Analysis Of The Penality Of The Concision

0 / 5. 0

ANALYSIS OF THE PENALITY OF THE CONCISION

INTRODUCTION

Among the crimes against the Public Administration-of Delites committed by public officials specifically the crime of concussion. The crime of concussion constitutes: “The official or public servant who, abusing his position, obliges or induces a person to give or promise improperly, for himself or for another, a good or a patrimonial benefit, will be repressed with a private penaltyFreedom not less than two or more than eight years;disqualification, as appropriate, in accordance with subsections 1.2 and 8 of article 36;And, with one hundred eighty to three hundred and sixty-five days-mult.

The crime in question is of greater intensity than other criminal types within the crimes committed by public officials. This crime is unilateral, since the taxpayer is not attributable and on the contrary the active subject is the one who seriously attempts against the public administration with his actions, because it is the one who is deposited the confidence of providing a correct administration towards society.

The present investigation aims to demonstrate that the penalty of concussion violates the principle of proportionality, since it must be related to the agent’s degree of responsibility, with the magnitude of the damage caused and the importance of the injured legal good;The minimum penalty that is typified in this crime is not congruent with the other crimes committed by public officials, that is why it is proposed to establish the principle of proportionality to the minimum penalty of the crime of concussion and modify the deprivation of liberty not less than twoyears for a deprivation of liberty not less than four years.

Developing.

The lack of principles and values, and the precarious training offered by the educational, and labor system to public servants, has generated the increase in committing this crime;Values that must be taken as a person and as a public official, must be the characteristic of a good public servant, allowing the service to be efficient, effective, warmth and quality, without creating job instability, since this leads to giving aBad institutional image and therefore to the State, this kind of acts committed notes that public servants in our environment and at all levels are not prepared.

The crime of concussion.

 It is one by which a public official or servant, abusing his position, obliges or induces another person to unduly deliver or promise a patrimonial good or benefit. This crime is typified in article 382 of the Peruvian Criminal Code. The crime of concussion prohibits any public official from using their powers to force the individual to deliver a patrimonial advantage.

The crime of concussion is compared to other crimes within the crimes committed by public officials, and therefore a comparison will be made:

Corruption.

Crime of corruption, the protected legal good is the correct and regular functioning of the public administration. Which stops working properly because of the corrupt acts committed by public officials or servants..This crime compared to the concussion is bilateral, that is, both the individual is an active subject with the official because they cooperate with this crime.

Because that way it serves as a history for a better public administration, since this crime is one of the most controversial, since it has only active subject to the public official and it is this who, by threat or violence, takes advantage of a person to obtain a benefitPatrimonial, to this we want to arrive that in this crime in which only a public official is committed the minimum penalty is two years and is not related to the other crimes typified in the same chapter, for that we seek to be modified in article 382 of the CodePenal.

Passive bribery. 

This crime compared to concussion, the crime of the passive bribery there is contractual freedom between the official and the individual, the individual who intervenes can respond criminally, while in the concussion it only sanctions the official, but not the person who gives or promisesa benefit.

In this sense, the typification of this crime seeks to protect, specifically, the exercise of the public function in accordance with the norms that regulate it. This implies that the public servant does not carry out hostile acts or coercion to the manager in the development of their functions, since in their work the trust provided by citizens is deposited.

Through this investigation, it is proposed to modify article 382, of the Criminal Code, so that the crime of concussion executed by public officials has a more severe penalty, according to the social reality of our country and thus reduce the crime rate against thepublic administration in this type of crime specifically.

Given this, it is noted that the active subjects of the crime of concussion both official or public servant, seriously threaten the public administration with their actions;This is why the minimum criminal sanction in this crime is not proportional in terms of established punishable conduct, since such conduct carried out by the active subject is very socially reproachable, since the public official or servant has the obligation to provide acorrect public administration to society.

More not to use its quality as such to obtain undue profit bending the will of the taxpayer and that as a result there is a minimum criminal sanction of 2 years of imprisonment. It is therefore that in us we intend through the proper use of the principle of proportionality with its characteristics such as suitability, need and proportionality, modify the deprivation of liberty not less than two years increase it to that of not less than four years.

conclusion.

The crime of concussion requires as a commissive the use of violence or threat that vicie the will of the subject. However, it would be impossible to demand that it behave in another way and in accordance with the legal system. On the other hand, the "induced" element indicated by the criminal type of concussion merits a careful interpretation. According to the general theory of crime, induction or instigation is a figure of participation that is accessory to the injury of the legal good carried out by the author.   

Free Analysis Of The Penality Of The Concision Essay Sample

Related samples

Zika virus: Transmission form Introduction The Zika virus belongs to the Flaviviradae family, was found for the first time in a monkey called Rhesus febrile and in...

Zika virus: cases and prevention Introduction The World Health Organization (WHO) has confirmed that Zika is a virus caused through the mosquito bite which is...

Zeus The King of Greek mythology Introduction Zeus is the Olympic God of heaven and thunder, the king of all other gods and men and, consequently, the main figure...

Zeus's punishment to Prometheus Introduction Prometheus, punished by Zeus Prometheus, punished by Zeus. Prometheus is a ‘cousin’ of Zeus. He is the son of the...

Comments

Leave feedback

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *