowych mające na celu reformę warunków wykonywania kary pozbawienia wolności. Zmiany objęły sytuację matek-więźniarek, a także ich dzieci, będących pod bezpośrednią opieką rodzica, jak też tych znajdujących się poza więzieniem. Początkowo, więźniarka w ciąży lub połogu pozbawiona była szczególnej pomocy, ale na drodze praktyki wykształcił się w latach 30. XIX w. zwyczaj udziału w porodach akuszerek, ale regulacje ustawowe w tym zakresie pochodzą dopiero z lat 50. tegoż stulecia. Poprawa fatalnych warunków sanitarnych sprawowania opieki nad noworodkami miała miejsce w więzieniu warszawskim dopiero w latach 30. XIX w., zaś w kolejnym dziesięcioleciu wydano pierwsze przepisy administracyjne zapewniające kobietom karmiącym lepsze racje żywieniowe. Założenie, iż potomstwo nie powinno przebywać ze swoimi rodzicami w zakładach karnych spowodowało, iż już w roku 1823 r. wydano przepisy administracyjne regulujące zasady opieki nad dziećmi, które już nie mogły przebywać pod bezpośrednią opieką matki.
Źródło:
Studia z Dziejów Państwa i Prawa Polskiego; 2015, 18; 55-72
1733-0335
Pojawia się w:
Studia z Dziejów Państwa i Prawa Polskiego
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Contemporary thieves in Poland - their crime and punishment
Autorzy:
Klimczak, Joanna
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1788441.pdf
Data publikacji:
2021-06-24
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
kradzież
złodziej
kradzież w sklepach
polityka karna
penal policy
theft
larceny
thief
Opis:
Theft is one of the oldest and clearly condemned crime in history. It takes a significant part in the crime structure in Poland. Nevertheless, it seems to be a forgotten and uninteresting subject among modern criminological research. In public opinion, theft invariably causes indignation, and the way of punishing thieves is a field of interest for both public opinion and politicians. In  Poland,  theft  is  an  offence  that  can  either  be  prosecuted  as  a  misdemeanor  or  a  crime - it depends on the value of the property stolen. Therefore, legal penalties for crime related to theft may vary considerably. It is precisely this line between misdemeanor and crime that is cur- rently being discussed in Poland. To talk about changes concerning the punishment of thieves, one should first check what is the current state of the criminal policy in this regard. Therefore, I want to present the results of the research, which I carried out at the Institute of Justice in 2017. I examined randomly selected court files of two above mention categories of theft, which ended validly and in which the enforcement proceedings ended in 2016. The research was conducted on 420 cases (including 233 misdemeanor and 187 crime cases). On the basis of the collected material emerges the image of the criminal policy against thieves who stood before the court, which gives the opportunity to consider whether and what changes in the law can be predicted against the perpetrators of the simple theft.
Kradzież jest jednym z najstarszych przestępstw znanych w historii. Przy ogólnej tendencji spadku ilości popełnianych przestępstw, kradzieże wciąż stanowią znaczący udział w strukturze polskiej przestępczości. W Polsce kradzież jest czynem, który może być ścigany jako wykroczenie lub jako przestępstwo – zależy to od wartości skradzionej własności. W związku z tym, kary za kradzież mogą się znacznie różnić. Sposób i wysokość tzw. „przepołowienia” kradzieży, czyli granicy od której będzie traktowana jako przestępstwo (i co za tym idzie surowiej karana), jest obecnie przedmiotem dyskusji w Polsce. Aby sprawdzić jak w rzeczywistości wygląda struktura orzekanych kar i za jakie wartości skradzionego mienia sprawcy byli pociągani do odpowiedzialności, przestawiam wyniki badania, które przeprowadziłam w Instytucie Wymiaru Sprawiedliwości w 2017 roku. Przedmiotem analizy były losowo wybrane akta sądowe 420 spraw (w tym 233 spraw wykroczeń i 187 spraw przestępstw), które zakończyły się prawomocnie i w których postępowanie wykonawcze zakończyło się w 2016 r. Na podstawie zebranego materiału wyłania się obraz polityki karnej przeciwko sprawcom kradzieży, którzy stanęli przed polskimi sądami. Artykuł jest rozszerzoną i zmodyfkowaną wersją referatu wygłoszonego na XVIII Konferencji Europejskiego Towarzystwa Kryminologicznego w Sarajewie, która odbyła się w dniach 29 sierpnia 2018 r. - 1 września 2018 r.
Źródło:
Biuletyn Kryminologiczny; 2018, 25; 184-190
2084-5375
Pojawia się w:
Biuletyn Kryminologiczny
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:
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
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
Tytuł:
Kuratorzy sądowi i zadania przez nich wykonywane po dokonanej reformie
Probation Officers and their Duties After the Implementation of the Reform
Autorzy:
Szymanowski, Teodor
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/699263.pdf
Data publikacji:
2004
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
kuratorzy sądowi
polityka karna
wymiar sprawiedliwości
reforma
probation officers
penal policy
criminal justice
reform
Opis:
This report devoted to presenting the probation system in Poland together with the duties performed by probation officers is made up of two chapters. In the first chapter all primary legal acts regulating the institutions of the probation officers were discussed, also with the functions they perform in the system of criminal justice. In the second chapter, results of research conducted in all court districts in Poland in 2002 were presented. Both, the analysis of legal regulations, as well as the research, have been conducted after the implementation of the basic reform in Poland, yet there is still a lot to be done organisation wise, i.e. enlarging the number of probation officers, improving their essential preparation as well as implementing modem and effective forms of activity.       In the first chapter, where the legal bases of probation officers are discussed, the most important legal acts were mentioned first. Their number is quite substantial, since in the nine laws there are regulations concerning the socio-legal status and duties of probation officers. In order to indicate the most significant of them the following cannot be omitted:       The Penal Code of 1997 which regulated matters concerned with probation officers performing a number of supervisory forms (including probation);       The Executive Penal Code of 1997 by means of which piobation officers were given a rank of one of the important organs responsible for executing punishments and means of punishment. These tasks have been extended in order to grant the probation officers: executing the punishment of restriction of liberty and substitutive penalty ‒ community service, and also certain duties have been precised concerned with executing the punishment of deprivation of liberty and providing the post penitentiary help.        The law on the organisation of law courts (dated from 2001) in which only few articles are devoted to probation. They are, however, immensely important because they helped to precise this system, constituting that probation officers are an autonomous organ operating within the judiciary system, meaning by that regional and district courts, towards which presidents of the law courts and judges occupy supervisory and controlling positions. Simultaneously, the professional and social character of the probation officer has been confirmed in that law.       Another very important legal act is the law of 1982 on the procedures in juvenile cases (with later changes, especially with a very thorough amendment of 2000) which regulates the use of probation (family courts) in cases of defining the supervisory methods or reformative for the juveniles.       Amongst the discussed laws one, from 2001, about the probation officers is of a special significance. This law has almost a pioneer character. It has been created by the Polish Parliament from the initiative of probation officers and with their considerable participation. While enacted from the beginning of 2002, it has normalised in a complex way the socio-professional status of probation officers and precisely settled the location, organisation and the duties ofthe probation service in the judiciary system.         In this report laws and obligations of probation officers have been discussed, together with their calling and prospects for promotion, as well as competence connected with performing duties foreseen in the law of probation officers, and other laws, especially in the Penal Code, the Executive Penal Code, Code of Penal Procedure and in the Civil Code.        The bills conceming the probation service and the persons of probation officers, are an additional documentation to the executive acts, to the regulations and orders of the court. In example we can mention one of the most significant regulations, created by the Minister of Justice in 2003, in matter of a detailed executing of the authorities and obligations of probation officers.        In the second chapter the activity of probation officers in 2002 has been presented, in the light of the research results. They were conducted by sending a questionnaire to all 40 court regions (all together 150 questionnaires, part of which has been filled in in groups). It needs to be stressed at this point that amongst the questions none of the issues which could be called stressful were taken up. The research included 50 different issues, amongst which the following should be discussed: - kinds and number of performed interviews by the probation officers during the time of criminal proceedings and later of executing, - executing of measures to examine a convicted offender in case of conditional discontinuance of legal penal proceedings, a conditional suspension of penalty execution, a conditional release from serving the full sentence, - the content of adjudged and executed guardianship, in other words what is the character of probation officers’ contacts and work with persons under their ward, - ęxecuting of penalty of imprisonment and community service, - activity in the area of executing the penalty of imprisonment, - the difficulties in the work of probation officers, - opinions of probation officers concerned with cooperation with social workers as well as in reference to the significance of specific purposes of penalty.        It is difficurt to summarise the research results. Therefore, only for the purpose of a small illustration, the following conclusions can be  mentioned: - probation officers' opinion about their insufficient number (there is about 2000 professional probation officers for adults) in order to be effective in the assigned roles, - the legal system seems to have achieved a desired state, - supervisions performed by probation officers do not comply with all the obligatory (i.e.- caring - job finding); however, the controlling functions over the sentenced under supervision seem to be accepted as satisfactory.
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 2004, XXVII; 67-113
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Merytoryczne przesłanki orzekania kar i innych środków wobec wielokrotnych recydywistów
Penalties and other measures applied towards multiple recidivists
Autorzy:
Janiszewski, Bogusław
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/699228.pdf
Data publikacji:
1986
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
recydywa
wielokrotny recydywista
kara
kodeks karny
środki karne
polityka karna
wymiar kary
kara pozbawienia wolności
orzecznictwo
badania empiryczne
statystyki sądowe
recidivism
multiple recidivists
punishment
penal code
penal measures
criminal policy
sentence
imprisonment
case law
empirical research
court statistics
Opis:
The aims of the present study have been: 1) to ascertain the actual conditions of the courts' decisions applying penalties and other measures towards multiple recidivists; 2) to determine the present penal policy towards this category of convicted persons; 3) to compare this policy with the assumptions included in the Penal Code in force. Punishment imposed upon multiple recidivists is regulated by the provisions of Art. 60, para. 2 and 3 Art. 61 of the Penal Code. Their formulation is as follows: on a perpetrator sentenced twice in the conditions specified in para. 1 (special basic recidivism), who has served altogether at leat one year of deprivation of liberty and in the period of 5 years after the serving of the last penalty commits again an intentional offence with the purpose of obtaining a material benefit or of a hooligan character, similar to at least one of the previously committed offencęs, the court shall impose a penalty within the limits of from three times the lowest sanction, but not less than 2 years, up to the highest statutory sanction increased by one half, and if the highest statutory sanction is not higher than 3 years: up to 5 years deprivation of liberty. The increase of the lowest statutory sanction provided in para. 1 or 2 shall not apply, when the offence is a serious offence; in this case the court shall consider the commission of the offence in the conditions specified in para 1 or 2 as a circumstance increasing the penalty. In particularly justified cases when even the lowest penalty imposed on the basis of Art. 60. paras 1 or 2 would be incommeasurably Severe by reason of the motives for the action of the perpetrator, his traits and personal conditions as well as his way of life before the commission and his behaviour after the perpetration of the offence, the court when imposing the penalty may refrain from applying the rules specified in Art. 60. paras 1 or 2; in these cases the court shall take into consideration the commission of the offence in the conditions specified in Art. 60, para 1or 2 as circumstances influencing increasing the penalty. With regard to a perpetrator sentenced in the conditions specified in Art. 60, para. 2 he court shall adjudge protective supervision; if adjudging this supervision is not sufficient to prevent recidivism, the court shall adjudge .the commitment of the sentenced person to a social readaptation centre. (Art. 62, para. 2). The present work has been based on the author's own research and to a minimum extent only on the analysis of the national statistical data. The point of departure for the study of the actual conditions of the courts decisions were the conditions specified in the Penal Code now in force. The conditions specified in Art. 61 of the Penal Code and related to the offender only have been assumed to form the ratio legis of special recidivism in the Polish penal legislation. If, however, when aplying this provision, the courts prefer the conditions related to the most recent act of the offender, this mignt be an indication of their different attitude towards the aim of punishment in the case of the discussed category of offenders. The existence of such divergences between the conditions of application of Art 61 of the Penal Code as included in the law on the one hand, and those applied by the courts on the other hand  has been one of the hypotheses verified in the present study.  The study has been based on the examination of court records. All the accessible records of criminal cases (230) have been included in it, in which Sentences were passed with regard to multiple recidivists (under Art 60. para. 2  and Art. 61 in connection with Art. 60, para. 2 of the Penal Code) in the District Court of the city of Poznań in the years 1975-1981. The question arised whether this could be treated as an equivalent to a random sample of the national population of convicted multiple recidivists. As shown by a comparison of distributions in question are highly convergent. A questionnaire to investigate the ourt records consisted of 41 questions concerning the convicted recidivist, his previous offences and criminal record, his last offence and the content of the last sentence. The impact of a number of variables on the application of Art. 61 of the Penal Code, on the length  of the prison sentence and on the decision of commitment to a social readaptation centre has been analysed in succession. Conclusions from the study are as follows: 1. In the application of Art.61 of the Penal Code ,the predominating part is played by the conditions connected with the degree of socil danger of the act and with its legal label. The conditions connected with the person of the perpetrator seem to have a much smaller effect. The reason of this state of affairs may be seeked in the fact that the court is obligated by Art. 60, para.2 of the Penal Code to impose long-term penalties of deprivation or liberty regardless of the degree of social danger (seriousness) of the offence which may be trivial in particular cases. Therefore, it is not to be wondered at that in these cases the courts apply Art. 61 of the Penal Code so as to impose a lower or more lenient penalty in order to make it commeasurable with the offence. The following conditions have been found to exert the greatest influence on the length of sentences to deprivation of liberty under Art. 60, para. 2: firstly, the legal appraisal of the offence and the related content of the instructions for meting out punishment specified in Art. 60, para. 2 of the Penal Code, and secondly, the degree of social danger of the offence. The character of the offence and the appraisal of its social danger influence the sentence too, including the type of penalty, when Art. 61 of the Penal Code is applied by the court. This is probably a further result of following the same conditions already when deciding on the application of Art. 61 of the Penal Code. When adjudging the commitment of convicted persons to a social readaptation centre, the courst were guided by the conditions connected with intense symptoms of demoralization of these persons and with a previous application of various penal measures towards them; thus the conditions were formally the same as those to be found in the Penal Code. At the same time, conditions connected with the recently committed offence were left out of account here. One should be particularly careful when interpreting the findings in this case aS the decisions in question may be conditioned by the courts' various attitudes towards the practical functioning of the centers, and by different purposes of their adjudgement in definite cases. The length of the perod for which commitment to a social readaptation centre was adjudged has appeared to increase with the length of the sentence to deprivation of libety. Admittedly, outright conclusions as to the need for amendments of the provisions of the Penal Code in its part concerning recidivists do not follow immediately from the findings of the present study. These findings have. however, demonstrated the degree to which the instructions for meting out, punishment specified in Art. 60, para. 2 of the Penal Code sever the relation between the offence and punishment, as  well as the fact that the corrective function of punishment imposed upon multiple recidivists - officially assumed by the legislator-has a fictious character in practice. In consequence, Art. 61 of the Penal Code is used in discord with its purpose; it is applied to adjust the adjudicated punishment to the seriousness of the offence committed.
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 1986, XIII; 109-139
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Nauka a praktyka z perspektywy polityki karnej lat siedemdziesiątych i osiemdziesiątych
Theory and Practice in Poland’s Criminal Policy in the 1970s and ’80s
Autorzy:
Pływaczewski, Emil W.
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2098380.pdf
Data publikacji:
2021-06-24
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Kardynała Stefana Wyszyńskiego w Warszawie
Tematy:
prawo karne
polityka kryminalna
nauka a praktyka
zapobieganie przestępczości
reforma prawa karnego
criminal law
criminal policy
theory and practice
crime prevention
penal law reform
Opis:
Artykuł dotyczy zagadnienia polityki kryminalnej w Polsce, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem okresu lat siedemdziesiątych i osiemdziesiątych. W 1969 r. Sejm uchwalił nową kodyfikację karną, w tym kodeks karny, który zastąpił kodeks karny z 1932 r. Najbardziej rozczarowującą częścią nowego kodeksu karnego były określone w nim sankcje. Ich system pozostał nadmiernie sztywny i surowy; najczęściej stosowaną karą pozostała kara pozbawienia wolności. Między innymi kodeks wprowadził wyjątkowo surowe sankcje – środki karne wobec recydywistów. Efektem tych rozwiązań prawnych, lojalnie stosowanych przez judykaturę, był znaczący wzrost populacji więziennej (w latach siedemdziesiątych wahała się ona od 90 do 130 tysięcy, tj. przeciętnie 235 na 100 tysięcy mieszkańców). W tym zakresie Polska niekorzystnie i znacząco odbiegała od większości innych krajów wschodniej Europy, nie mówiąc już o krajach zachodnich. Powstanie „Solidarności” w sierpniu 1980 r. było początkiem odchodzenia od komunizmu w sowieckim stylu. Ekspercka krytyka ustawodawstwa karnego i realizowanej na jego gruncie represyjnej polityki kryminalnej zaowocowała przygotowaniem w 1981 r. dwóch projektów nowego kodeksu karnego. Kulminacja konfliktu pomiędzy władzą a opozycją nastąpiła w grudniu 1981 r. Wówczas komunistyczny rząd kierowany przez generała Wojciecha Jaruzelskiego wydał dekret o stanie wojennym, będący uderzeniem w silny ruch opozycyjny. Cztery lata później w 1985 r. została uchwalona drakońska ustawa o szczególnej odpowiedzialności karnej. Od 1987 r. Komisja Kodyfikacyjna (jej skład został zmieniony po zawarciu porozumienia tzw. okrągłego stołu pomiędzy stroną rządową a opozycją) przygotowywała nowe projekty kodeksu karnego, kodeksu postępowania karnego i kodeksu karnego wykonawczego. Nowa kodyfikacja karna, w tym kodeks karny, uchwalona została przez Sejm 19 kwietnia 1997 r., a weszła w życie 1 września 1998 r. W konkluzji autor stwierdza, że punitywny charakter systemu sprawiedliwości karnej, odziedziczony po poprzednim ustroju, wywiera wpływ na dzisiejszą politykę kryminalną, łącznie z problemami zmniejszenia populacji więziennej.
The article addresses issues from the criminal policy Poland pursued in the 1970s and ’80s. In 1969 Sejm enacted a new criminal codification, including a Penal Code to replace the 1932 Penal Code. Te most disappointing part of the new Penal Code were the penalties. Penalisation was still kept unduly harsh and rigid, with imprisonment as the most frequently form of punishment. One of the innovations the Code adopted was a set of exceptionally stringent measures against recidivists. As the result of these amendments, which the courts duly implemented, there was a steep rise in the number of inmates held in Polish prisons. In the ’70s it fluctuated between 90 and 130 thousand, on average amounting to 235 in 100 thousand inhabitants. The figures for Poland were much higher than those for most other East European countries, let alone Western Europe. Te emergence of Solidarity in August 1980 turned out to be the beginning of the end for Soviet-style Communism. In 1981 strong criticism from experts on criminal law, who castigated Poland’s penal law and repressive criminal policy, led to the compilation of two drafts for a new penal code. In December 1981 the conflict between General Wojciech Jaruzelski’s Communist government and its (unrecognised) opposition culminated in the imposition of Martial Law, designed to crush the powerful opposition movement. Four years later, a draconian law was instituted, bringing in “special criminal liability”. Since 1987, Poland’s Codification Commission, which was re-constituted in 1989 following the Round Table Agreement concluded between the leaders of PZPR (the ruling Communist Party) and the opposition, has been working on new drafts of the penal code, the code of criminal procedure, and the code on the execution of penalties. Te new legislation, including a new penal code, was passed by Sejm in 1997, and entered into force on 1 September 1998. I conclude with a remark that the punitive character of the criminal justice system Poland inherited from the Communist system is still exerting a considerable influence on the country’s current policy on criminal justice, and is still contributing to problems with reducing the prison population.
Źródło:
Zeszyty Prawnicze; 2021, 21, 2; 115-141
2353-8139
Pojawia się w:
Zeszyty Prawnicze
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Nieprawomocne orzeczenia sądów w sprawach karnych w świetle starego i nowego kodeksu karnego
Invalid judgments in criminal matters in the light of the ‘old’ and the new penal code
Autorzy:
Gruszczyńska, Beata
Marczewski, Marek
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/698931.pdf
Data publikacji:
2000
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
kodeks karny
orzeczenie nieprawomocne
statystyka
polityka karna
the Penal Code
statistics
criminal policy
judgement is not final
judgment is not final
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 2000, XXV; 179-192
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
O polityce karnej z perspektywy retrospektywnej
On Criminal Policy in Retrospection
Autorzy:
Pływaczewski, Emil W.
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/698744.pdf
Data publikacji:
2008
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
polityka karna
kodeks karny
analiza retrospektywna
criminal policy
penal code
retrospection
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 2008, XXIX-XXX; 617-628
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
O wpływie ustawodawstwa karnego na politykę karną
Impact of penal law on penal policy
Autorzy:
Krajewski, Krzysztof
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/698822.pdf
Data publikacji:
2019
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
polityka karna
determinanty polityki karnej
punitywność polityki karnej
prawo zapisane
prawo w działaniu
penal policy
determinants of penal policy
punitiveness of penal policy
law on the books
law in action
Opis:
For many years, Polish penal policy has been considered to be very punitive. This is confirmed by the very high imprisonment rate which was observable even before World War Two. This raises the legitimate question of how to explain this consistent pattern. It is also appropriate to ask whether the reasons for this punitiveness can be found in punitive penal legislation, in the legal code, or in punitive sentencing practice, or at the level of the law in action. This article uses available statistical data to analyse selected trends in Polish penal policy, indicating that on many occasions attempts to diminish punitive sentencing outcomes through legislation produced absolutely opposite results. At the same time, there have been periods of real reduction in this punitiveness which occurred without any specific legislative changes made with such an intention. All of this suggests that the law on the books and the law in action may to a large extent be independent of each other.
Polityka karna w Polsce od lat uchodzi za niezwykle punitywną, o czym świadczą wysokie wartości, jakie przyjmują współczynniki prizonizacji, poczynając od okresu przed II wojną światową. Rodzi to uzasadnione pytanie o przyczyny takiego stanu rzeczy: czy leżą one po stronie punitywnego ustawodawstwa, tj. prawa zapisanego, czy też po stronie praktyki orzekania kar przez sądy, tj. prawa w działaniu. Artykuł poświęcony jest analizie w świetle dostępnych danych statystycznych wybranych zjawisk w polskiej polityce karnej, pokazujących, że w szeregu wypadków reformy zmierzające do obniżenia poziomu punitywności polskiej polityki karnej dawały rezultaty odwrotne od zamierzonych. Równocześnie wskazać można okresy jednoznacznego obniżenia tej punitywności, które nie były warunkowane jakimikolwiek zmianami ustawodawczymi. Pokazuje to względną niezależność płaszczyzn prawa zapisanego i prawa w działaniu.
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 2019, XLI/2; 41-80
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Obraz polityki karnej lat osiemdziesiątych i początku lat dziewięćdziesiątych (1980‒1991)
Penal Policy in the 1980s and early 1990s (1980‒1991)
Autorzy:
Jasiński, Jerzy
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/962416.pdf
Data publikacji:
1993
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
polityka karna
sądy polskie
prawo karne
penal policy
Polish courts
penal law
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 1993, XIX; 27-105
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Wyświetlanie 1-15 z 41

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