DOCSLIB.ORG

DC/04 DRAFT CRIMINAL CODE and COMMENTARY 31 May 2010

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DC/04 DRAFT CRIMINAL CODE and COMMENTARY 31 May 2010 Doc. No.: DC/04 Doc. No.: DC/04 DRAFT CRIMINAL CODE AND COMMENTARY 31 May 2010 Page 1 of 329 Doc. No.: DC/04 Page 2 of 329 Doc. No.: DC/04 INTRODUCTION Contents 1. This draft integrates all of the work done to date on the Draft Criminal Code, thus realising one of the principal aims of codification: digesting the sources of law into a single instrument. In line with the Advisory Committee’s First Programme of Work 2008-2009, the draft contains six numbered Parts, of which Part 2: Homicide Offences takes the form of an indicative heading only, to signal the fact that the Advisory Committee is mindful of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform’s request that homicide offences be included in the inaugural criminal code. Subject to a successful outcome of the upcoming review of the codification project by the Department, it is envisaged that the codification of homicide offences, and their eventual insertion into the Draft Criminal Code, will take place post review. 2. The remaining Parts are as follows: Part 1: General Principles; Part 3: Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person; Part 4: Theft and Fraud and Related Offences; Part 5: Criminal Damage Offences; Part 6: Public Order Offences. Parts 2-6 have been sequenced in descending order of seriousness. (a) The General Part 3. Part 1, dealing with general principles, is incomplete in the sense that it is currently confined to the rules of inculpation affecting such matters as the objective and faults elements of an offence, causation and consent; remaining matters of preliminary and general concern (such as provisions on the objectives of the Code, scope of the General Part, principles of construction, as well the articulation of the rules governing proof of criminal responsibility, double jeopardy, jurisdictional issues and general time limitations etc) and the general defences to a criminal charge will be added at a later date. Broadly speaking, this division of labour is designed to ensure that the bulk of the rules affecting the meaning and scope of offence definitions can now be seen in fully codified form. It also illustrates how the general principles codified in Part 1 interact with the offences codified in Parts 3-6; and how this interaction contributes to greater certainty and consistency when interpreting and applying offence provisions. (b) The Special Part 4. Parts 3-6 inclusive are complete in the sense that all of the matter pertaining to their respective areas of substantive law has been included; although it goes without saying that these Parts will be kept under review as work on the Draft Code progresses. In addition, the current draft reflects the suggestions and observations made by the Advisory Committee in respect of earlier drafts. 5. Moreover, the relevant procedural, evidential and ancillary provisions have been included in the form of code chapters (as distinct from schedules) in all four substantive law Parts following the Advisory Committee’s recommendation to that effect. Pending detailed consideration of the matter by the Advisory Page 3 of 329 Doc. No.: DC/04 Committee, the technique of codification (described below in paragraphs 7-23) has not as yet been systematically applied to this material. (c) Codifying homicide offences and the general defences 6. Although the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has yet to take a formal view on the matter, it seems likely that the completion of Part 1: General Principles, and work on Part 2: Homicide Offences, will take the form of codifying the draft Bills in these areas recently published (or, in the case of inchoate offences, shortly to be published) by the Law Reform Commission. With the exception of two proposals affecting the scope of the mental element in murder and the limits of the offence of conspiracy, respectively, these draft Bills are largely declaratory of the common law in their respective areas. So it would seem sensible to “codify” them as they are, as opposed to waiting until such time as the relevant legislation has been introduced and passed, and then codifying the resultant law. At all events, pending any decision the Department may make, the Advisory Committee may wish to consider this matter, along with other issues bearing on the future development of the Draft Code, during the period of the upcoming review. The technique of codification (a) The role of restatement 7. Unlike its more exotic cognates, the model of codification employed in the current draft is essentially a form of enhanced restatement. Apart from changes necessitated by the offence template (see section (c), below), the introduction of the triple fault alternative (see paragraphs 28-34, below) and the division of labour between the General and Special Parts, the emphasis throughout has been on preserving the integrity of the original statutory offence. Accordingly, there are no instances of law reform save those inherent in the codification process - such as the “plugging” of gaps in mens rea and the standardisation of fault terms in order to promote consistency and certainty across the Code (this issue is discussed in more detail in the Explanatory Notes to Head 1106 (Fault Elements)). 8. Similarly, in respect of the common law rules and principles codified in Part 1, the emphasis has also been on restatement; the aim has been to reduce the general principles of criminal liability to statutory form. Moreover, only those rules and principles which can be regarded as having been definitively settled by the courts have been fully codified. Where matters are still uncertain, as in the case of some of the rules bearing on the issue of consent, the relevant provisions have been codified in headline form only, leaving room for further development and clarification by the courts. (b) Suggestions for law reform 9. Where work on the draft has suggested that there may be a need for limited law reform in a particular area, or where a member of the Advisory Committee has made an arguable case that such reform may be desirable, a suggestion to that Page 4 of 329 Doc. No.: DC/04 effect has been made in the Explanatory Notes to the relevant Head; see, for example, note 10 to Head 6108, suggesting that the penalties for riot and violent disorder may need to be adjusted to reflect the relative seriousness of these offences. (c) The use of a standardised offence template 10. Offences have been codified in two stages. First, in the interests of consistency and accessibility, each offence has been formatted in accordance with the standard offence template outlined in the Committee’s First Programme of Work 2008- 2009, paragraph 2.17. Thus offence names now form part of the offence definition, while offence definitions across the Draft Criminal Code now have the form: “A person commits the offence of x if he or she…” Similarly, where relevant, exemptions from liability are rendered in the form: “A person does not commit an offence under this Head if…” (d) The role of element analysis 11. Second, by way of promoting consistency and certainty in the application of the law, the actus reus of each offence has been broken down into three component parts in accordance with the principles of element analysis: viz., conduct, circumstance and result elements. By the same token, mens rea has been disaggregated as intention, knowledge and recklessness, and each of these terms has in turn been defined to reflect the exigencies of the particular objective element to which it is being applied. The details of this aspect of the technique of codification, together with the principles of element analysis on which it is based, are set out in the Explanatory Notes to Heads 1102 (Objective Elements) and 1106 (Fault Elements). The practical benefits of element analysis are illustrated in the analytic grid accompanying each codified offence. (e) Offence names 12. In contradistinction to current legislative policy on the matter, an attempt has been made to fashion a consistent approach to the naming of offences. Broadly speaking, the following principles have been applied: (i) offence names should accurately reflect, though not necessarily spell out exhaustively, the content of an offence; (ii) where possible, offence names should be reasonably generic so as to facilitate future amendment without excessive degradation; (iii) in the interests of accessibility, offence names should be reasonably short so that they can be incorporated into the text of offence definitions without adding undue bulk. These principles should be read in conjunction with the discussion of code degradation in sections (g) and (h), below. (f) The policy of “one offence per Head” 13. Generally speaking, a policy of “one offence per Head” has been pursued throughout the draft. The advantages of the “one offence per Head” policy are twofold. First, it aids accessibility by aligning cross headings with offence names, and by making the Code’s table of contents clearer and more informative for professional and ordinary users alike. Second, by ensuring that each offence Page 5 of 329 Doc. No.: DC/04 has a distinct section number, the “one offence per Head” policy arguably helps to reduce the risk of error by Gardaí and prosecutors when charges are being framed. (g) The aggravating factor model 14. Where it was felt that the pursuit of the “one offence per Head” policy would lead to needless offence proliferation, what might be described as an integrated aggravating factor model has been employed. The essence of this model is that the aggravating factor is provided for within the Head dealing with the baseline offence, instead of being treated as a separate offence in a standalone Head as per the non-integrated version of the aggravating factor model – as used, for example, in aggravated assault in Head 3105.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • RE-VISITING the FRAUD ACT 2006 – a STEP TOO FAR? Hannah Willcocks
    RE-VISITING THE FRAUD ACT 2006 – A STEP TOO FAR? Hannah Willcocks Brought into force on 15th January 2007,1 the Fraud Act 2006 (‘the Act’) has now been part of the criminal law of England and Wales for over 12 years. Through the introduction of a new general offence of fraud, its aim was to improve the law by making it: a. more comprehensible to juries, especially in serious fraud trials; b. a useful tool in effective prosecutions; c. simpler and therefore fairer; and d. more flexible so able to encompass all forms of fraud 2 and “deal with developing technology”.3 Following the Act’s implementation, it has generally4 been accepted5 that the Act has managed to overcome the vast majority of the difficulties previously encountered with the old offences of deception.6 In 2012, in its Post-Legislative Assessment of the Fraud Act 2006, the Ministry of Justice (‘MoJ’) concluded that the aims and objectives of the 1 The Fraud Act 2006 (Commencement) Order 2006 (SI 2006/3200). 2 Law Commission, Fraud (Law Com No 276, Cm 5560, 2002), para 1.6. 3 Home Office, Fraud Law Reform: Consultation on Proposals for Legislation (2004) p. 5. 4 For a contrary view see Anthony Arlidge QC, Jonathan Fisher QC, Alexander Milne QC and Polly Sprenger, Arlidge and Parry on Fraud (5th edn, Sweet & Maxwell 2016) 44, para 3-005. 5 See e.g. Simester and Sullivan’s Criminal Law, Theory and Doctrine (5th edn, Hart Publishing Ltd 2013) 610; Andrew Ashworth & Jeremy Horder, Principles of Criminal Law (7th edn, Oxford University Press 2013) 405; Carol Withey ‘The Fraud Act 2006 – some early observations and comparisons with the former law’ (2007) 71(3) Journal of Criminal Law, 220 – 237, 228 – 236; Nicholas Yeo, ‘Bull’s-Eye’, 157 NLJ 212 & 418.
    [Show full text]
  • Crimes Act 2016
    REPUBLIC OF NAURU Crimes Act 2016 ______________________________ Act No. 18 of 2016 ______________________________ TABLE OF PROVISIONS PART 1 – PRELIMINARY ....................................................................................................... 1 1 Short title .................................................................................................... 1 2 Commencement ......................................................................................... 1 3 Application ................................................................................................. 1 4 Codification ................................................................................................ 1 5 Standard geographical jurisdiction ............................................................. 2 6 Extraterritorial jurisdiction—ship or aircraft outside Nauru ......................... 2 7 Extraterritorial jurisdiction—transnational crime ......................................... 4 PART 2 – INTERPRETATION ................................................................................................ 6 8 Definitions .................................................................................................. 6 9 Definition of consent ................................................................................ 13 PART 3 – PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY ................................................. 14 DIVISION 3.1 – PURPOSE AND APPLICATION ................................................................. 14 10 Purpose
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Criminal Liability
    Criminal Law G153 PPRINCIPLES OF CCRIMINAL LLIABILITY 22:: Mens Rea By the end of this unit, you will be able to: Explain what is meant by the term ‘mens rea’ and illustrate your explanation with cases Understand what is meant by the terms: o Direct intent, o Oblique intent, o Specific & basic intent. Explain the current legal test for recklessness, and understand how the test evolved. Explain the scope of the doctrine of transferred malice and how the courts have developed the concept of coincidence. You will also be able to evaluate: The development of the law on oblique intent and the proposals for reforming it. The limitations of the doctrines of coincidence and transferred malice. Homework During this unit, you will be set the following. In completing homework, you will be expected to do your own research and supplement your own notes. This is essential to show understanding. 1. Complete Homework Sheet (2) 2. Complete Case Cards for Actus Reus and Mens Rea. End of Unit Assessment As with AS, you will sit a DRAG test on elements, but this will be done at the end of this unit. You will also complete the following problem question (from Part B of the exam), which we will plan in lesson time, and you will then write up in timed circumstances as your termly assessment. Wayne belongs to a terrorist organisation. He telephones the police to say that he has placed a bomb in a van on Westminster Bridge and confirms that it is timed to explode in fifteen minutes. The police telephone operator mistakenly thinks that Wayne has said 'fifty minutes' and immediately communicates this information to his superior officer.
    [Show full text]
  • The British Journal of Inebriety
    4 The British Journal of Inebriety SOME MEDICO-LEGAL RELATIONS OF INTEMPERANCE. BY STANLEY B. ATKINSON, M.A., M.B., B.Sc. Of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law. IT is just three centuries since an Act was passed which first penalized “the loathesome and odious sin of drunkenness . to the great dishonour of God, and abusively wasting the good creatures of God.” Since then many pertinent questions relative to forensic proceedings have been raised for discussion by those interested in the possible medico-legal associations of the man addicted to POTUS. There are questions of immediate fact, involving skilled medical evidence; they rank as illustrations, and arise in the mass of unreported cases concerning intemperance. Thus, how can the condition of incipient or profound drunkenness be proved for practical purposes and differentiated from certain comparable disorders? In other words, Was this private citizen or that public servant “under the influence of drink ” as alleged at a stated time ? It is to be remembered in this connection that the fact of intoxication, if and when alleged in court, must be proved un- deniably by the affirmer ; for not only may the Bench or the jury be semi-sympathetic with the u weakness,” but the law presumes sobriety in all men. Again, the fact may be questioned, 1s this man ‘‘ an habitual drunkard ” ? There are also numerous occa- sions demanding the application of principles of law; when judicially decided, they rank as precedents. Thus, the fact of actual drunkenness, or of mental debility owing to the chronic abuse of intoxicants, being established, what possible legal con- sequences-advantageous or disadvantageous-can result ? Con- The British Journal of Inebriety 5 sidering the assertion that many men, on recovery from a bout of drinking, disclaim any desire to have become drunk, is it always right to speak of voluntarizcs dmon, or, with Baron Alderson, of " a madness for which the madman is to blame " (R.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 10 General Offenses
    CHAPTER 10 General Offenses Article I Offenses and Miscellaneous Provisions Sec. 10-1 Definitions generally Sec. 10-2 Legislative intent Sec. 10-3 Affirmative defenses Sec. 10-4 Penalty Sec. 10-5 Parental responsibility for acts of minor children Sec. 10-6 Attempts; aiding, abetting or advising Sec. 10-7 Accessory to crime Article II Property Sec. 10-21 Trespass Sec. 10-22 Interference with use of public property Sec. 10-23 Parking on private premises Sec. 10-24 Littering Article III Damage or Destruction Sec. 10-41 Public property generally Sec. 10-42 Criminal mischief Sec. 10-43 Posters Article IV Theft and Related Offenses Sec. 10-61 Theft generally Sec. 10-62 Bad checks Sec. 10-63 Theft of rental property Sec. 10-64 Joyriding Sec. 10-65 Shoplifting Sec. 10-66 Price switching Sec. 10-67 Theft by receiving Sec. 10-68 Questioning of person suspected of theft without liability Article V Public Health and Safety Sec. 10-81 Abandoned containers Sec. 10-82 Storage of flammable liquids in vehicles Sec. 10-83 Storage of construction materials Sec. 10-84 Contamination of water Sec. 10-85 Poisonous substances Sec. 10-86 Cruelty to animals Sec. 10-87 Hunting and feeding of wildlife prohibited Sec. 10-88 Fire bans Article VI Morals Sec. 10-101 Lewd conduct Sec. 10-102 Obscene conduct Sec. 10-103 Indecent books or demonstrations Article VII Public Peace Sec. 10-121 Disorderly conduct Sec. 10-122 Disrupting lawful assembly Sec. 10-123 Loitering Sec. 10-124 Unlawful assembly Sec. 10-125 Unlawful interference; educational institutions 10-1 Sec.
    [Show full text]
  • Omissions and Criminal Liability
    OMISSIONS AND CRIMINAL LIABILITY J. PAUL McCUTCHEON INTRODUCTION The question of liability for omissions raises issues of profound significance for the criminal law. While discussion thereof might be predominently theoretical - in practice prosecutors are likely to encounter few omissions cases - it is nevertheless impOltant as it embraces consideration of the proper scope of the criminal law, its function in the prevention of harm and the en­ couragement of socially beneficial conduct and the practical effectiveness and limits of the criminal sanction. Although it has not been seriously considered by Irish courts the issue has attracted the attention of courts and jurists in other jurisdictions. I The Anglo-American tradition is one ofreluctance to penalise omissions; to draw on the time honoured example no offence is committed by the able-bodied adult who watches an infant drown in a shallow pool. That gruesome hypothetical is happily improbable, but the general proposition is substantiated by the much-cited decision in People v. BeardsleyZ where it was held that the accused was not criminally answerable for the death from drug use of his 'weekend mistress' in circumstances where he failed to take the necessary, and not unduly onerous, steps to save her life. Likewise, the law does not impose a general duty to rescue those who are in peril nor is there a duty to warn a person of impending danger.3 A passive bystander or witness is not answerable for his failure to act, even where the harm caused is the result of criminal conduct.4 This general reluctance is evident in the manner in which criminal offences are defined.
    [Show full text]
  • Should Western Australian Criminal Law Do More?
    PROTECTING OLDER PERSONS FROM LIFE- THREATENING AND FATAL ABUSE: SHOULD WESTERN AUSTRALIAN CRIMINAL LAW DO MORE? MEREDITH BLAKE* The criminal law has a fundamental role in protecting bodily integrity and specifically the value of human life. This paper examines the role which the criminal law has played in addressing life-threatening and fatal abuse of older persons by others. It does so in light of the recent recommendations from the Australian Law Reform Commission and the Western Australian Parliamentary Inquiry Report on this issue. These reports acknowledge that elder abuse takes a variety of forms, but is commonly characterised by the breach of trust in an existing relationship. The paper reviews existing criminal protections in Western Australian criminal law and reflects upon several coronial inquiries. It submits that the moral distinctions characterising abuse which involve a life-threatening or fatal harm to an older person requires that the criminal law responds specifically to this abuse, and that such a response could be led by the inclusion of provisions in the Criminal Code (WA) which target those who facilitate this form of abuse of older persons. INTRODUCTION We live in an ageing society. Statistics from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare indicate that in 2016, 15% of the population constituted older persons (persons aged 65 years and over), with that proportion expected to steadily rise.1 Global ageing is claimed to have led to ‘a corresponding increase in the number of older persons living in vulnerable and dependent circumstances, making them particularly vulnerable to abuse and neglect’.2 However being older is not inherently associated with vulnerability; the World * Law School, University of Western Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • H LTD V J & ANOR
    SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA (Applications Under Various Acts or Rules: Application) DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court in which it was generated. H LTD v J & ANOR [2010] SASC 176 Judgment of The Honourable Justice Kourakis 15 June 2010 CRIMINAL LAW - PARTICULAR OFFENCES - OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON - MISCELLANEOUS OFFENCES - OTHER MISCELLANEOUS OFFENCES AND MATTERS HEALTH LAW - MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS HIGH COURT AND FEDERAL COURT - HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA - ORIGINAL JURISDICTION - MATTERS IN WHICH HIGH COURT HAS ORIGINAL JURISDICTION - COMMONWEALTH AS A PARTY PROCEDURE - MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MATTERS - DECLARATIONS - JURISDICTION First defendant a resident in a high care unit of plaintiff’s facilities – first defendant informed plaintiff to end life by ceasing to take any food, water or medical treatment necessary for particular conditions suffered – first defendant proposes to give plaintiff direction not to provide nutrition, hydration and insulin - plaintiff seeks declarations which will allow it to determine the extent to which it can lawfully comply with direction of first defendant to be given to achieve stated intention – Commonwealth opposes directions sought with respect to consequences
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 25, 2016 D Nott-Law Jnl25 Cover Nott-Law Cv 25/07/2016 13:18 Page 2
    d_Nott-law jnl25_cover_Nott-Law_cv 25/07/2016 13:18 Page 1 N O T T I N In this issue: G H A M L Helen O’Nions A EDITORIAL W J O U R N A ARTICLES L How Many Contracts in an Auction Sale? James Brown and Mark Pawlowski NOTTINGHAM LAW JOURNAL The Legal Prospective Force of Constitutional Courts Decisions: Reflections from the Constitutional Jurisprudence of Kosovo and Beyond Visar Morina Journal of Nottingham Law School Don’t Take Away My Break-Away: Balancing Regulatory and Commercial Interests in Sport Simon Boyes The Creative Identity and Intellectual Property Janice Denoncourt THEMATIC ARTICLES: PERSPECTIVES ON THE ISLAMIC FACE VEIL Introduction Tom Lewis Articles S.A.S v France : A Reality Check Eva Brems Human Rights, Identity and the Legal Regulation of Dress Jill Marshall No Face Veils in Court Felicity Gerry QC Face Veils and the Law: A Critical Reflection Samantha Knights The Veiled Lodger – A Reflection on the Status of R v D Jeremy Robson Why the Veil Should be Repudiated* Yasmin Alibhai-Brown 2 0 1 6 *Extract from Refusing the Veil, 2014. Published with kind permission of Biteback V Publishing, London. O L U Continued on inside back cover M E T W E N Nottingham Law School T The Nottingham Trent University Y Burton Street F I V Nottingham E NG1 4BU England £30.00 Volume 25, 2016 d_Nott-law jnl25_cover_Nott-Law_cv 25/07/2016 13:18 Page 2 Continued from outside back cover Book Reviews E Brems (ed.) The Experiences of Face Veil Wearers in Europe and the Law Cambridge University Press, 2014 Amal Ali Jill Marshall Human Rights Law and Personal Identity Routledge, 2014 Tom Lewis CASE NOTES AND COMMENTARY Killing the Parasite in R v Jogee Catarina Sjolin-Knight Disputing the Indisputable: Genocide Denial and Freedom of Expression in Perinçek v Switzerland Luigi Daniele Innocent Dissemination: The Type of Knowledge Concerned in Shen, Solina Holly v SEEC Media Group Limited S.H.
    [Show full text]
  • Suppression of Popular Gatherings in England, 1800-1830 Frank W
    digitalcommons.nyls.edu Faculty Scholarship Articles & Chapters 1981 Suppression of Popular Gatherings in England, 1800-1830 Frank W. Munger New York Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/fac_articles_chapters Part of the Judges Commons, and the Law and Society Commons Recommended Citation 25 Am. J. Legal Hist. 111 (1981) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles & Chapters by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. Suppression of Popular Gatherings in England, 1800-1830 by FRANK MUNGER* Recent works on crime and society in eighteenth century England have reported challenging questions about the exercise of legal authority and the maintenance of control over the working classes.1 It has been suggested, for example, that the manipulation of sentencing for capital offenses at eighteenth century assizes re- flected a deep concern for maintaining the legitimacy of class rule through the legal system apart from any immediate concern with crime. 2 It has also been argued that while the creation of capital offenses under the Black Act of 1722 reflected class struggle over the uses of property, the commitment of the English legal system to even-handed justice tempered the effect of the Act in certain in- stances. 3 Thus, by two different routes, recent historians have ar- gued that the English criminal justice system produced more temp- erate and "just" results than the context of class rule might suggest. Such studies suggest that a legal system, and specifically the legal system of Industrial Revolution England, was a complex sys- tem.
    [Show full text]
  • Dolus Eventualis in South African Criminal Law
    THE INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF DOLUS EVENTUALIS IN SOUTH AFRICAN CRIMINAL LAW by LINUS TAMBU AWA Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF LAWS in the subject Criminal and Procedural Law at the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA SUPERVISOR: PROF NINA MOLLEMA NOVEMBER 2019 i Table of Contents Page DECLARATION .......................................................................................................... v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................... vi DEDICATION ............................................................................................................ vii SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... viii KEY WORDS ............................................................................................................. ix GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................ xi CHAPTER ONE .......................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background information ................................................................................. 1 1.2 Research problem .......................................................................................... 3 1.3 Research questions and hypotheses of study ...............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Working Party No. 3 on Co-Operation and Enforcement
    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development DAF/COMP/WP3(2020)5 Unclassified English - Or. English 14 September 2020 DIRECTORATE FOR FINANCIAL AND ENTERPRISE AFFAIRS COMPETITION COMMITTEE Cancels & replaces the same document of 23 April 2020 Working Party No. 3 on Co-operation and Enforcement Cartel Criminalization and the Challenge of ‘Moral Wrongfulness’ By Peter Whelan 9 June 2020 This paper by Peter Whelan was submitted by the author as part of the background material in support of their presentation at Item 1 of the 131st meeting of Working Party 3 on Co-operation and Enforcement on 9 June 2020. This paper was not commissioned nor vetted by the OECD Secretariat; the opinions expressed and arguments employed herein are exclusively those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Organisation or of the governments of its member countries. The document is available in PDF only. More documents related to this discussion can be found at http://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/criminalisation-of-cartels-and-bid-rigging-conspiracies.htm Ms Sabine ZIGELSKI [Email: [email protected]] JT03465237 OFDE This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. 2 DAF/COMP/WP3(2020)5 CARTEL CRIMINALIZATION AND THE CHALLENGE OF ‘MORAL WRONGFULNESS’ Unclassified Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 33, No. 3 (2013), pp. 535–561 doi:10.1093/ojls/gqt010 Published Advance Access April 29, 2013 Cartel Criminalization and the Challenge of ‘Moral Wrongfulness’ Peter Whelan* Abstract—There is considerable debate at present, particularly in the Member Downloaded from States of the European Union, concerning the necessity and appropriateness of imposing custodial sentences upon individuals who have engaged in cartel activity.
    [Show full text]