Os crimes de mídia no paradigma democrático constitucional

The criminal responsibility of the media is analyzed when the criteria for production of news and events involving public safety are produced without considering the technical, legal and ethical practice of journalism in the media factors. Freedom of speech, expression of thought, necessary for professional qualifications and constitutional limits, reaching criminal constitutional principles and the possibilities of criminal liability for offenses practiced in the media are present as key factors legal dialogue in this work. The judgment of the Supreme Court on the unconstitutionality of Law nº. 5.250/67 called Media Law caused a gap in the national legal system, forcing the use of the criminal code to address issues that involve crimes produced in media professional performance. The presumption of innocence is ignored by the professional media during a police investigation where the information published does not respect, including constitutional guarantees: the right to privacy, honor and image. The right to information and the duty to inform media are worked in its constitutional aspect, considering that the same information should be produced is guided by the quality and guiding principles of truth. The constitutional concept of media is presented as information with the appropriate language of the news media, produced and disseminated through the vehicles of mass media, whether in print or digital platform. The presented model of the legal right to information is outlined from a constitutional hermeneutics, increasing the production of news as a result of the occupation of journalist in different news platforms, guaranteeing the quality of this prolific law. Under the Freedom of professional activity of the journalist, the constitutional limits are addressed in line with the reality of (non) regulation of their profession, considering the constitutional abuses committed in the exercise of that activity linked to communication fences. Jusphilosophic field reaches the limits of the duty of truth in journalism as a tool for spreading news, respect the audience and compatibility with the constitutional state. Using the conceptual and doctrinal aspects, this criminal offense is parsed from the journalistic practice and the publication of news involving public safety, with the hypothetical field consummation of that crime through the eventual intention. As a form of judgment against these crimes produced in honor media presents the court of the jury as a legitimate form of democratic decision

Criminal Liability of Organizations, Corporations, Legal Persons, and Similar Entities on Law of Portuguese Cybercrime: A Brief Discussion on the Issue of Crimes of “False Information,” the “Damage on Other Programs or Computer Data,” the “Computer-Software Sabotage,” the “Illegitimate Access,” the “Unlawful Interception,” and “Illegitimate Reproduction of the Protected Program”

Abstract: in Portugal, and in much of the legal systems of Europe, «legal persons» are likely to be criminally responsibilities also for cybercrimes. Like for example the following crimes: «false information»; «damage on other programs or computer data»; «computer-software sabotage»; «illegitimate access»; «unlawful interception» and «illegitimate reproduction of protected program». However, in Portugal, have many exceptions. Exceptions to the «question of criminal liability�� of «legal persons». Some «legal persons» can not be blamed for cybercrime. The legislature did not leave! These «legal persons» are v.g. the following («public entities»): legal persons under public law, which include the public business entities; entities utilities, regardless of ownership; or other legal persons exercising public powers. In other words, and again as an example, a Portuguese public university or a private concessionaire of a public service in Portugal, can not commit (in Portugal) any one of cybercrime pointed. Fair? Unfair. All laws should provide that all legal persons can commit cybercrimes. PS: resumo do artigo em inglês.

«Corruption» and social and economic criminal law: criminology, criminal policy, political science and law&economics - a new idea about criminal liability of legal entities

Abstract: If we think there is a significant number of legal offshore in the globalized world, then there is not even a global consensus about what «corruption» is. The «illegal corruption» in a country may be legal in another. Moreover, the great global corruption is above the law or above democratic States. And not all democratic States are «Rule of Law». Therefore, the solution is global earlier in time and space law, democratic, free and true law. While the human being does not reach a consensus of what «corruption» really is, the discussion will not go further than a caricature. One of the other problems about «corruption» is that it is very difficult to establish the imputation of crimes, including «corruption» (v.g. Portugal) on some «companies», corporations. We have a juridical problem in the composition of the art. 11. of the Portuguese Penal Code.

Criminal liability of canadian corporations for international crimes

Ce mémoire porte sur la responsabilité pénale des entreprises canadiennes pour des crimes internationaux commis en partie ou entièrement à l’étranger. Dans la première partie, nous montrons que les premiers développements sur la reconnaissance de la responsabilité criminelle d’entités collectives devant les tribunaux militaires établis après la deuxième guerre mondiale n’ont pas été retenus par les tribunaux ad hoc des Nations Unies et par la Cour pénale internationale. En effet, la compétence personnelle de ces tribunaux permet uniquement de contraindre des personnes physiques pour des crimes internationaux. Dans la deuxième partie, nous offrons des exemples concrets illustrant que des entreprises canadiennes ont joué dans le passé et peuvent jouer un rôle criminel de soutien lors de guerres civiles et de conflits armés au cours desquels se commettent des crimes internationaux. Nous montrons que le droit pénal canadien permet d’attribuer une responsabilité criminelle à une organisation (compagnie ou groupe non incorporé) pour des crimes de droit commun commis au Canada, comme auteur réel ou comme complice. Nous soutenons qu’il est également possible de poursuivre des entreprises canadiennes devant les tribunaux canadiens pour des crimes internationaux commis à l’extérieur du Canada, en vertu de la Loi canadienne sur les crimes contre l’humanité et les crimes de guerre, du principe de la compétence universelle et des règles de droit commun. Bref, le Canada est doté d’instruments juridiques et judiciaires pour poursuivre des entreprises soupçonnées de crimes internationaux commis à l’étranger et peut ainsi mettre un terme à leur état indésirable d’impunité.

A «corrupção e a fraude» no espaço comunicacional português e europeu: contributo para uma visão interdisciplinar constitucional criminológica e jurídico-penal

As formas de definir «corrupção e fraude» são infinitas, pelo que a aplicação do Direito penal constitucional pode ficar prejudicada. A comunicação e o comentário público e política são por vezes feitos em termos profundamente equivocados. Recentemente, em Portugal, destacados políticos e comentadores chegaram a apelar à «criminalização do enriquecimento ilícito», nem que fosse com o sacrifício da própria Constituição ou do Estado de Direito. É a democracia que passa a estar em perigo. Ao mesmo tempo que se defende com fanatismo quase teológico o sistema económico capitalista, procura-se consagrar na lei a sua destruição. Ou seja, há uma certa demagogia política que quer ter tudo ao mesmo tempo como se isso fosse possível. Perante isto, resta ao cidadão comum agir se for necessário sob as possibilidades das causas de justificação e fazendo uso do direito constitucional de resistência. ABSTRACT Ways to define «corruption and fraud» are endless, so the application of constitutional criminal law may be impaired. The communication and public comment and politics are sometimes done in terms profoundly mistaken. Recently, in Portugal, prominent politicians and commentators have come to call the «criminalization of illicit enrichment» (embezzlement) even if it was at the sacrifice of the Constitution or the rule of law. It is democracy that happens to be in danger. At the same time it defends itself with almost theological fanaticism the capitalist economic system, seeking to enshrine in law its destruction. That is, there is a certain political demagoguery that wants to have everything at the same time as if that were possible. Given this, it remains to ordinary act if necessary under the scope of defenses and making use of the constitutional right of resistance.

«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.