Informacja

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

Wyszukujesz frazę "prison reform" wg kryterium: Temat


Wyświetlanie 1-3 z 3
Tytuł:
Granice reformy więziennictwa
The Limits of Prison Reform
Autorzy:
Porowski, Michał
Rzepliński, Andrzej
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/699237.pdf
Data publikacji:
1986
Wydawca:
Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:
instytucje społeczne
reforma więzienia
polityka więzienna
stereotyp
granice
neoklasycyzm
social institutions
prison reform
Prison Policy
stereotype
borders
neoclassicism
Opis:
A reform consists in the intention to introduce changes into a given system of social institutions which would not be aimed at its radical and qualitative transformation but would resolve themselves into improvement or rationalization. The reformatory thought may be inspired by conservative, liberal or radical attitudes which determine the motives, limits and profoundness of the changes. In the present paper, a conception of a reform of the prison system has been presented which would assimilate its contents to the substance of punishment, i.e. retribution in its humanistic interpretation and the values that come to the foreground of the axiological system of our times. These values are included in the notion of the dignity of a human being which results from treating man as the aim in itself and a being endowed with free will. The authors have assumed in the present paper that when reforming the prison system, all of its elements can be manipulated with the following exceptions: deprivation of the isolated person of his right to decide about his place of abode, and his duty to stay in a place determined by the authority which executes the penalty. Therefore, the following things can be changed: the ideological grounds of the system, i.e. its aims, functions and the role it plays in the global system of interests; external organization of the system, i.e. its -management regulation of interactions between the isolated and the isolating communities, organization the staff; material equipment of the system, i.e. buildings and their architecture, the arrangements concerning security, economy nd production. The authors oppose the conception which has been called here the reason of humanized retribution to the two contemporary variants of the prison policy. Ideologists of the first of them (the variant oriented at a psycho-social corrective treatment) model prisons having in view the future law abiding functioning of the offender in the society. An individual is here but a ,.human material" which is to undergo transformation as a result of the application of adequate measures. Ideologists of the second variant (one oriented at education through work) emphasize the social needs not connected with the prisoner who is treated as a quantum of man power that can be used. Retribution is inherent in the prison policy irrespective of the intention of its promotors and executors. After all it is one of the elements of the execution of penalty. The moral value of retribution resulting from a just punishment was recognized in the philosophy and dogmatic assumptions of pastoral theology. Recognizing punishment to be the offender’s personal right, we at the same time recognize his dignity due to a rational person. Therefore, punishment based on retribution certifying to the subjectivity and dignity of an human being, is tantamount to the humane attitude. To render possible the realization of the reason of humanized retribution, definite conditions have to emerge. These are: consistently grounding the punishment on the responsibility for the commission of a given act: this excludes the use of the perpetrator’s way of life, state or personality, and opinions as the essential criteria for meeting out punishment, and leads to the imposition of prison sentences for the most serious crimes only; stopping both the building of new prisons an the artificial increase of the capacity of the existing ones; overcoming the barrier of functional connections between prisons and state enterprises which use the immates cheap and first of all easily disposable man power. The reform of the prison policy inspired by the reason of humanized retribution can be expressed in three fundamental postulates which are: (i) the principle of the rule of law and that of mutual respect for the legel status of the prison staff and of the inmates; (ii) the principle of respect for the prisoners dignity; (iii) and the principle of minimalization of isolation of the prison system and of increasing its integration with the outside social environment. The rule of law which is the content of the first principle is the order not only of an absolute observance of the law, but also of the consistence of its contents with the achievements of civilization and morals of the global , society. Thus, on the one hand, the importance of the law as an instrument to eliminate arbitrariness of decisions from the process of execution of penalty is emphasized here, and, on the other hand, the postulate acquires justification that the prisoners' rights - instead of resulting from discretional decisions - be the articulation of the socially accepted values and their realization in accordance with the spirit of times. Thus the prisoners rights become the content and at the same time the safeguard of an humane attitude towards him.  The recognition of the rule of law as the central principle of the prison policy is justified by the very reason of humanized retribution. According to this principle. the process of execution of the deprivation o [ liberty is treated as a sui generis legal relationship between the prison management and the prisoner. the safeguard o[ which is the principle of mutual respect for the both parties legal positions. The construction of a definite catalogue of these rights is the task of the legislation. In any case, the prisoner retains his rights to the extent appropriate of any citizen in barracks. The only thing the penal isolation eliminates is the personal participation in the outside social life. A specific prison right is the inmates' right to use the period of isolation in the way that would be most helpful for their evelopment, which means, among other things the opportunity to participate in treatment alternatives offerred to them, or the conditions for individual development. For the principle of mutual respect of legal statuses to be realized, the prisoner should be equipped with effective means of execution of his rights. This is dictated by two reasons. Firstly, the conception of the process of execution of the penalty of deprivation of liberty as a legal relationship between the prisoner and the management naturally brings the normative factor. to the fore; secondly, prison-as an extremely dense social environment-releases tensions increased by the particural susceptibility to aggression on the part of both of its communities. The prison policy is a negation of the principle of respect for the prisoner’s human dignity in the present interpretation, its contents being adjusted to the Spartan attitude towards men in which an human being has an instrumental Value only. Therefore, he may be modeled after a freely chosen pattern by means of open repression, behavioural conditioning and other kinds of manipulation. On the other hand, the opposite Socratean model of influencing the individual is consistent with the authors assumptions. According to this model, the principal means of the so-called prisoners resocialization are discussed in the paper (work, education, access to culture, as well as punishment and award), in the effort to define them in such a way as never to disturb the ideological contents of the Socratean attitude towards the development of the individual. Prisons are social institutions for which everybody is responsible, though to a varying degree. This gives significance to the principle of minimum of isolation and integration of the prison with the outside social milieu. In this connection, a detailed discussion has been included in the present paper of the forms of isolation (internal, external), the effects of its accomplishment (material and social), and the effects of alienation of penal institutions ( totalitarization, prisonization, exlusion of social control, strict control of contacts with the outside social milieu). To sum up, the approach presented in the present paper is aimed at overcoming the stereotype that consist in a critical analysis of the separate  elements of the prison system without a comprehensive appraisal of its theoretical and practical values. This stereotype does nothing but consolidate the system the value of which has never been verified, and results in the prison policy becoming more and more eclectic.
Źródło:
Archiwum Kryminologii; 1986, XIII; 141-172
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:
Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Więziennictwo w Polsce i Ukrainie: od dziedzictwa totalitarnego do współczesnego europejskiego systemu penitencjarnego
Prisons in Poland and Ukraine: from a totalitarian heritage to a modern European penitentiary system
Autorzy:
Krupnyk, Luba
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1371281.pdf
Data publikacji:
2019-03-28
Wydawca:
Fundacja Pedagogium
Tematy:
więziennictwo
system totalitarny
Państwowa Służba Penitencjarna
reforma więziennictwa
prison system
totalitarian system
State Penitentiary Service
penitentiary reform
Opis:
Badanie reformy więziennictwa w Polsce jest doskonałą ilustracją przemian ustrojowych, jakie przechodzili Polacy od systemu naznaczonego radzieckim totalitaryzmem do społeczeństwa spełniającego kryteria demokratyczności . Dążenia Ukrainy w kierunku adaptacji rozwiązań Unii Europejskiej w dziedzinie reformy penitencjarnej zachęcają do poznania doświadczeń Polski ze względu na postęp tego kraju w eliminowaniu spuścizny komunistycznej w działalności więziennictwa i nadzorującej go Służby Więziennej. Zadanie to staje się również aktualne dla współczesnej Ukrainy i z uwagi na łączące oba kraje głębokie więzi kulturowe i mentalne, polskie doświadczenia wydają się być niezwykle inspirujące. Korzystając z doświadczenia sąsiadów nie należy zapominać o różnicach. Przede wszystkim należy zauważyć, że okres komunizmu w Polsce był wyraźnie krótszy, w porównaniu z 70-letnim doświadczeniem Ukrainy, Białorusi i innych Republik Radzieckich które w odróżnieniu od Polski nie zaznały pełnej suwerenności.Kluczowe dla powodzenia reform w Polsce było to, że realizowali je nowi, często młodzi ludzie, przygotowani do pracy w oparciu o współczesną wiedzy, nie związaną z poprzednim systemem. Polacy potępili zbrodnie komunizmu i jego dziedzictwo. Na Ukrainie do tej pory tak zdecydowanie tego nie zrobiono i to jest jeden z powodów niepowodzenia reform.
The study of the penitentiary reform in Poland is a perfect illustration of the political changes that Poles have undergone from a system marked by Soviet totalitarianism to a society that meets the criteria of democracy.Ukraine's aspirations to adapt EU solutions in the field of penitentiary reform encourage to learn about Poland's experiences due to the progress of this country in eliminating the communist legacy in the work of the prison system and the Prison Service that oversees it. This task is also valid for contemporary Ukraine and due to the deep cultural and mental ties connecting the two countries, Polish experiences seem to be extremely inspiring.When using the experience of neighbors, do not forget about the differences. First of all, it should be noted that the period of communism in Poland was clearly shorter, compared to the 70 years of experience of Ukraine, Belarus and other Soviet Republics which, unlike Poland, did not experience full sovereignty.
Źródło:
Resocjalizacja Polska; 2018, 15; 105-133
2081-3767
2392-2656
Pojawia się w:
Resocjalizacja Polska
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
    Wyświetlanie 1-3 z 3

    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