Voice in the discussion on some legislative answers brought in to the Polish Penal Code with the amendment from 20 February 2015
Journal Title: The Polish Journal of Criminology - Year 2015, Vol 1, Issue 1
Abstract
In the history of Polish penal law, year 2015 will most certainly be remembered as time of signifi-cant changes, primarily in terms of the shape of normative principles and adjudication of penalty measures. Although there has been no adoption of a new penal codification, but formally only an amendment of the existing one of 6 June 1997, yet since the Makarewicz’s Code no other such significant modifications have been made to the system of penal law reaction to the crimi-nal acts. The changes were introduced by two identically named acts, established within a month apart - the first law of 20 February 2015, which came into effect on 1 July 2015, and the second act of March 20 2015, in force since 18 May 2015.The implementation of one of the basic assumptions of the amendment to the current penal codi-fication, which aims to drastically reduce the use of imprisonment with a conditional suspension of its execution in favour of non-custodial penalties, is the new normalization provided in article 37a p. p. c. It is even dubbed one of the „pillars of the reform”. Even before July 1 2015, the controversy surrounding the rudimentary questions about the characteristics of juridical legislative solution con-tained in the article 37a p. p. c. was outlined in the literature. It is worth drawing attention to so called sins of omission of the legislator who decided not to intro-duce changes to some penal regulations, despite their obvious need.At the time of acceding to work on amending the current penal codification of 1997 - theoretically having to remove defectiveness of the current solutions – it seemed quite obvious that the changes will be made to a relatively often used in practice structure, which from the beginning of its function-ing generated numerous controversies. The success of amendment to the Polish Penal Code will be determined, above all, by the effectiveness of the execution of modified penalty measures.<br/><br/>
Authors and Affiliations
Janusz Raglewski
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP187309
- DOI -
- Views 98
- Downloads 0
Zadania kontrolne kuratora sądowego dla dorosłych wykonującego orzeczenie/a sądu
Celem niniejszego opracowania jest przedstawienie w sposób skondensowany zadań realizowanych przez kuratora sądowego dla dorosłych w systemie polskiej polityki karnej. Z uwagi na charakter oraz sam temat niniejszego opra...
Znaczenie diagnozy resocjalizacyjnej w pracy kuratora sądowego dla dorosłych
Zgodnie z przepisami Kodeksu karnego oraz Kodeksu karnego wykonawczego, które obowiązują w Polsce, zarówno w postępowaniu przygotowawczym, jak i w postępowaniu egzekucyjnym, sąd powinien podejmować decyzje w oparciu o in...
Privatization of Prisons - Old or New Problem? Perspective for Poland.
At the moment, we are witnessing an ever stronger expansion of the private sector in the criminal policy of modern States. This issue is also noticeable on the Polish ground. A particular expression of this issue is the...
Stosowanie środków zabezpieczających w Polsce jako forma ochrony społeczeństwa przed niektórymi sprawcami przestępstw. Rola kuratora sądowego w ich wykonywaniu
W Polsce w 2015 r. dokonano poważnej reformy w zakresie orzekania i wykonywania środków zabezpieczających. W jej wyniku poszerzono nie tylko katalog możliwych do zastosowania środków, ale też krąg osób wobec których taki...
Penology at source: Francis Lieber
This article presents the person of Francis Lieber, an American intellectual of German origin, who lived in the 19th century. During his life he was interested in many issues, inter alia criminal punishment and prison sy...