Global ETD Search

421	A qualitative analysis of womens' experiences before, during and after imprisonment in South Africa Agboola, Caroline Aderonke 11 1900 (has links) The purpose of this thesis is to examine the experiences of South African women prior to, during and after incarceration. The theoretical bases for this study include the general strain theory (GST), feminist pathways approach and Goffman’s “total institutions”. The study made use of a qualitative research design. In-depth interviews were conducted with a total of twenty female ex-prisoners, who were selected using snowball sampling, to obtain information about their experiences during the periods indicated. The findings of the study indicated that, in respect of the three periods mentioned, the participants cited their experiences during incarceration as the most prominent as they tended to dwell more on this phase of their lives than any other phase. This is, in fact, not surprising as their narratives portrayed their lives behind bars as having been traumatic with far-reaching consequences for their lives after their incarceration. The study found that some of the participants had histories of emotional and physical abuse before their offending behaviours. It emerged that consensual same-sex sexual relationships between females in South African prisons exist and that these relationships are, sometimes, accepted by the family members of the female inmates. The participants reported that coercive sexual relationships also take place in female prisons in South Africa. It was also reported that the conditions under which females are incarcerated are, for the most part, deplorable. It emerged that the female prisoners use a unique monetary system which is based mainly on the trade by barter system. In addition, the findings revealed that female inmates often experience daunting challenges upon their release from prison, including high rates of unemployment, stigma and discrimination, family breakdown and the psychological effects of imprisonment, all of which often compound the resolve of some of the participants to live crime-free lives. / Sociology / D. Litt. et Phil. (Sociology) Female criminality Female ex-prisoners Feminist pathways approach General strain theory Goffman’s “total institutions” Incarceration Prison conditions Sexual relationships South Africa Women in prison 363.3740968 Female offenders -- South Africa Recidivism -- South Africa -- Prevention Stress (Psychology) -- South Africa Social institutions -- South Africa
422	La participation a l'infraction internationale. / The participation in the international crime Duffourc, Marie 12 December 2013 (has links) Qu’elle soit extranationale, transnationale ou internationale par nature, l’infraction internationale est toujours construite de la même manière : elle naît de la réunion d’un élément matériel et d’un élément moral, incluant parfois un élément contextuel. Cette constance structurelle dominant la diversité définitionnelle milite en faveur d’une unification des formes de la participation associées à ces infractions internationales : la spécificité de la participation à l’infraction internationale résiderait donc dans la spécificité, non des formes de la première, mais de la définition de la seconde. D’ailleurs, il n’existe que deux grands systèmes de participation applicables à l’infraction internationale : celui des juridictions pénales nationales et celui des juridictions pénales internationales. De leur comparaison, pourrait naître un système unique de participation à l’infraction internationale, permettant de mieux appréhender la criminalité collective en attribuant aux participants intellectuels une place plus juste au sein de la participation. En effet, après quelques adaptations nécessaires, il pourrait être fait appel au critère mixte du contrôle sur l’infraction internationale, développé récemment par la Cour pénale internationale, pour distinguer les formes principales des formes secondaires de la participation à l’infraction internationale. Ainsi, seraient des participants principaux les agents qui, avec l’état d’esprit idoine, prennent le contrôle de l’infraction internationale (coauteurs et auteurs intellectuels), tandis que seraient des participants secondaires les agents qui ne prennent pas un tel contrôle (complices par aide ou assistance et subordonnants). / Can it be extranational, transnational or international by nature, the international crime is always the same : it needs the reunion of a material element and a moral element, sometimes including a contextual element. This structural constancy, which dominates the definitional diversity, inclines us to campaign for the unification of the participation forms associated to the whole international crimes. In other words, the specifity of the participation in the international crime would be less due to the specifity of the first one’s forms than to the specifity of the second one’s definition. Now, there are only two grand systems of participation in the international crime : the one applied by the national criminal jurisdictions and the one applied by the international criminal jurisdictions. From the comparison of these two systems, it is possible to imagine a unique system of participation in the international crime, permitting a better understanding of the collective criminality by attributing a righter role to the intellectual participants within the participation. More precisely, and after a few necessary adaptations, control over the international crime, which is a mixed criterion recently developed by the International Criminal Court, could be used to distinguish the main forms from the secondary forms of participation in the international crime. Thus, main participants might be those who, with the suitable state of mind, take control over the international crime (co-perpetrators and intellectual perpetrators) while secondary participants might be those who don’t take such a control (accomplices by aid and assistance and “subordinators”). Abstention Action intellectuelle Action matérielle Action par un intermédiaire Aide Assistance Autorité Capacité d’influence Causalité Coaction Complicité Contrôle Emprunt de criminalité Entente Entreprise criminelle commune Fait d’autrui Imputation Infraction collective Infraction internationale Instigation Participation principale Participation secondaire Subordination Abstention Aiding and abetting Authority Borrowing of criminality Capacity of influence Causality Collective crime Commission through another person Common plan Complicity Control Co-Perpetration Imputation Instigation Joint criminal enterprise Intellectual perpetration International crime Material perpetration Order Principal participation Secondary participation Subordination 340
423	La coaction en droit pénal / Co-perpetration in criminal law Baron, Elisa 07 December 2012 (has links) Le coauteur est traditionnellement défini en droit pénal comme l’individu qui, agissant avec un autre, réunit sur sa tête l’ensemble des éléments constitutifs de l’infraction. Pourtant, il est permis de douter de la pertinence de cette affirmation tant la jurisprudence comme la doctrine en dévoient le sens.En réalité, loin d’être cantonnée à une simple juxtaposition d’actions, la coaction doit être appréhendée comme un mode à part entière de participation à l’infraction. En effet, elle apparaît comme un titre d’imputation à mi-chemin entre l’action et la complicité, auxquelles elle emprunte certains caractères. Autrement dit, elle se révèle être un mode de participation à sa propre infraction. Surtout, son particularisme est assuré par l’interdépendance unissant les coauteurs : parce que chacun s’associe à son alter ego, tous sont placés sur un pied d’égalité. Ces différents éléments, qui se retrouvent dans sa notion et dans son régime, permettent ainsi d’affirmer la spécificité de la coaction tout en renforçant la cohérence entre les différents modes de participation criminelle. / In criminal law, the co-perpetrator is classically presented as an individual who, acting jointly with another, gathers all the constitutive elements of the offence. However, one may harbor doubts concerning the relevance of this assertion since both case law and legal scholars denature its meaning.Actually, far from being limited to a mere juxtaposition of perpetrations, co-perpetration must be understood as a full mode of participation in the offence. Indeed, it appears as a form of imputation halfway between perpetration and complicity, from which it borrows some characteristics. In other words, it proves to be a mode of participation in one’s own offence. Above all, its particularism is provided by the interdependence between the co-perpetrators : because each of them joins forces with his alter ego, all are placed on an equal footing. These elements, which are found both in it’s concept and in it’s regime, demonstrate thereby the specificity of co-perpetration while strengthening the coherence of the different modes of criminal participation. Action Aide Autorité Causalité Circonstances agravantes Chef d’entreprise Chose jugée Commencement d’exécution Communication pénale Compétence Complicité Connexité Emprunt de criminalité Entente Faits justificatifs Fautes concurrentes Fautes conjuguées Filiale Groupe de sociétés Imprudence Imprudence commune Indivisibilité Infraction collective Instigation Intention Interdépendance Participation Peine justifiée Personne morale Préposé, Résultat Solidarité Subordination Tentative Violences collectives Perpetration Aiding and abetting Authority Causal link Aggravating circumstances Civilian superiors Res judicata Initiation of execution Criminal communication Jurisdiction Complicity Connexity Borrowing of criminality Common plan Justifications Subsidiary Group of companies Recklessness Collective recklessness Imputability Imputation Indivisibility Collective offence Instigation Intent Interdependence Participation Justified sentence Legal persons Agent Solidarity, subordination Attempt Collective violence 340
424	Opomenutí v trestním právu / Omissions in Criminal Law Kučera, Pavel January 2018 (has links) Omissions in Crimial Law Abstract The submitted thesis represents a relatively comprehensive, and given the contemporary state of the domestic criminal law theory, also a quite complex elaboration of questions associated with the phenomenon of omission in criminal law. From my point of view, the text itself deals with all significant problems related to criminal liability for omissive conduct. This concerns in particular the subject matter associated with the institution of omission within the doctrine of substantive criminal law, the term of omission in criminal law and the reason and historical evolution of criminalization of omission. Furthermore, the thesis deals with the individual types of criminal omissions and questions associated therewith, including a note of the differences between the traditional dual distinction on the one hand and the newer triple distinction of criminal omissions on the other, while comprising the emphasis of shortcomings of the traditional approach and the advantages of the newer concept. Saying that, in the most part the thesis focuses on the newer approach towards criminal liability for omission and it describes the foundation points thereof in great detail, since I consider it to be the key subject of this dissertation. I also comment on the very important subject of...

Page generated in 0.0657 seconds