«A Responsabilidade das Empresas pelo Crime de Corrupção», «Direito Penal § Fundamentos Dogmáticos e Político-Criminais»

Resumo: 1- Introdução: algumas notícias da comunicação social; 2 – O designado «Conselho de Prevenção de Corrupção»; 3 – Procuradoria-Geral da República (P.G.R.) e o Departamento Central de Investigação e Acção Penal (D.I.A.P.); 4 – Alguns sítios com relevo; 5 – Alguns dos problemas que podem ser colocados em relação à Responsabilidade das Empresas pelo Crime de Corrupção; 5.1 – Âmbito dos problemas a serem falados; 6 – Qual a noção de «empresas que vamos utilizar»?; 6.1 – A noção de «empresa» em sentido geral objectivo e penal; 7 – Mas que tipo de crimes de corrupção vamos falar?; 8 – O art. 11º do Código Penal e os crimes de corrupção no contexto do ordenamento jurídico português; 8.1 – No contexto do art. 11º do Código Penal, o que significa «em nome da pessoa colectiva»?; 8.2 – No contexto do art. 11º do Código Penal, o que significa «no interesse da pessoa colectiva»?; 8.2.1 – No contexto do art. 11º do Código Penal, o que significa «quando não há interesse colectivo»?; 9 – E haverá diferenças, por exemplo, entre o modo de funcionamento técnico-jurídico do art. 11º do Código Penal e o art. 3º do Regime das Infracções Anti-Económicas e Contra a Saúde Pública (R.I.A.E.C.S.P.)?; 10 – E como é que a Jurisprudência portuguesa, a que tivemos acesso - dado não haver ainda fartura de decisões neste campo -, estabelece o nexo de imputação de responsabilidade penal a uma pessoa colectiva e/ou organização?; 10.1 – Uma primeira pré-conclusão dentro do objectivo que pretendemos demonstrar na totalidade deste trabalho; 11 – Uma segunda pré-conclusão: será que as diferenças acima assinaladas, por exemplo, entre o modo de funcionamento técnico-jurídico do art. 11º do Código Penal e o art. 3º do Regime das Infracções Anti-Económicas e Contra a Saúde Pública (R.I.A.E.C.S.P.), são as únicas? Veja-se o caso, v.g., do art. 7º do Regime Geral das Infracções Tributárias (R.G.I.T.); 12 – Em face das duas pré-conclusões anteriores, faça-se aqui, neste breve ensaio, uma primeira grande conclusão; 13 – Uma (primeira) hipótese de solução; 14 – Que tipo de «empresa» podemos enquadrar no art. 11º do Código Penal?; 14.1 – De acordo com o referido anteriormente, podemos dizer que todas as «empresas» podem praticar os crimes previstos e punidos no Código Penal português?; 14.2 – De acordo com o referido antes, quais são as «empresas» que não podem praticar os crimes de corrupção que estão previstos e punidos no Código Penal português?; 14.3 – Uma outra pré-conclusão: 14.4 – Um esboço de um dos possíveis problemas; 14.4.1 – Mas, afinal, o que são Entidades Públicas Empresariais (E.P.E.)?; 14.5 – Outra hipótese de esboço de um outro dos possíveis problemas que aqui podemos encontrar; 14.6 – Nova pré-conclusão; 14.7 – Uma outra importante pergunta a fazer e a responder desde já; 14.7.1 - Alarguemos, pois, um pouco a nossa investigação para além do Código Penal português; 14.7.2 – O problema da responsabilidade penal das organizações e/ou «pessoas colectivas», rectius, neste breve ensaio, empresas, pela prática de crimes de corrupção previstos e punidos na mencionada Lei n.º 20/2008, de 21 de Abril («Responsabilidade penal por crimes de corrupção no comércio internacional e na actividade privada»); 14.7.3 – Mais algumas pré-conclusões; 15 - Em face das duas pré-conclusões anteriores, faça-se aqui, neste breve ensaio, uma segunda grande conclusão; 16 - O que também apresenta outras implicações como por exemplo na aplicação do crime de «branqueamento» quando nos fala em «corrupção» como «crime primário»; 17 – Outras interrogações; 18 – Conclusão final, mas não última, como nenhuma o pode ser em ciência; 19 – Hipótese de solução. § Abstract: 1 - Introduction: some news media; 2 - The so-called "Council for the Prevention of Corruption”, 3 – “Attorney General's Office” (PGR) and the Central Bureau of Investigation and Penal Action (DIAP) 4 - Some sites with relief , 5 - Some of the problems that can be placed in relation to the Corporate Responsibility of the Crime of Corruption; 5.1 - Scope of issues to be spoken, 6 - What is the concept of "companies that we will use"?; 6.1 - The term “business” in a general purpose and criminal matters; 7 - What kind of crimes of corruption we talking about?; 8 - Art. 11 of the Penal Code and the crimes of corruption in the context of the Portuguese legal system; 8.1 - In the context of art. 11 of the Penal Code, which means "in the name of the legal person"?; 8.2 - In the context of art. 11 of the Penal Code, which means “in the interests of the legal person"?; 8.2.1 - In the context of art. 11 of the Penal Code, which means "where there is no collective interest"?; 9 - There will be differences, for example, between the operating mode of the Art. 11 of the Criminal Code and Art. 3 of the Legal Infractions Anti-Economic and Against Public Health (RIAECSP)?; 10 - And how does the case law of Portugal, we had access - as there still plenty of decisions in this field - makes a connection of allocating criminal liability to a legal person and / or organization?; 10.1 - A first pre-completion within the objective that we intend to demonstrate in all of this work; 11 - A second pre-conclusion: that the differences will be noted above, for example, between operating mode of the Art. 11 of the Criminal Code and Art. 3 of the Rules of the Offences Against Anti-Economics and Public Health (RIAECSP) are the only ones? Take the case v.g. of art. 7 of the Legal Framework of Tax Offences (RGIT) 12 - In view of the two pre-earlier conclusions, do it here, in this brief essay, a first major conclusion; 13 - A (first) chance for a solution, 14 - What kind “undertaking” we can frame the art. 11 of the Penal Code?; 14.1 - According to the above, we can say that all "companies" can practice the crimes defined and punished in the Portuguese Penal Code?; 14.2 - According to the mentioned before, what are the "business" who cannot practice corruption crimes that are planned and punished the Portuguese Penal Code?; 14.3 - Another pre-completion: 14.4 - A sketch of one of the possible problems; 14.4.1 - But after all the entities that are Public Enterprise (EPE)?; 14.5 - Another chance to draft another one of the possible problems that can be found here; 14.6 - New pre-completion; 14.7 - Another important question to ask and answer now; 14.7.1 - Let us expand, then, a little beyond our investigation of the Portuguese Penal Code; 14.7.2 - The problem of criminal liability of organizations and / or "legal persons", rectius, this brief essay, companies, for crimes of corruption provided for and punished mentioned in Law No. 20/2008 of 21 April ("Criminal liability for crimes of corruption in international trade and private activities"); 14.7.3 - Some more pre-conclusions; 15 - In view of the two pre-earlier conclusions, let it be here in this brief essay, a second major conclusion, 16 - Who also has other implications such as the application of the crime of "money laundering" when we talk about “corruption” as “primary crime”, 17 - Other questions; 18 - Bottom line, but not last, as the can be no science; 19 - Hypothesis solution. Abstract como no livro.

La innovación de los procesos - diferenciación en los servicios turísticos

The innovation contributes to business success and increased competitive advantage, one of the concepts that has deserved more attention among researchers in the field of management. Innovation is not exclusive of tangible products or services and can naturally extend to the process itself, the organization or marketing. Although it is not easy to gather a universal concept for innovation, do not seem to be no doubt that its importance is such that allows the company to build on the foundations of this future development, regardless of past success. This work has as its central purpose the study of process innovation in the supply outlook for tourism, given its importance in achieving business success. The recognition of its value assumes it as a challenge, making it necessary to distinguish with product, marketing and organizational innovation, either in substance or in the organizational competencies. Will be presented in this work, a brief description (as well as evolution of the concept) as a way of contextualizing and, then, clarified the distinction between the concepts process innovation and innovation process. Search will bring together the key distinguishing features from the perspective of tourism as a means of achieving competitive advantage for business. We will also discuss implications for management and future studies.

Economic analysis of occupational risk prevention: a case study in a textile company

Work accidents affect business and society as a whole. Fewer accidents mean fewer sick leaves, which results in lower costs and less disruption in the production process, with clear advantages for the employer. But workers and their households bear also a significant burden following a work accident, only partially compen-sated by insurance systems. Furthermore, the consequences of work accidents to the State and Society need also to be considered. When an organization performs an integrated risk analysis in evaluating its Occupational Health and Safety Management System, several steps are suggested to address the identified risk situations. Namely, to avoid risks, a series of preventive measures are identified. The organization should make a detailed analysis of the monetary impact (positive or negative) for the organization of each of the measures considered. Particularly, it is also important to consider the impact of each measure on society, involving an adequate eco-nomic cost-benefit analysis. In the present paper, a case study in a textile finishing company is presented. The study concentrates on the dyeing and printing sections. For each of the potential risks, several preventive measures have been identified and the corresponding costs and benefits have been estimated. Subsequently, the Benefit/Cost ratio (B/C) of these measures has been calculated, both in financial terms (from the organisa-tion’s perspective) and in economic terms (including the benefits for the worker and for the Society). Results show that, while the financial analysis in terms of the company does not justify the preventive measures, when the externalities are taken into account, the B/C ratio increases significantly and investments are fully justified.

Analysis of the return on preventive measures in musculoskeletal disorders through the benefitecost ratio: A case study in a hospital

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) are among the most costly health problems that society is facing today. Prevention involves investments and it is important for organizations to make a cost ebenefit analysis of ergonomic projects. Return on prevention is a recent concern in the domain of occupational safety and health (OSH). There are many studies concerning the return on the prevention of WMSDs, in terms of the benefits for the organization in which the preventive measures are implemented. However, it is also important to perform an analysis of the impact of each measure on society (externalities). A model to perform a financial and economic costebenefit analysis related to OSH projects was developed and it was applied in the case of the prevention of WMSDs in a Portuguese hospital. An analysis of the accidents and corresponding costs has been made in six of the services of the hospital. Financial and an economic costebenefit analysis have been made and the benefitecost ratio (B/C) has been calculated. While the B/C financial ratio, considering only the benefits to the hospital, is around 2, the economic B/C ratio, taking into account all the external benefits that have been quantified, is higher than 14. Relevance to industry: Both the economic and the financial B/C ratio are important support tools for decision makers in public and private organizations, helping them to define which preventive measures should be implemented, taking into account the costs involved and the resulting quantified benefits, for the organization, for the workers and for the society.

Economic evaluation of occupational safety preventive measures in a hospital

BACKGROUND: When an organization performs an integrated analysis of risks through its Occupational Health and Safety Management System, several steps are suggested to address the implications of the identified risks. Namely, the organization should make a detailed analysis of the monetary impact for the organization of each of the preventive measures considered. However, it is also important to perform an analysis of the impact of each measure on society (externalities). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to present a case study related to the application of the proposed economic evaluation methodology. METHODS: An analysis of the work accidents in a hospital has been made. Three of the major types of accidents have been selected: needle stings, falls and excessive strain. Following the risk assessment, some preventive measures have been designed. Subsequently, the Benefit/Cost ratio (B/C) of these measures has been calculated, both in financial terms (from the organization’s perspective) and in economic terms (including the benefits for the worker and for the Society). RESULTS: While the financial ratio is only advantageous in some cases, when the externalities are taken into account, the B/C ratio increases significantly. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to consider external benefits to make decisions concerning the implementation of preventive measures in Occupational Health and Safety projects

A Responsabilidade das Empresas pelo Crime de Corrupção: o Caso Português a partir de uma Perspectiva de Direito Penal, mas também de Criminologia

1- Introdução: algumas notícias da comunicação social; 2 – O designado «Conselho de Prevenção de Corrupção»; 3 – Procuradoria-Geral da República (P.G.R.) e o Departamento Central de Investigação e Acção Penal (D.I.A.P.); 4 – Alguns sítios com relevo; 5 – Alguns dos problemas que podem ser colocados em relação à Responsabilidade das Empresas pelo Crime de Corrupção; 5.1 – Âmbito dos problemas a serem falados; 6 – Qual a noção de «empresas que vamos utilizar»?; 6.1 – A noção de «empresa» em sentido geral objectivo e penal; 7 – Mas que tipo de crimes de corrupção vamos falar?; 8 – O art. 11º do Código Penal e os crimes de corrupção no contexto do ordenamento jurídico português; 8.1 – No contexto do art. 11º do Código Penal, o que significa «em nome da pessoa colectiva»?; 8.2 – No contexto do art. 11º do Código Penal, o que significa «no interesse da pessoa colectiva»?; 8.2.1 – No contexto do art. 11º do Código Penal, o que significa «quando não há interesse colectivo»?; 9 – E haverá diferenças, por exemplo, entre o modo de funcionamento técnico-jurídico do art. 11º do Código Penal e o art. 3º do Regime das Infracções Anti-Económicas e Contra a Saúde Pública (R.I.A.E.C.S.P.)?; 10 – E como é que a Jurisprudência portuguesa, a que tivemos acesso - dado não haver ainda fartura de decisões neste campo -, estabelece o nexo de imputação de responsabilidade penal a uma pessoa colectiva e/ou organização?; 10.1 – Uma primeira pré-conclusão dentro do objectivo que pretendemos demonstrar na totalidade deste trabalho; 11 – Uma segunda pré-conclusão: será que as diferenças acima assinaladas, por exemplo, entre o modo de funcionamento técnico-jurídico do art. 11º do Código Penal e o art. 3º do Regime das Infracções Anti-Económicas e Contra a Saúde Pública (R.I.A.E.C.S.P.), são as únicas? Veja-se o caso, v.g., do art. 7º do Regime Geral das Infracções Tributárias (R.G.I.T.); 12 – Em face das duas pré-conclusões anteriores, faça-se aqui, neste breve ensaio, uma primeira grande conclusão; 13 – Uma (primeira) hipótese de solução; 14 – Que tipo de «empresa» podemos enquadrar no art. 11º do Código Penal?; 14.1 – De acordo com o referido anteriormente, podemos dizer que todas as «empresas» podem praticar os crimes previstos e punidos no Código Penal português?; 14.2 – De acordo com o referido antes, quais são as «empresas» que não podem praticar os crimes de corrupção que estão previstos e punidos no Código Penal português?; 14.3 – Uma outra pré-conclusão: 14.4 – Um esboço de um dos possíveis problemas; 14.4.1 – Mas, afinal, o que são Entidades Públicas Empresariais (E.P.E.)?; 14.5 – Outra hipótese de esboço de um outro dos possíveis problemas que aqui podemos encontrar; 14.6 – Nova pré-conclusão; 14.7 – Uma outra importante pergunta a fazer e a responder desde já; 14.7.1 - Alarguemos, pois, um pouco a nossa investigação para além do Código Penal português; 14.7.2 – O problema da responsabilidade penal das organizações e/ou «pessoas colectivas», rectius, neste breve ensaio, empresas, pela prática de crimes de corrupção previstos e punidos na mencionada Lei n.º 20/2008, de 21 de Abril («Responsabilidade penal por crimes de corrupção no comércio internacional e na actividade privada»); 14.7.3 – Mais algumas pré-conclusões; 15 - Em face das duas pré-conclusões anteriores, faça-se aqui, neste breve ensaio, uma segunda grande conclusão; 16 - O que também apresenta outras implicações como por exemplo na aplicação do crime de «branqueamento» quando nos fala em «corrupção» como «crime primário»; 17 – Outras interrogações; 18 – Conclusão final, mas não última, como nenhuma o pode ser em ciência; 19 – Hipótese de solução; 20 – Novos desenvolvimentos. § 1 - Introduction: some news media; 2 - The so-called "Council for the Prevention of Corruption”, 3 – “Attorney General's Office” (PGR) and the Central Bureau of Investigation and Penal Action (DIAP) 4 - Some sites with relief , 5 - Some of the problems that can be placed in relation to the Corporate Responsibility of the Crime of Corruption; 5.1 - Scope of issues to be spoken, 6 - What is the concept of "companies that we will use"?; 6.1 - The term “business” in a general purpose and criminal matters; 7 - What kind of crimes of corruption we talking about?; 8 - Art. 11 of the Penal Code and the crimes of corruption in the context of the Portuguese legal system; 8.1 - In the context of art. 11 of the Penal Code, which means "in the name of the legal person"?; 8.2 - In the context of art. 11 of the Penal Code, which means “in the interests of the legal person"?; 8.2.1 - In the context of art. 11 of the Penal Code, which means "where there is no collective interest"?; 9 - There will be differences, for example, between the operating mode of the Art. 11 of the Criminal Code and Art. 3 of the Legal Infractions Anti-Economic and Against Public Health (RIAECSP)?; 10 - And how does the case law of Portugal, we had access - as there still plenty of decisions in this field - makes a connection of allocating criminal liability to a legal person and / or organization?; 10.1 - A first pre-completion within the objective that we intend to demonstrate in all of this work; 11 - A second pre-conclusion: that the differences will be noted above, for example, between operating mode of the Art. 11 of the Criminal Code and Art. 3 of the Rules of the Offences Against Anti-Economics and Public Health (RIAECSP) are the only ones? Take the case v.g. of art. 7 of the Legal Framework of Tax Offences (RGIT) 12 - In view of the two pre-earlier conclusions, do it here, in this brief essay, a first major conclusion; 13 - A (first) chance for a solution, 14 - What kind “undertaking” we can frame the art. 11 of the Penal Code?; 14.1 - According to the above, we can say that all "companies" can practice the crimes defined and punished in the Portuguese Penal Code?; 14.2 - According to the mentioned before, what are the "business" who cannot practice corruption crimes that are planned and punished the Portuguese Penal Code?; 14.3 - Another pre-completion: 14.4 - A sketch of one of the possible problems; 14.4.1 - But after all the entities that are Public Enterprise (EPE)?; 14.5 - Another chance to draft another one of the possible problems that can be found here; 14.6 - New pre-completion; 14.7 - Another important question to ask and answer now; 14.7.1 - Let us expand, then, a little beyond our investigation of the Portuguese Penal Code; 14.7.2 - The problem of criminal liability of organizations and / or "legal persons", rectius, this brief essay, companies, for crimes of corruption provided for and punished mentioned in Law No. 20/2008 of 21 April ("Criminal liability for crimes of corruption in international trade and private activities"); 14.7.3 - Some more pre-conclusions; 15 - In view of the two pre-earlier conclusions, let it be here in this brief essay, a second major conclusion, 16 - Who also has other implications such as the application of the crime of "money laundering" when we talk about “corruption” as “primary crime”, 17 - Other questions; 18 - Bottom line, but not last, as the can be no science; 19 - Hypothesis solution; 20 - New developments.