Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
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
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. Beccarias 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.
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 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.
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
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 mans effigy produced the same preventive effect as
hanging the man himself there would be no reason to hang the man.
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
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.
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. Mans emergence from the States 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. Beccarias 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. Beccarias 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