Corporate criminal liability in terms of attributability concept

Eirp Proceedings, 2013

Economic and financial crimes committed by individuals through legal persons grew every year in Romania after the communist era while court decisions have varied in their final sentences. The lack of jurisprudence in this field has led to a slow developme legal persons use them to commit this infraction. Romanian law has failed to keep up with the ingenuity of criminals that get around the law and gets a mere administrative or penal fine. In this art present and explain a number of Romanian jurisprudence decisions and problems that lack of a properly applied law led to encouraging this type of economic crimes among individuals through legal persons or on behalf of them, infractions that led to damage to the state patrimony. theorists and practitioners in the field. The essential contribution of this paper consists of critical observations, conclusions and proposals made by

2021

The practice of this criminal act of corruption that involves corporations is an extraordinary crime and is very detrimental to the state. The direct consequences of these crimes to society are financial losses, job losses, and even loss of life due to the crisis. Researchers use normative juridical research methods with 3 (three) approaches to examine two problems discussed with normative research methods. It was found that corporate crime against corruption contained five theories of strict liability according to the law (strict liability) where historically the law began to pay more attention and the principle of absolute responsibility as a punishment needed to prevent retaliation then changed. be a responsibility based on the element of error

IJCLS (Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law Studies)

The development of cyber crime gives birth to new facts that corporations can become perpetrators of criminal acts, therefore it is necessary to impose criminal responsibility on the corporation. The purpose of this research is to find out the criminal responsibility of corporations in Law Number 11 of 2008 in conjunction with Law Number 19 of 2016 concerning Electronic Information and Transactions. The type of research in writing this journal is normative or doctrinal by using a statutory approach and taking primary and secondary legal materials. Law Number 11 of 2008 in conjunction with Law Number 19 of 2016 concerning Electronic Information and Transactions adopts the doctrine of identification in imposing criminal liability on corporations. In addition, actions against the law by the management and / or staff of the corporation can be subject to criminal liability based on the doctrine of vicarious liability.

IJOLARES : Indonesian Journal of Law Research, 2025

At this time, the existence of corporations is felt to be increasingly important and strategic, in addition to being able to help turn the wheels of the economy, corporations have also reached almost all spheres of life. Corporations do not only carry out activities that aim to achieve their goals based on the provisions of the laws and regulations that govern them but in certain cases, many corporations commit criminal acts of corruption. Corruption is developing in various sectors, including state-owned companies. The purpose of this study is to determine the criminal liability of corporations in the crime of corruption. The research method used is normative juridical, where this research was conducted by examining library materials in the form of secondary data obtained from various legal materials. The research results show the law must be interpreted as a regulation that is real and applies to all humans without exception. All acts of corruption committed by corporations must be subject to sanctions if they are contrary to applicable legal regulations. So that the law will function in order to achieve the objectives of the law, namely certainty, justice and benefit. That that corporations are responsible as legal subjects in criminal acts of corruption. Legal subjects are not only individuals or individuals but legal entities such as corporations that can be held accountable. The existence of an error is an absolute element that can result in a corporation being held criminally responsible.

Harvard Law Review, 1996

Although considerable debate surrounds society's increasing reliance on criminal liability to regulate corporate conduct, few have questioned in depth the fundamental basis for imposing criminal liability on corporations. In this Article, Mr. Khanna explores the underlying rationale for corporate criminal liability and finds it problematic. After summarizing the historical development of corporate criminal liability and surveying the current legal landscape, the Article explores the justifications for such liability. Mr. Khanna argues that corporate civil liability can capture the desirable features of corporate criminal liability, especially criminal liability's powerful enforcement and information-gathering dimensions. Furthermore, he contends that corporate civil liability avoids the undesirable features of corporate criminal liability. Such undesirable features include criminal procedural protections and criminal sanctions' stigma effects. Mr. Khanna concludes that a modified form of corporate civil liability could make corporate criminal liability obsolete by capturing the advantages of corporate criminal liability while avoiding or mitigating its disadvantages. 4 For example, Lord Holt reportedly said in 1701 that "[a] corporation is not indictable, but the particular members of it are." Anonymous Case (No. 935), 88 Eng. Rep. 1518, 1518 (K.B. 1701). Kathleen Brickey notes that some early commentators relied on this statement to support the contention that corporations could not be criminally liable.

Advances in Economics and Business Management (AEBM), 2018

Corporate criminal liability came in to existence due to the growing of business beyond specified boundaries and horizons due to demand from the consumers’ world wide A corporate in the view of law is considered as a separate legal entity and has got a separate identity and existence beyond the death of its promoters and directors and which can execute a contract and deal with the business on its own with the help of Board of Directors In view of separate legal identity it is also liable to perform according to the set of rules and regulations as specified in the MOA & AOA of the company While performing as a separate legal entity in the eyes of law it can make mistakes and commit illegal actions and frauds which are not according to the law of land thus corporate criminal liability can come into picture and attributed by criminal law as Mens Rea and Actus Reus

U. Pitt. L. Rev., 1957

New Criminal Law Review, 2013

An exercise in comparative legal history and legal theory, this article challenges the radical distinction that traditionally has been drawn between corporate criminal liability in German and Anglo-American law. In the familiar account, corporate criminal liability in the common law and the civil law passed each other like ships in the night, sometime around the turn of the nineteenth century: the common law had no corporate criminal liability before 1800, and the civil law had no corporate criminal liability after 1800. Closer inspection, however, reveals that corporate criminal liability was widely accepted in both common law and civil law countries at least since the Middle Ages, and that rejection of corporate criminal liability was complete neither in England before 1800 nor in Germany after 1800.

A corporation is a different legitimate element built up through some enactment or enrollment prepare. They have rights and liabilities isolate from that of their shareholders. Some of these organizations have resources and offices in different nations separated from their nation of origin also and such enterprises are known as multinational corporations (MNCs). Multinational companies have come to assume a colossal part in many parts of human life today. Their forces have developed at an astounding rate in the course of the most recent few centuries, to such an extent that they are frequently contrasted with whole countries. Consequently, forcing some kind of methods for responsibility and control over these multinationals and organizations is of fundamental significance and ought to be to a great degree high on the rundown of needs for each country.

Journal of Politics and Law, 2016

One of the innovations of Islamic Penal Code in 2013 was to accept criminal liability of legal entities. By accepting criminal liability of legal entities, the way to punish them is arisen. As a legal person cannot commit any crime, any punishments are not applicable to them. Accordingly, Article 20 of this Law enumerated a list of penalties applicable to legal persons and it was tried to use penalties in accordance with the legal entities to deal with them. Punishments such as dissolution, confiscation, cash fine, announcement of the judgment, Diyeh, social and economic exclusion; such as a ban on business activities, prohibition of the public invitation to raise capital and ban from drawing business documents listed in Article 20 and Article 14, are a set of punishments which relatively different from usual punishment for individuals. These penalties are relative diversity, but what is objectionable is that the details and conditions of implementation of each of these punishments are not clear. If legislator described the details exactly or provided the condition to require the adoption of The Executive Bylaw of the punishment, it would be better. Given that all the points and issues about penalties for legal persons are not stated in this law as well as ambiguities in the law for a comprehensive definition of legal person, the way to implement main and supplementary punishments, In this study it was tried to evaluate and criticize the legal entities penalties including main and supplementary ones and their grading.