PiS came to power, promising among stiffer penalties for the most serious crimes. Mr. collaborated with the Ministers of Justice: Lech Kaczynski and Zbigniew Ziobro. Is it true that the courts are lenient treat perpetrators of violent crime?
Poland is one of the smoothest punishing countries. Both in terms of practice and the regulations. With this, the practice is even more liberal than the rules.
Why is it so often goes with us after a suspended sentence, after extraordinary leniency or decides to close lower risks for violent crime?
the criminal Code establishes penalties priority to freedom, as the restriction of freedom or even imprisonment with conditional suspension of execution of the insulation. Kara absolute deprivation of liberty – ie prison – is designed to be an exceptional punishment. This train of thought imposes courts legislator. For the authors of the Criminal Code of 1997. In the comments clearly they emphasize that the court should always go lower limit penalties, and increase it only in case of a particularly aggravating circumstances the offender. My research shows that in practice maturing judgments are very close to the minimum. In fact, judges use a 1/3 or 1/4 of the available range of punishment, of course, starting at a minimum. They use this schematic only a few levels of fines, generally even-numbered, constituting a multiple of 6 months. Most often predicated punishment is thus one year imprisonment. The next popular dimensions are: punishment two years or 18 months.
A sentence of imprisonment work?
Via the last 25 years we have been accustomed to the idea that such penalties do not bring the desired results, so there is no sense to reach them.
you agree with this?
Absolutely not. Imprisonment allows isolation of criminals, has a deterrent effect. The criminal justice system – the way its shape – affects the crime rate.
But we repeat that the importance of a quick response criminal, not the amount of the penalty.
There’s a point, but only a little. Przełóżmy is a specific example. Is if convicted rapist in one day sentenced to one day of arrest, we will have to deal with criminal accurate response? Absolutely not. The speed in this case will not do anything.
So what is more important: the rate or severity?
When it comes for the cause of a vandal who anointed the bus stop, then I can imagine the expedited procedure under 24-hour courts and a relatively mild punishment. But in the case of a rapist would not want at the price of speed has been sentence mild.
So when the little things the speed of the proceedings and the inevitability of punishment should be more important?
probably. But please note the paradox: when introduced in 2007. Courts 24-hour, this is our doctrine of criminal law is not approached this with enthusiasm. The idea met with criticism. And I might add that for a period of two years of practical operation of this mode is resolved in this way nearly 10 percent. all criminal cases.
The penalty should therefore be harsh?
The penalty should be adequate to the evil that has been caused. It should just be fair. And by the way has to provide the public an adequate level of security.
Are you a supporter of tightening the penal code?
Yes, but not about the tightening of penalties for all. At one time appealed eg. By so-called decriminalization. drunken bike. The problem is that our law does not punish – and should – perpetrators of serious crimes against life and health. Polish penal system is not only benign, it is also absurd. We have a justice chaotic. How else to call it, that rapist gets two years in the hinges and enjoys the freedom and drunk cyclist recently sat three years in prison?
It is unfortunate when the judicial dimension penalties does not correspond to the social sense of justice?
People can not leave the court with a sense of injustice. The legislature should set the allowable penalties to suit the social sense of justice. Of course, there should be provision allowing the court to extraordinary mitigation of punishment or tighten depending on the circumstances. But as a general rule of discretion of the court typically must be much smaller than it is today. Staying with the crime of rape: Code uses the threat from 2 years to 12 years in prison, but you also recently punishable mixed and convict the perpetrator eg. One month imprisonment and a month restriction of liberty, that is, for example, social work. Interval from 1 month to 12 years allows courts to enormous flexibility in the sentence.
That should be raised as lower risks laws?
Yes. Parliament should consider, eg., Whether in a typical case of rape the perpetrator really deserves to two years imprisonment, or the minimum penalty should not be much higher – and in my opinion it should be. The question also whether or not we should introduce the jury to criminal matters.
But it was withdrawing from the typical systems of the Anglo-Saxon adversarial in criminal proceedings.
In criminal cases we have two problems. One – the level of the fine, the second – from the controversial qualification actions. The jury could help solve them. For example, someone punching knife in the back or jumping by the perpetrators after the victim’s head is considered by our courts as beating fatal. And any reasonable person feel that we are dealing with murder. The perpetrators may not want to kill the direct intention, but at least on this reconciled. So it was – to put legal language – recklessness, which is very close to the action with intention. The jury could say in this situation: we recognize that this murder, because fatal was not something accidental. Now the justification of the courts as to the eligibility of individual actions raise many doubts. And I remember that for murder threatens even a life sentence, and for beating fatal – from one year to 10 years in prison.
Comparing Poland to other EU countries or the US, we have liberal criminal law?
Of course. Recently, an English judge, condemning the Pole for the brutal rape of Polish women in Britain, expressed surprise that the man he was convicted of a similar offense in Poland, barely three years in prison, and then he went to England, where he committed another serious crime of the same kind. At what punishment condemn this man our judgment for re-offense?
In the optimistic scenario, a few years in prison.
And what punishment the court sentenced him English? To life in prison. Obviously convicted probably a dozen years will be able to leave the prison, but everything will depend on the assessment of the risk posed. Besides, if you come out, there will always be monitored. Our law does not permit a decision for life imprisonment, even when rape with particular cruelty or rape resulting in death. The same is true with us with the heavy bodily injury resulting in death. Even the system of French and German provides more opportunities to tighten punishment for the most serious crimes.
Why do professors of criminal law is dominated by liberal approach to discipline?
The PRL-ish was very repressive. Also in the field of criminal law. In response to the past and the then opposition elite recognized unless you have to go the other way: towards a mild state. Except that both then and now they menace to society and they are criminals criminals. There was no reason to mitigate the approach to them. The liberal trend in our legal thought prevails for several years. At the same time it is not based on any evidence. On ignores reality, research, social sentiment. According to the motto: if the theory does not agree with the facts, the worse for the facts. According to the mainstream of a society they are wrong in your sense of justice and fairness, and the lawyers know better.
Is the reign of PO-PSL tightened criminal responsibility for the most serious crimes?
Penal Code in the years 2008-2015 was revised from nearly 50 times. There has been a significant easing of criminal responsibility. Of key importance were two changes.
What?
The first concerned an increase in the threshold at which the theft, vandalism and receiving stolen goods is a crime, and no offense: from 250 zł to 1/4 of the minimum wage. Currently, it is 420 zł. This resulted in a reclassification of approx. 50 thousand. crimes offenses.
Is it wrong?
This is a misunderstanding. They moved a large part of the category of offenses of theft, thrown into one bag with actions such as passing a red light. Then we show that the Germans or Swedes have a greater crime than us. But they count all crimes, not artificially divide them. Western countries treat theft as a crime regardless of the value. Initially, the government refused to accept even a threshold of 1 thousand. zł, but after protests retailers lowered the threshold.
achieved thanks to the effect of: paper decreased the number of crimes.
No. Its effect was such that people are less safe. The number of crimes decreased, but the number of deeds. It is possible that even increased. Because criminals feel more impunity.
Why?
The culprit is not listed in the National Register of Criminal no so the possibility of applying to it the rules on recidivism. Threshold of approx. 400 zł is half of the lowest pensions. It is difficult to agree with the assertion that the theft of half of the pensioner’s monthly income is only a misdemeanor, not a felony. And finally the most important: the police chasing the offense with much less enthusiasm than a crime, and therefore the victims will be less likely to report the perpetration of such acts.
A second change?
in July last year, they came into effect systemic changes in the penal code. One really upset upside down our entire criminal justice system. They deprive him of teeth. This was done in a particular way: the amendments? the provisions of the general part of the Code, leaving unchanged threats provided in the specific section, which is where the code says how much risk eg. for murder or rape.
But it was the whole package of changes . All were wrong?
Catastrophic were those that allow you to deviate from the statutory size of the penalties provided for in the specific section of the Code, which deals with specific crimes. As for the possibility of the so-called ruling. mixed penalties, or fines of several months’ imprisonment, which may be conditionally suspended, in conjunction with the punishment? restriction of liberty from a month to several years. Suddenly, that can be the gateway to use and punishable mixed with the most severe misdemeanors, for example. Assault resulting in death, rape, intercourse sexual intercourse with a child under the age of 15, forced into prostitution, accepting financial benefit in connection with the performance of public functions. But also with armed robbery and theft and extortion. After a fine mixed, you can also reach the assault resulting in serious damage to health, for example. Cutting off hands or feet, blinding. Not only that, in the case of overlapping of such acts, eg. If the offender raped and blinded victim to avoid identification, it can be punishable mixed.
But the punishment mixed introduced to the courts ceased so readily decide a suspended sentence.
you can not cure cholera plague. If we talk about stealing a candy bar at the store, it can actually short the punishment is jail sentence appropriate. It makes no sense to suspend execution of the sentence, even theoretically longer, better use a shorter sentence, and the real. But change related issues typically more serious. A complete misconception is that such easing concern serious crimes directed against life and human health. In support of the project Criminal Law Codification Commission have not found a trace of argument, why introduced the ability to rule on penalties mixed against such serious crimes.
And rightly been extraordinary mitigation of punishment – art. 60a K. K., that is, the mere submission of an application for submission to penalty without a hearing or a trial? Especially that related to both offenses and crimes.
For me controversial is whether the fact that the offender agrees to punish, justify mitigation of punishment. I think is some room in the criminal process to opportunism, and thus offer a little more lenient punishment if, for example. Cooperates with the offender to justice. In Anglo-Saxon countries have courts guides sentencing. It seems to be the legislature and are binding for the third power. They provide eg., The typical punishment eg. For rape should be between 10 to 12 years. For collaborating with justice the perpetrator can receive a fine of less 1/3. But the extraordinary mitigation of punishment in Poland is based on a sentence below the minimum danger – it can not be consent, because here clemency to the offender becomes a mockery of justice.
What are the consequences can bring changes made by the previous government?
the result of these changes, a further relaxation of the already mild case law of criminal courts. As a result of criminal law to stop responding fairly to the evil incurred. It will be less effective in reducing the crime rate.
The Ministry of Justice, which again directs Zbigniew Ziobro, is working on amendments to the penal code. In what direction should they go?
should move away from hazardous regulations introduced recently. Especially fine mixed. Article 60a – allowing for extraordinary mitigation – already eliminated during the revision of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It should also be remodeled responsibility for serious transgressions. Most of them should be crimes. Robbery, grievous bodily harm, assault resulting in death, rape – this is a very serious crime, which in other countries are crimes, and with us they should be treated as such. They should definitely be increased lower risk laws in these cases. We need to rebuild the provisions on recidivism to have the tools for a more severe reaction in case of offenders returning to the most serious crimes of violence. To this should also remodel the principle of self-defense.
In what direction? Expand its borders?
Enter the principle that the perpetrator has to fear the consequences of their actions, not the victim. In this perspective, the person defending themselves from attack bears a responsibility only if the full knowledge and intention of deliberately chose defense too far, despite the fact that another would be equally good for repelling the attack.
a matter of combining punishment?
Polish law in this matter, we have a real hodgepodge. Penalties shall be combined, but the total penalty is meted out on top of the penalties imposed to the sum of the penalties. Courts rule close to the minimum, rarely they go beyond that. So if someone has made 10 acts for which the sentence one year imprisonment, it will get as a penalty totaling half of the year, although it could get even 10 years.
Penalties should be aggregated automatically?
It would not be right solution. If someone rob 10 cellars and theft for each year will get is the summation would serve 10 years. Such a penalty would not be adequate. But you have to introduce a system of strictly judicial discretion. The starting point could be the highest of the sentence imposed, but for each subsequent offense would add another necessary part of the sentence to be served. Besides, we have another problem, which should solve the legislator. It concerns the accumulation of qualifications, when one act the perpetrator has features of several crimes, for example. We have rape of unintentional fatal. Currently, this type of action does not entail any increase in the penalty for the offender. Similarly, when the rape cause grievous bodily harm. And yet we feel that in this case the reaction the criminal should be more severe. Finally, they need to be introduced strict laws against recidivism. If the perpetrator once again commits a serious crime, particularly violent and sexual, it must be isolated for many years in prison, sometimes for life – modeled on American law three times, and after you. Lifetime insulation killers should be the standard.
You are a supporter of the death penalty?
moderate. I know that because of international obligations of its introduction in Poland is not possible. However, if asked me, lady, and I think this penalty to be fair, it would answer that in some cases the death penalty is the only just punishment.
And what is the case?
the murder with premeditation, with ulterior motives or with particular cruelty. In these cases, my sense of justice tells me that the death penalty would be appropriate to the action.
If you’re a supporter of tightening responsibility for the most serious crimes, how would you solved the problem of overcrowded goal ? When zaostrzymy penalty, we will have a problem with the number of inmates. This argument often cited by proponents of liberal punishment.
I do not buy this argument. Of course, prisons cost. But criminals at large cost us even more. My research shows that crime costs Poland 5 percent per year. GDP. Isolation of criminals is not so bad, is profitable. More profitable to keep hardened offenders in prison than let allowed to do any damage to the public.
No comments:
Post a Comment