Karnoprawna ochrona środowiska naturalnego

Protection of natural environment in criminal law S u m m a r y The aim of this paper is to answer the question of the formal and legal adequacy of instruments introduced to the Criminal Code to protect the natural environment. The regulation of its Chapter XXII has been analysed. The author formulates a critical assessment of the regulation and postulates gross amendments to it. The necessary systemic correction should not only consist in substantial reformulation, but also a redefinition of the delicts referred to in the analysed chapter. It seems that the redrafting works currently being conducted by the Criminal Law Codification Committee at the Minister of Justice are a good occasion to implement the necessary amendments. What is needed is the elimination of the legislative errors which are the main obstacle today, and which reduce the scope of, or the extent to which the currently available provisions are applied in practice. As a result, the symbolic and fictitious character of the protection of natural environment in criminal law would make that protection a feasible reality.La tutela penale dell’ambiente R i a s s u n t o Lo scopo dello studio è di rispondere alla domanda sulla sostanziale correttezza di natura formale e giuridica degli strumenti di tutela penale dell’ambiente introdotti nel Codice penale. Da questo punto di vista all’analisi è stato sottoposto il Capitolo XII del codice penale. In conclusione l’autore valuta la regolamentazione inclusa nel capitolo in oggetto in maniera critica e formula il postulato di procedere alla sua sostanziale modifica. Servono le modifiche sistemiche, volte alla totale riformulazione, persino alla determinazione ex novo delle trasgressioni incluse nel Capitolo XXII del codice penale. Un’ottima occasione al. fine di realizzare questo compito sono i lavori volti a proporre modifiche nella Parte specifica del Codice civile svolti dalla Commissione di Codificazione del Diritto Penale presso Il Ministero della Giustizia. Sembra che gli errori legislativi indicati nell’articolo siano la causa principale dell’applicazione limitata delle regole analizzate nella prassi investigativa e nella giustizia. Ciò significherebbe che la tutela penale dell’ambiente sia di carattere simbolico e fittizio proprio per questo motivo. Per cui la riforma postulata avrebbe lo scopo di introdurre la reale tutela dell’ambiente.1411271466Przegląd Prawa Rolneg

How to peer-review a study from the field of criminal law

Artykuł podejmuje problematykę właściwego sposobu recenzowania prac naukowych z zakresu nauk penalnych. Zawiera ona wskazanie i omówienie wszystkich koniecznych elementów recenzji naukowej w tym zakresie. Jednocześnie przedstawiono tutaj na właściwą metodologię opracowania naukowego o charakterze karnoprawnym. Na końcu zaproponowano optymalny formularz recenzji naukowej.The article describes the proper way to review scientific work from the field of the penal sciences. It includes an outline and discussion of all the necessary elements of a scientific review. The appropriate methodology of a criminal-law scientific study is also presented. Finally, a model for an optimal scientific review is proposed

Warunkowe zawieszenie wykonania kary w założeniach nowej polityki karnej

Opracowanie stanowi interdyscyplinarne studium badań nad instytucją warunkowego zawieszenia wykonania kary z perspektywy analizy dogmatycznej w płaszczyźnie prawa karnego materialnego i wynikających z niego implikacji w sferze proceduralnej oraz szeroko pojętej praktyki stosowania prawa karnego: sędziowskiej, prokuratorskiej i adwokacko-radcowskiej. Wiele miejsca poświęcono zagadnieniom z zakresu teorii i filozofii prawa karnego, umiejętnie eksponując przy tym ich wymiar praktyczny. Omówiono m.in. ustawowe przesłanki stosowania warunkowego zawieszenia, jego wady i zalety, obowiązki probacyjne związane z poddaniem sprawcy próbie

Idee nowelizacji kodeksu karnego

Praca recenzowana / peer-reviewed pape

The need for reform of the non‑code criminal law

Title of this study indicates not only its subject, but also purpose of considerations included therein. This purpose is in particular an attempt to demonstrate that currently there are well‑founded grounds to start works on a thorough reform of the substantive non‑code criminal law being in force in Poland. Currently, more than 100 laws in force contain provisions defining criminal offences. Their exact number is difficult to determine, it is certain, however, that for several years, this number has been constantly growing. That difficulty is not connected with their number, as eventually one can make an effort to review all the laws being in force, although there are several hundred. The problem is that the current laws still undergo dynamic changes, or they are “transformed” into other laws or group of laws. As a result, it is almost certain that the number of “criminal” laws at the time of counting for the purposes of this article will be different from the number at the time the reader will read it

ON METHOD OF INTERPRETING CRIMINAL REGULATIONS

The article concerns the correct method of interpreting criminal regulations. There is no doubt that the way of criminal interpretation directly influences its result. Therefore, the issue is considered as one of the most important problems in the criminal law. According to W. Wolter, representing in this matter the classical view, the act of an explanation of the criminal regulations should be based only on the logic and language rules (dogmatic way of criminal interpretation). And for his opponent, I. Andrejew, the aforesaid operation should be complemented with an explanation based on the special dynamic element, connected whit present criminal policy requirements (social needs). His view of criminal interpretation is based on functional explanation of criminal regulations. The author of the article shows both sides’ arguments and, at the end, proposes his own opinion in accordance with the dynamic interpretation

EXCLUSION OF PRESCRIPTION OF OFFENCES COMMITTED BY THE FUNCTIONARIES OF THE POLISH PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC Autor: Zawłocki, Robert

Artykuł dotyczy problematyki wyłączenia przedawnienia karalności i wykonania kary kryminalnej za umyślne przestępstwo zabójstwa, ciężkiego uszkodzenia ciała i uszczerbku na zdrowi lub pozbawienia wolności łączonego ze szczególnym udręczeniem, popełnione przez funkcjonariusza publicznego w związku z pełnieniem obowiązków służbowych (art. 105 § 2 k.k.). Analiza tej instytucji karnoprawnej została przeprowadzona w kontekście zagadnienia solidarności międzypokoleniowej. Należy stwierdzić, że instytucja nieprzedawnienia się ciężkich przestępstw popełnionych przez funkcjonariuszy PRL z art. 105 § 2 k.k., choć wyjątkowo, to jednak bezspornie stanowi karnoprawny przejaw solidarności międzypokoleniowej, rozumianej jako przejaw solidarności i sprawiedliwości społecznej. W tym wypadku państwowe prawo karania, opierając się na ściśle powiązanych przesłankach aksjologicznych i prakseologicznych, bez wątpienia stanowi szczególny element realizacji idei solidarności międzypokoleniowej.The paper features the issue of the prescription of offences and the enforcement of a sentence for homicide, grievous bodily harm, severe impairment to health or deprivation of liberty entailing particular suffering committed by a functionary in connection with the performance of his or her duties (art. 105 § 2 Penal Code). This institution of criminal law has been analysed in the context of intergenerational solidarity. It may be concluded that the ‘no prescription’ institution in respect of serious offences committed by functionaries under article 105 § 2 of the Penal Code is an unquestionable and obvious example of intergenerational solidarity understood as social solidarity and justice. In this very case, pursuant to tightly interrelated axiological and praxeological premises, the state’s right to punish clearly constitutes a particular element of implementation of the idea of intergenerational solidarity

EXCLUSION OF PRESCRIPTION OF OFFENCES COMMITTED BY THE FUNCTIONARIES OF THE POLISH PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC Autor: Zawłocki, Robert

The paper features the issue of the prescription of offences and the enforcement of a sentence for homicide, grievous bodily harm, severe impairment to health or deprivation of liberty entailing particular suffering committed by a functionary in connection with the performance of his or her duties (art. 105 § 2 Penal Code). This institution of criminal law has been analysed in the context of intergenerational solidarity. It may be concluded that the ‘no prescription’ institution in respect of serious offences committed by functionaries under article 105 § 2 of the Penal Code is an unquestionable and obvious example of intergenerational solidarity understood as social solidarity and justice. In this very case, pursuant to tightly interrelated axiological and praxeological premises, the state’s right to punish clearly constitutes a particular element of implementation of the idea of intergenerational solidarity.Artykuł dotyczy problematyki wyłączenia przedawnienia karalności i wykonania kary kryminalnej za umyślne przestępstwo zabójstwa, ciężkiego uszkodzenia ciała i uszczerbku na zdrowi lub pozbawienia wolności łączonego ze szczególnym udręczeniem, popełnione przez funkcjonariusza publicznego w związku z pełnieniem obowiązków służbowych (art. 105 § 2 k.k.). Analiza tej instytucji karnoprawnej została przeprowadzona w kontekście zagadnienia solidarności międzypokoleniowej. Należy stwierdzić, że instytucja nieprzedawnienia się ciężkich przestępstw popełnionych przez funkcjonariuszy PRL z art. 105 § 2 k.k., choć wyjątkowo, to jednak bezspornie stanowi karnoprawny przejaw solidarności międzypokoleniowej, rozumianej jako przejaw solidarności i sprawiedliwości społecznej. W tym wypadku państwowe prawo karania, opierając się na ściśle powiązanych przesłankach aksjologicznych i prakseologicznych, bez wątpienia stanowi szczególny element realizacji idei solidarności międzypokoleniowej

Against a live sentence in Polish penal law

In his critical approach to life sentence the author states that it does not correspond to the Modern times and the demands that are required from a modern criminal sentence. He thinks that a 25-year sentence has none of the main faults that a life sentence does, and has some of its solitary merits (first of all, isolationalism). A life sentence, as an exceptional one, needs, however: a) establishing special penal institutions with medical and psychological care, b) introduction of the judiciary's ability to decide on the soundness and shortening of the sentence, its recess or bail, and in the case of acquitall after serving the whole sentence, placing the person in a preventative institution (eg in specialized educational and medical institutions at various stages of isolation).Digitalizacja i deponowanie archiwalnych zeszytów RPEiS sfinansowane przez MNiSW w ramach realizacji umowy nr 541/P-DUN/201