Lebenslange Freiheitsstrafe in Europa:Die neue Rechtssprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte

Die Europäische Haltung der lebenslangen Freiheitsstrafe gegenüber hat sich in den letzten Jahren deutlich gewandelt. Signifikant hierfür ist der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (EGMR), insbesondere die Große Kammer, welche sich in den letzten Jahren vermehrt mit dem Thema auseinandersetzen musste. Die Entwicklung ist besonders auffällig in den letzten fünf Jahren, da seit 2012 der EGMR verstärkt für ein Verbot der lebenslangen Freiheitsstrafe ohne Möglichkeit einer vorzeitigen Entlassung plädiert. Ein solches Verbot hat nicht nur Auswirkungen auf nationale Rechtsfragen, sondern auch auf zwischenstaatliche Beziehungen, da es sich auf die Rechtmäßigkeit von Ausweisungsverfahren Schwerkrimineller auswirkt. Während sich die Große Kammer im Jahr 2017 inkonsequent ihrer vorherigen Aussage gegenüber zeigte, dass auch lebenslang Inhaftierte eine realistische Chance auf Entlassung verdienen, wurde zum ersten Mal für die generelle Abschaffung der lebenslangen Freiheitsstrafe argumentiert

Oblici odmjeravanja kazne u međunarodnom kaznenom pravosuđu

Ovo je tekst predavanja što ga je autor održao 9. svibnja 2003. u Max Planckovu institutu za strano i međunarodno kazneno pravo, Freiburg i. Br. Prethodna verzija objavljena je pod nazivom Punishment and Human Rights in Criminal Justice, Human Rights Law Review 2002, 1. Njemački je tekst objavljen u Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft (ZStW), Auslandsrundschau, 115. Band, 2003, str. 931-957. Prijevod s njemačkog prof. dr. sc. Petar Novoselec. Prijevod objavljujemo uz suglasnost izdavača ZStW, de Gruyter Rechtswissenschaftlichen Verlags-GmbH, Berlin

The Paradox Of Scottish Life Imprisonment

More people are serving life sentences in Scotland as a proportion of the national population than in any other country in Europe. Yet Scotland claims to adopt a welfarist rather than a penal approach to criminal justice. This paper uses a wide range of data to explain the factors underpinning this paradox. It focuses on key aspects of the imposition and implementation of life sentences, providing, for the first time, an analysis that goes behind headline figures. The paper concludes that, notwithstanding the commitment to welfare in penal policy, the high rate of life imprisonment is driven by both increased punitiveness and attempts to reduce the risk that serious crime poses to society. Finally, the paper outlines strategies for reducing the use of life imprisonment, which may be more effective because they pay close attention to the Scottish penal context, but which have relevance for other jurisdictions seeking to reverse penal excess

‘One cannot legislate kindness’: ambiguities in European legal instruments on non-custodial sanctions

Non-custodial sanctions, particularly those that are implemented in the community, have different historical roots in common and civil law jurisdictions. Nevertheless, various European instruments seek to shape the imposition and implementation of such sanctions uniformly across the continent. These instruments reflect an apparent consensus about penal values, culminating in 1992 with the adoption of the European Rules on Community Sanctions and Measures and of the Recommendation on Consistency in Sentencing. In spite of the apparent pan-European consensus, some tensions remained as a result of underlying doctrinal differences and of the compromises that were required to accommodate them. In the 21st century further European initiatives have sought to go beyond the 1992 instruments and focus on ‘what works’ and on the development of probation services. In the process, the central objective of penal reductionism, so important in 1992, has become somewhat marginalised. This shortcoming can be addressed by reconsidering the approaches that had been rejected in the earlier search for consensus and by developing a more comprehensive understanding of the human rights safeguards to which all penal sanctions should be subject

Risk factors for Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) death in a population cohort study from the Western Cape province, South Africa

Risk factors for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) death in sub-Saharan Africa and the effects of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and tuberculosis on COVID-19 outcomes are unknown. We conducted a population cohort study using linked data from adults attending public-sector health facilities in the Western Cape, South Africa. We used Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for age, sex, location, and comorbidities, to examine the associations between HIV, tuberculosis, and COVID-19 death from 1 March to 9 June 2020 among (1) public-sector “active patients” (≥1 visit in the 3 years before March 2020); (2) laboratory-diagnosed COVID-19 cases; and (3) hospitalized COVID-19 cases. We calculated the standardized mortality ratio (SMR) for COVID-19, comparing adults living with and without HIV using modeled population estimates.Among 3 460 932 patients (16% living with HIV), 22 308 were diagnosed with COVID-19, of whom 625 died. COVID19 death was associated with male sex, increasing age, diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease. HIV was associated with COVID-19 mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.70–2.70), with similar risks across strata of viral loads and immunosuppression. Current and previous diagnoses of tuberculosis were associated with COVID-19 death (aHR, 2.70 [95% CI, 1.81–4.04] and 1.51 [95% CI, 1.18–1.93], respectively). The SMR for COVID-19 death associated with HIV was 2.39 (95% CI, 1.96–2.86); population attributable fraction 8.5% (95% CI, 6.1–11.1)