Pages From 280434052-Criminology 20 Tradus

Published on January 2017 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 40 | Comments: 0 | Views: 152
of 13
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content

2.2.

The Classical School

The Classical School in criminology is usually a reference to the eighteenth-century
work during the Enlightenment by the utilitarian and social contract philosophers Jeremy
Bentham and Cesare Beccaria. Their interests lay in the system of criminal justice and
penology and, indirectly through the proposition that "man is a calculating animal", in the
causes of criminal behaviour. The Classical school of thought was premised on the idea
that people have free will in making decisions, and that punishment can be a deterrent for
crime, so long as the punishment is proportional, fits the crime, and is carried out
promptly.
Scoala clasica in criminologie este de obicei o referinta la munca din sec 18 a iluministilor
realizata de catre utilitaristi si filosofii contractului social Jeremy Bentham si Cesare Beccaria.
Interesul lor rezida in sistemul penal si penology si, indirect prin propozitia omul este un
animal calculate, in cauzele comportamentului criminal. Scoala clasicista a pornit de la ideea
ca oamenii au vointa libera in luarea deciziilor si ca pedeapsa poate fi un factor descurajant
pentru crima, atata timp cat pedeapsa este proportional, este pe masura crimei si este aplicata
rapid.
Beccaria, the pioneer of modern criminology expounded his naturalistic theory of
criminality by rejecting the omnipotence of evil spirit. He laid greater emphasis on mental
phenomenon of the individual and attributed crime to ‗free will‘ of the individual. Thus he
was much influenced by the utilitarian philosophy of his time which placed reliance on
hedonism, namely, the ―pain and pleasure theory‖. As Donald Taft rightly put it, this
doctrine implied the notion of causation in terms of free choice to commit crime by
rational man seeking pleasure and avoiding pain.
Beccaria, pionierul criminologiei modern si-a expus teoria sa naturalista despre criminalitate prin
respingerea omnipotentei duhului rau. A pus un accent si mai mare pe fenomenul mental
individual si a atribuit crima liberei vointe a individului. De aceea el a fost influentat foarte mult
de filosofia utilitarista a timpului sau care punea accent pe hedonism, adica pe teoria durere si
placere. Dupa cum Donald Taft correct spunea, aceasta doctrina implica notiunea de cauzalitate
in termini ai vointei libere folosite pentru a comite o crima de catre omul rational care cauta
placerea si Evita durerea.

1

Main Reforms Advocated by the Classical School
The system of law, its mechanisms of enforcement and the forms of punishment used in
the eighteenth century were primitive and inconsistent. Judges were not professionally
trained so many of their decisions were unsatisfactory being the product of incompetence,
capriciousness, corruption or political manipulation. The use of torture to extract
confessions and a wide range of cruel punishments such as whipping, mutilation and
public executions were commonplace. A need for legal rationality and fairness was
identified and found an audience among the emerging middle classes whose economic
interests lay in providing better systems for supporting national and international trade.

sistemul legal, mecanismele sale de impunere si formele de pedeapsa folosite in sec 18 erau
primitive si neuniforme. Judecatorii nu erau formati professional asa ca multe din deciziile
lor erau nesatisfacatoare fiind produsul incompetentei, capriciilor, coruptiei si manipularii
politice. Folosirea torturii pentru obtinerea marturiilor si o mare varietate de pedepse crude ca
biciurea, mutilarea si executiile publice erau comune. O nevoie de rationalitate legala si
dreptate a fost identificata si si-a gasit publicul tinta in clasa mijlocie emergent ale caror
interese economice se gaseau in oferirea unui system mai bun pentru sustinere comertului
national si international.
John Locke
John Locke considered the mechanism that had allowed monarchies to become the primary
form of government. He concluded that monarchs had asserted the right to rule and
enforced it either through an exercise in raw power, or through a form of contract, e.g. the
feudal system had depended on the grants of estates in land as a return for services
provided to the sovereign. Locke proposed that all citizens are equal, and that there is an
unwritten but voluntary contract between the state and its citizens, giving power to those in
government and defining a framework of mutual rights and duties. In Leviathan, Thomas
Hobbes wrote, "the right of all sovereigns is derived from the consent of every one of
those who are to be governed." This is a shift from authoritarianism to an early model of
European and North American democracy where police powers and the system of
punishment are means to a more just end.
2

John Lock e a studiat mecanismul care a permis monarhiilor sa devina principal
forma de guvernamant. A concluzionat ca monarhii si-a impus dreptul de a guverna
si l-au aplicat fie prin exercitarea cu duritate a puterii, fie printr-o forma de contract,
de exemplu sistemul feudal care se baz a pe acordarea de proprietati in schimbul
serviciilor prestate pentru coroana. Locke a propus ca toti cetatenii sunt egali si ca
exista un contract nescris, dar voluntary intre stat si cetatenii saii, danad puterea
celor de la guvernare si definind un cadru de drepturi si indatoriri mutual. In
Leviatan, Hobbes a scris : dreptul tuturor monarhiilor deriva din consimtirea
fiecaruia dintre cei care sunt guvernati. Aceasta este o deplasare de la
authoritarianism spre un model nou de democratie europeana si nord Americana
unde puterile politienesti si sistemul pedepselor nu sunt doar mijloace pentru ca
statul sa isi atinga obiectivele.

Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794)
In 1764, Beccaria published Dei Deliti e Delle Pene ("On Crimes and Punishments")
arguing for the need to reform the criminal justice system by referring not to the harm
caused to the victim, but to the harm caused to society. In this, he posited that the greatest
deterrent was the certainty of detection: the more swift and certain the punishment, the
more effective it would be. It would also allow a less serious punishment to be effective if
shame and an acknowledgement of wrongdoing was a guaranteed response to society's
judgment. Thus, the prevention of crime was achieved through a proportional system that
was clear and simple to understand, and if the entire nation united in their own defence.
His approach influenced the codification movement which set sentencing tariffs to ensure
equality of treatment among offenders. Later, it was acknowledged that not all offenders are
alike and greater sentencing discretion was allowed to judges. Thus, punishment works
at two levels. Because it punishes individuals, it operates as a specific deterrence to those
convicted not to reoffend. But the publicity surrounding the trial and the judgment of
society represented by the decision of a jury of peers, offers a general example to the
public of the consequences of committing a crime. If they are afraid of similarly swift
justice, they will not offend.
In 1764 Beccaria a publicat Despre crime si pedepse prezentand nevoia de a reforma sistemul
penal prin schimbarea interesului dinspre raul produs victimelor spre raul produs societatii. El
a propus ca cel mai mare factor de descurajare ar fi certitudinea detentiei: cu cat mai rapida si
3

sigura pedeapsa, cu atat ar fi mai eficienta. De asemenea ar permite ca o pedeapsa mai putin
serioasa sa fie eficienta daca rusinarea si recunoasterea vinovatiei ar fi raspunsul la judecata
sociala. Asadar, prevenirea crimei era realizata prin intermediul unui system proportional care
era clar si simplu de inteles. Abordarea sa a influentat miscarea codificarii care a reglementat
nivelurile pedepselor pentru a asigura tratament egal pentru infractori. Ulterior, a fost realizat
faptul ca nu toti infractorii sunt la fel si judecatorilor li s-a acordat o libertate mai mare.
Asadar, pedeapsa lucreaza pe doua nivele. Pentru ca pedepseste indivizi, opereaza ca
descurajant specific pentru ca cei condamnati sa nu recidiveze. Dar publicitatea din jurul
procesului si judecata societatii reprezentata prin decizia unui juriu ofera un exemplu general
societatii despre consecintele comiterii unei crime. Daca ei se vor teme de o judecata la fel de
eficienta, nu vor comite crime.
In his book "On Crimes and Punishments" Beccaria presented a coherent, comprehensive
design for an enlightened criminal justice system that was to serve the people rather than
the monarchy. According to Beccaria, the crime problem could be traced not to bad
people but to bad laws. A modern criminal justice system should guarantee all people
equal treatment before the law. Beccaria‘s book supplied the blue print. That blue print
was based on the assumption that people freely choose what they do and are responsible for
the consequences of their behavior.
In cartea sa DEspre crime sipedepse Beccaria a prezentat un proiect coherent si
comprehensive pentru un system penal iluminat care sa serveasca societatii mai
degraba decat monarhiei. Potrivit lui Beccaria, crima se datoreaza nu oamenilor
rai, ci legilor rele. Un system penal modern ar trebui sa garanteze tuturor
tratament egal in fata ;egii. Aceasta carte a fost o schita pentru systemul penal
bazata pe presupunerea ca oamenii aleg in mod liber ce fac si sunt responsabili
pentru consecintele comportamentului lor.
Beccaria proposed the following principles:


Laws Should Be Used To Maintain Social Contract: “Laws are the conditions
under which men, naturally independent, united themselves in society. Weary of
living in a continual state of war, and of enjoying a liberty, which became a little
value, from the uncertainty of its duration, they sacrificed one part of it, to
enjoy the rest in peace and security.‖

4

Legile ar trebui folosite pentru mentinerea contractului social: legile sunt
conditiile sub care oamenii, in mod natural independent, se unesc in
societate. Obositi sa traiasca in stare continua de razboi si sa se bucure de
libertate, care nu mai are valoare din cauza nesigurantei duratei sale,
sacrifice o parte din aceasta, pentru a se bucura de restul in pace si
Securitate.



Only Legislators Should Create Laws: “The authority of making penal laws can
only reside with the legislator, who represents the whole society united by the
social compact.‖
Doar legislatorii ar trebui sa creeze legi: autoritatea de a emite legi penale trebuie
sa o aiba doar legislatorul, care reprezinta intreaga societate unita de contractual
social.



Judges Should Impose Punishment only in Accordance with the Law: ―[N]o
magistrate then, (as he is one of the society), can, with justice inflict on any other
member of the same society punishment that is not ordained by the laws.‖
Judecatorii ar trebui sa impuna pedepse numai in concordanta cu lege : niciun
magistrate, ca unul care face parte din societate, nu poate sa impuna cu justete asupra
altui membru al aceleeasi societati o pedeapsa care nu este specificata in legi.



Judges Should not Interpret the Laws: ―Judges, in criminal cases, have no right to
interpret the penal laws, because they are not legislators….Everyman has his own
particular point of view and, at different times, sees the same objects in very different
lights. The spirit of the laws will then be the result of the good or bad logic of the
judge; and this will depend on his good or bad digestion.‖
Judecatorii nu ar trebui sa interpreteze legile: judecatorii, in cazurile penale, nu au
niciun drept sa interpreteze legile penale, pentru ca nu sunt legiuitori. Fiecare individ
are proriul punct de vedere si in momente diferite vad acelasi lucru in moduri foarte
diferite. Spiritual legii va fi rezultatul judecatii bune sau gresite a judecatorilor si asta va
depinde de modul bun sau rau in care are loc digestia sa.



Punishment Should be Based on the Pleasure/Pain Principle: ―Pleasure and pain
are the only springs of actions in beings endowed with sensibility….If an equal
punishment be ordained for two crimes that injure society in different degrees, there
is nothing to deter men from committing the greater as often as it is attended with
greater advantage.‖
5

Pedeapsa trebuie sa se bazeze pe principiul placer/durere: placerea si durerea sunt
singurele resorturi care dirijeaza actiunile fiintelor daruite cu sensibilitate. Daca o
pedeapsa egala este impusa pentru doua crime care afecteaza societatea in moduri
diferite, nu mai exista nimic care sa determine oamenii sa nu comita o fapta mai
grava, cu avantaje mai grave.


Punishment Should be Based on the Act, not on the Actor: ―Crimes are only to be
measured by the injuries done to the society they err, therefore, who imagine that a
crime is greater or less according to the intention of the person by whom it is
committed.‖
Pedeapsa trebuie sa fie bazata pe fapta, nu pe faptuitor. Crimele pot fi masurate
numai prin daunele asupra societatii, nu prin imaginarea faptului ca o crima este
mai grava sau mai putin grava in functie de intentia persoanei care o comite.



The Punishment Should be Determined by the Crime: ―If mathematical
calculation could be applied to the obscure and infinite combinations of human
actions, there might be a corresponding scale of punishment descending from the
greatest to the least.‖
Pedeapsa ar trebui sa fie determinate de crima: daca calculele matematice ar
putea fi applicate asupra combinatiei actiunilor umane obscure si infinite, ar putea
exista o scala a pedepsei descrescatoare de la cele mai grave, la cele mai blande.



Punishment Should be Prompt and Effective: ―The more immediate after the
commission of a crime a punishment is inflicted the more just and useful it will
be….An immediate punishment is more useful; because the smaller the interval of
time between the punishment and the crime, the stronger and more lasting will be
the association of the two ideas of crime and punishment.‖

Pedeapsa ar trebuie sa fie prompta si eficienta: cu cat mai repede dupa comiterea unei crime pedeapsa
este impusa cu atat va fi mai justa si folositoare. O pedeapsa imediata este mai folositoare ,pentru ca cu
cat este mai mic intervalul de timp dintre producerea crimei si pedepsirea acesteia, cu atat mai scump si
mai de durata va fi asocierea celor doua idei de crima si pedeapsa



All People Should be Treated Equally: ―I assert that the punishment of a noble man
should in no wise differ from that of the lowest member of the society.‖
6

Toti oamenii ar trebui tratati egal: sustin ca pedeapsa unui nobil nu ar trebui sa
difere in vreun fel de pedeapsa unui membru mai putin important al societatii


Capital Punishment Should be Abolished: ―The punishment of death is not
authorized by any right; for….no such right exists….The terrors of death make so
slight an impression, that it has not force enough to withstand forgetfulness natural to
mankind.‖
Pedeapsa capitala ar trebui eliminate: pedeapsa cu moartea nu este autorizata de
niciun drept, pentru ca un astfel de drept nu exista. Frica mortii face o senzatie
asa de mica, incat nu are suficienta putere sa reziste uitarii natural a omenirii.



The Use of Torture to Gain Confessions Should be Abolished: ―It is
confounding all relations to expect…that pain should be the test of truth, as if
truth resided in the muscles and fibers a wretch in torture. By this method the
robust will escape, and the feeble be condemned.‖
folosirea torturii pentru obtinerea marturisilor ar trebuie interzisa: cei puternici vor
scapa, iar cei slabi vor fi condamnati



It is Better to Prevent Crime than to Punish Them: ―Would you prevent
crimes? Let the laws be clear and simple, let the entire force of the nation be
united in their defence, let them be intended rather to favour every individual than any
particular classes…. Finally, the most certain method of preventing crimes to perfect
the system of education.‖
Este mai bine sa previi crimele decat sa le pedepsesti: legile sa fie clare si simple,
intreaga forta a natiunii sa ramana unita in apararea lor sa fie menite sa favorizeze
fiecare individ mai degraba decat o clasa anume. In final, cea mai sigura metoda de
prevenire a crimelor este de a perfection sistemul de educatie.
Perhaps no other book in the history in the history of criminology has had so great an
impact. After the French Revolution, Beccaria‘s basic tenets served as a guide for the
drafting of the French Penal Code, which was adopted in 1791.
Poate nicio alta carte din istoria criminologiei nu a avut un impact mai mare. Dupa
revolutia franceza, principiile de baza ale lui Beccaria auservit ca un ghid de redactare
a Codului penal francez, adopta in 1791.
7

Jeremy Bentham(1748-1832)
Legal scholars and reformers throughout Europe proclaimed their indebtedness to Beccaria,
but none owed more to him than the English legal philosopher Jeremy Bentham. Bentham
had long and productive career. He inspired many of his contemporaries, as well as
criminologists of future generations, with his approach to rational crime control.
Reformatorii sistemului penal din intreaga Europa isi proclama indatorarea fata de Beccaria,
dar niciunul nu ii datoreaza mai mult decat filosoful englez Jeremy Bentham, care a avut o
cariera lunga si productive. A inspirit numerosi dintre contemporanii sai, dar si criminology din
generatiile de dupa cu abordarea sa asupra controlului rational al criminalitatii.
Bentham devoted his life to developing a scientific approach to the making and breaking of
laws. Like Beccaria he was concerned with achieving ―the greatest happiness of the
greatest number.‖ His work was governed by utilitarian principles. Utilitarianism assumes
that all human actions are calculated in accordance with their likelihood of
bringing happiness (pleasure) or unhappiness (pain). People weigh the probabilities of
present future pleasures against those of present and future pain.

Bentham si-a devotat viata pentru a dezvolta o abordare stiintifica asupra procesului de
elaborare si de incalcare a legilor. La fel ca Beccaria era preocupat de obtinerea celei mai
mari fericiri pentru cei mai multi dintre oameni. Opera sa a fost condusa de principiile
utilitariste. Utilitarianismul presupune ca toate actiunile umane cunst calculate in
concordanta cu posibilitatea de a adduce fericire-placere sau nefericire-durere. Oamenii
cantaresc probabilitatile placerii prezente si viitoare in opozitie cu durerea prezenta si
viitoare.
Bentham proposed a precise pseudo-mathematical formula for this process, which he
called ―felicific calculus.‖ According to his reasoning individuals are ―human
calculators‖ who out all the factors into an equation in order to decide whether or not a
particular crime is worth committing. This notion may seem rather whimsical today, but at a
time when there were over 200 capital offences, it provided a rationale for reform of the
legal system. Bentham reasoned that if prevention was the purpose of punishment, and if
punishment became too costly by creating more harm than good, then penalties need to be
set just a bit an excess of the pleasure one might derive from committing a crime, and no
higher. The law exists in order to create happiness for the community. Since punishment
creates unhappiness, it can be justified only if it prevents a greater evil than it produces.
Thus, Bentham suggested if a hanging a man‘s effigy produced the same preventive effect as
hanging the man himself there would be no reason to hang the man.

8

A propus o formula pseudomatematica precisa pentru acest process, pe care a numit-o calcul felicific.
Potrivit gandirii sale, indivizii sunt calculatoare umane care iau in calcul toti factorii pentru a decide daca
o infractiune specifica merita sa fie comisa. Aceasta notiune poate parea capricioasa,dar intr-o perioada
cand existau 200 de infractiuni grave, a oferit o motivatie pentru reforma sistemului penal. Bentham a
gandit ca daca preventia ar fi scopul pedepsei, si daca pedeapsa ar devein prea costisitoare prin crearea de
mai mult rau decat bine, atunci pedepsele trebuies sa fie un pic mai mari decat placerea obtinuta din
comiterea unei crime si nu mai mari de atat. Legeaexista pentru a adduce fericire comunitatii. Din
moment ce pedeapsa creeaza nefericire, poate fi justificata doar daca previne un rau mai mare decat cel
pe care il produce. Asadar, Bentahm sugereaza ca daca imaginea grafica a unui om spanzurat provoaca
acelasi efect preventi ca un om spanzurat real, atunci nu ar mai fi nevoie de spanzurare ca pedeapsa.

In this context, the most relevant idea was known as the "felicitation principle", i.e. that
whatever is done should aim to give the greatest happiness to the largest possible number of
people in society. Bentham argued that there had been "punishment creep", i.e. that the
severity of punishments had slowly increased so that the death penalty was then imposed for
more than two hundred offences in England (Landau, Norma, 2002). For example, if rape
and homicide were both punished by death, then a rapist would be more likely to kill the
victim (as a witness) to reduce the risk of arrest.
In acest context, cea mai relevanta idee a fost cea a principiului felicitarii, adica orice este
facut trebuie intreprins pentru a obtine cea mai mare fericire pentru cel mai mare numar d
eindivizi din societate. Bentham a observant ca s-a inregistrat o crestere a pedepselor, adica
severitatea pedepselor a crescut lent astfel astfel ca pedepasa cu moartea er atunci impusa
pentru mai mult de doua sute de infractiuni din Anglia. De exemplu daca violul si omorul erau
ambele pedepsite cu moartea, atunci un violator ar fi tentat sa isi omoare victima – ca martor,
pentru a reduce riscul arestarii sale.
Bentham posited that man is a calculating animal who will weigh potential gains against the
pain likely to be imposed. If the pain outweighs the gains, he will be deterred and this
produces maximal social utility. Therefore, in a rational system, the punishment system
must be graduated so that the punishment more closely matches the crime. Punishment is not
retribution or revenge because that is morally deficient: the hangman is paying the murder
the compliment of imitation.
Bentham a postulat ca omul este un animal care calculeaza si va masura orice castig potential
prin comparatia cu durerea care este posibil sa ii fie impusa. Daca durerea este mai mare decat
castigul, va fi descurajat si astfel se produce cea mai mare utilitate sociala. De aceea, intr-un
system rational, sistemul de pedeapsa trebuie proiectat astfel incat pedepasa sa fie cat mai pe
masura crimei pedepsite. Pedeapsa nu este retributive sau razbunare deoarece aceasta este moral
incorrect: calaul devine imitatorul criminalului.
But the concept is problematic because it depends on two critical assumptions:
9



if deterrence is going to work, the potential offender must always act rationally
whereas much crime is a spontaneous reaction to a situation or opportunity; and



if the system graduates a scale of punishment according to the seriousness of the
offence, it is assuming that the more serious the harm likely to be caused, the
more the criminal has to gain.

In this context, note Bentham's proposal for a prison design called the "panopticon"
which, apart from its surveillance system included the right of the prison manager to use
the prisoners as contract labor.

Acest concept este problematic deoarece depinde de doua ipoteze critice:
-daca descurajarea va functiona, posibilul criminal trebuie intotdeauna sa actionize rational,
pe cand mare parte din drime sunt reactii spontane la o situatie sau oportunitate, si
-daca sistemul stabileste o scala a pedepsei in conformitate cu seriozitatea infractiunii, se
presupune ca cu cat este mai grav raul produs, cu atat criminalul are mai multe de castigat.
In acest context, Bentham propune un proiect de inchisoare numit panopticon care, in afara
de sistemul de supraveghere include si dreptul prizonierului de a folosi detinutii ca forta de
munca.
Spiritualistic understandings of crime stem from an understanding of life in general, that
finds most things in life are destiny and cannot be controlled, we are born male or female,
good or bad and all our actions are decided by a higher being. People have held such
beliefs for all of recorded history, ―primitive people regarded natural disasters such as
famines, floods and plagues as punishments for wrongs they had done to the spiritual
powers‖ (Vold, G. Bernard, T. and Snipes, J. 1998). These spiritual powers gained
strength during the middle ages as they bonded with the feudal powers to create the
criminal justice systems. Under a spiritualistic criminal justice system, crime was a
private affair that was conducted between the offender and the victim‘s family. However
this method proved to be too revengeful, as the state took control of punishment. Spiritual
explanations provided an understanding of crime when there was no other way of
explaining crime. However, the problem with this understanding is it cannot be proven
true, and so it was never accepted.
Intelegerea spiritual a crimei porneste de la intelegerea vietii in general, care spune ca mai toate
lucrurile din viata sunt predestinate si nu pot fi controlate, suntem nascuti barbate si fmei, buni
sau rai si toate actiunile noastre sunt decise o fiinta superioare. Oamenii au avut astfel de
credinte de-a lungul istoriei consemnate, primitivii priveau dezastrele natural ca foametele,
inundatiile si epidemiile ca pedepse pentru relele facute lumii spiritual. Aceste puteri spirituale
au crescut in putere in evul mediu cand s-au alaturat cu puterea feudala pentru a crea sistemul
penal. Sub un system penal privat, crima era o chestiune private dintre un infractor si familia
10

victimei. Totusi aceasta metoda s-a dovedit prea rabunatoare si statul a preluat controlul actului
pedepsirii. Explicatiile spiritual au oferit o intelegere a crimei cand nu exista alt mod de a o
explica. Totusi, problema cu aceasta explicatie este ca nu poate fi dovedita ca adevarata si deci
nu a fost niciodata acceptata.
The main tenets of classical school of criminology why noted below
Principalele dogme ale scolii clasice de criminologie:
1. Man‘s emergence from the State‘s religious fanaticism involved the application of his
reason as a responsible individual.
Iesirea omului din fanatismul religios statal a implicat aplicarea rationalitatii sale de individ
responsabil.
2. It is the ‗act‘ of an individual and ‗not his intent‘ which forms the basis for determining
criminality within him. In other words, criminologists are concerned with the ‗act‘ of the
criminal rather than his ‗intent‘. Still, they could never think that there could be something
like crime causation.
Este un act al individului si nu intentia sa care formeaza baza pentru determinarea
criminalitatii din el. Cu alte cuvinte, criminologii sunt interesati de actul in sine si nu de
motivatia sa. Totusi, ei nu ar putea crede niciodata ca poate exista ceva ce cauzeaza o
crima.
3. The classical writers accepted punishment as a principal method of infliction of pain,
humiliation and disgrace to create ‗fear‘ in man to control his behavior.
Scriitorii clasici au acceptat pedeapsa ca principala forma de producere a durerii, umilintei si
degradarii si rusinarii pentru a crea frica in om pentru a-I controla comportamentul.
4. The propounders of this school, however, considered prevention of crime more important
than the punishment for it. They therefore, stressed on the need for a Criminal Code in
France, Germany and Italy to systematize punishment for forbidden acts. Thus the real
contribution of classical school of criminology lies in the fact that it underlined the need
for a well defined criminal justice system.
Exponentii acestei scoli considera totusi prevenirea crimei mai importanta decat pedepsirea
ei. De aceea ei au accentuat ideea nevoii unui cod penal pentru a sistematiza pedepsirea
actelor interzise. De aceaa adevarata contributie a scolii clasice de criminologie se afla in
faptul ca a subliniat nevoia pentru existenta unui bine definit system penal.
5. The advocates of classical school supported the right of the State to punish the offenders
in the interest of public security. Relying on the hedonistic principle of pain and pleasure,
11

they pointed out that individualization was to be awarded keeping in view the pleasure
derived by the criminal from the crime and the pain caused to the victim from it. They,
however, pleaded for equalization of justice which meant equal punishment for the same
offence.
Aparatorii scolii clasice au sprijinit dreptul statului de a pedepsi infractorii in interesul
securitatii publice. Bazandu-se pe principiul hedonist al durerii si placerii, au aratat ca
individualizarea trebuie realizata avand in vedere placerea obtinuta din savarsirea crimei si
durerea produsa victimei. Totusi ei au pledat pentru echivalarea justitiei care inseamna
pedepse egale pentru aceleasi crime.
6. The exponents of classical school further believed that the criminal law primarily rests on
positive sanctions. They were against the use of arbitrary powers of Judges. In their
opinion the Judges should limit their verdicts strictly within the confines of law. They also
abhorred torturous punishments.
Exponentii scolii clasice au crezut ca, in principal, legea penala se bazeaza in primul rand pe
sanctiuni positive. Erau impotriva folosirii puterii in mod arbitrar de catre judecatori. In
opinia lor, judecatorii ar trebui sa isi limiteze verdictele strict la prevederile legii. Ei au
detestat si pedepsele care constau in tortura.
Thus classical school propounded by Beccaria came into existence as a result of the
influence of writings of Montesquieu, Hume, Bacon and Rousseau. His famous work
„Essays on Crime and Punishment‟ received wide acclamation all over Europe and gave a
fillip to a new criminological thinking in the contemporary west. He sought to humanize
the criminal law by insisting on natural rights of human beings. He raised his voice against
severe punishment, torture and death penalty. Beccaria‘s views on crime and punishment
were also supported by Voltaire as a result of which a number of European countries
redrafted their penal codes mitigating the rigorous barbaric punishments and some of them
even went to the extent of abolishing capital punishment from their Penal Codes.
Asadar scoala classica propusa de Beccaria a luat fiinta ca urmare a scierilor lui
Montesquieu, Hume, Bacon si Rousseau. Lucrarea sa celebra Eseuri despre crima si
pedeapsa a primit aprecieri in intreaga Europa si a dat impulsul unei noi gandiri
criminologice in vestul contemporan. El a cautat sa umanizeze codul penal insistand asupra
drepturilor natural ale fiintelor umane. S-a declarant impotriva pedepselor severe, torturii si
pedepsei cu moartea. Opiniile lui Beccaria asupra crimei si pedepsei au fost de asemenea
12

sustinute de Voltaire ca urmare a acestui fapt o parte dintre tarile europene au rescris
codurile penale proprii eliminand pedepsele barbare si chiar mergand pana la eliminare de
catre unele dintre ele a pedepsei capitale din codurile lor penale.
Major Shortcomings of the Classical School Neajunsuri
The contribution of classical school to the development of rationalized criminological
thinking was by no means less important, but it had its own pitfalls.
1. The classical school proceeded on an abstract presumption of free will and relied solely on
the act (i.e., the crime) without devoting any attention to the state of mind of the criminal.
Scoala clasica a mers pe ipoteza abstracta a vointei libere si s-a bazat numai pe actul
criminal fara a lua in calcul starea mentala a criminalului.
2. It erred in prescribing equal punishment for same offence thus making no distinction
between first offenders and habitual criminals and varying degrees of gravity of the
offence.
A gresit in prescrierea pedepselor egale pentru unele infractiuni nefacand astfel distinctive
in criminalii primary si cei recidivisti si nediferentiind in functie de gravitatea faptelor.
However, the greatest achievement of this school of criminology lies in the fact that it
suggested a substantial criminal policy which was easy to administer without resort to the
imposition of arbitrary punishment. It goes to the credit of Beccaria who denounced the
earlier concepts of crime and criminals which were based on religious fallacies and myths
and shifted emphasis on the need for concentrating on the personality of an offender in
order to determine his guilt and punishment. Beccaria‘s views provided a background for
the subsequent criminologists to come out with a rationalized theory of crime causation
which eventually led the foundation of the modern criminology and penology.
Totusi, cea mai mare realizarea a aceste scoli de criminologie se regaseste in faptul ca sugereaza
o politica penala substantiala care este usor de administrat fara a se face uz de impunerea unei
pedepse arbitrare. Este spre meritul lui Beccaria ca a denuntat conceptele timpurii despre crime
si criminali bazate pe erori religiose si mituri si a pus accentual pe nevoie de a ne concentra
asupra personalitatii infractorului pentru a determina vina sa si pedeapsa necesara. Viziunea lui
Beccaria a oferit cadrul pentru criminologii care au urmat sa formulize o teorie rationalizata a
motivarii crimei care a dus in cele din urma la fondarea criminologiei si penologiei moderne.

13

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close