One of the most fundamental and yet challenging issues in the philosophy of criminal law is understanding the relationship between morality and law, and determining the limits of the moral legitimacy of criminalization. In this context, Aristotelian moral philosophy—centered on concepts such as eudaimonia, virtue, and justice—provides important theoretical resources for grounding the principles of criminalization. However, common interpretations of Aristotle often suggest that he advocates a complete overlap between individual morality and legal regulation. A careful examination of his works, particularly within the framework of justice theory, reveals a clear and essential distinction between moral faults and legal faults.This study critically reexamines Aristotle’s conception of justice as a form of virtue, to clarify this distinction and explore its implications for the foundations of criminalization. The central question of this article is to investigate Aristotle’s theory of justice in relation to virtue, and to derive its implications for criminal law. The objectives of the study are: first, to explore the relationship between individual virtue and social justice within Aristotle’s ethical-political system; second, to analyze the role of key Aristotelian ethical concepts—such as good intention, the mean, practical wisdom (phronesis), and justice—in determining the limits of legislation; and third, to clarify the fundamental distinction between moral faults and legally punishable acts from Aristotle’s perspective. Ultimately, the study aims to establish the criterion of “harm to others” as the cornerstone of the legitimacy of criminalization in the Aristotelian framework.The research employs an analytical-critical methodology, drawing primarily from Aristotle’s key texts, particularly the Nicomachean Ethics and Politics. The methodology involves conceptual analysis of virtue ethics, logical deduction of its implications for criminal law, and critique of reductionist interpretations of Aristotelian justice. An interdisciplinary approach, bridging moral philosophy and the philosophy of criminal law, is also utilized.The findings indicate that Aristotelian ethics, with its emphasis on eudaimonia as the ultimate goal of human life, conceives virtue as a dispositional state grounded in conscious choice and situated within the mean between extremes. The full realization of virtue requires the simultaneous presence of good intention and right action, meaning that ethical judgment ultimately depends on the agent’s motivation. Key concepts in this ethical system—such as the mean, which is context- and person-dependent, and practical wisdom (phronesis), the capacity to discern the right course of action in particular circumstances—are inherently agent-centered and situational. Consequently, Aristotelian ethics cannot directly provide a basis for fixed legal rules, since determining the right action requires the judgment of a virtuous agent (phronimos) in a specific context, and cannot be reduced to universal principles.Justice, in this framework, serves as the bridge between virtue and law. Aristotle distinguishes between general (universal) justice and particular (specific) justice. General justice refers to complete virtue in relation to others and conformity with the law, thus defining the scope of legislation and criminalization. Particular justice, on the other hand, is divided into distributive justice—concerned with the allocation of resources and positions based on merit—and corrective or rectificatory justice, aimed at restoring balance after harm has occurred. Crucially, from Aristotle’s perspective, the domain of law is defined by the criterion of “harm to others.” In other words, legitimate legislation is not intended to guide individual morality, but rather to preserve collective well-being and prevent harm to others. This criterion establishes a clear boundary between moral faults—concerned with individual character—and legal faults or punishable acts.The study demonstrates that Aristotle does not conflate individual morality with law. Certain acts, such as murder, theft, and adultery, may be regarded as “pre-legal” or “intrinsically wrong” because they inherently disrupt human relations, regardless of positive law. Therefore, the central criterion for criminalization in the Aristotelian framework is objective harm to others, or the undermining of the common good and the conditions necessary for societal flourishing. This perspective explicitly rejects legal paternalism, which involves government intervention solely for individual welfare without harm to others.Although practical wisdom is an individual attribute, mechanisms can be devised to institutionalize it within legislation and adjudication. The legislator, acting as a phronetic agent, can identify and criminalize public vices—collective patterns of behavior harmful to society—while considering the common good and citizens’ flourishing. Likewise, judges can assess intent, conscious choice, and situational factors through practical wisdom to determine the extent of criminal liability. Thus, virtue theory informs not only the definition of criminal acts but also the assessment of legal responsibility.In conclusion, Aristotelian virtue ethics, despite being agent-centered and context-sensitive, provides a coherent moral foundation for criminalization through the lens of justice and the central criterion of “harm to others.” In this framework, legitimate criminal legislation rests on two pillars: first, the criminalization of intrinsically harmful pre-legal acts, such as murder and theft; and second, the criminalization of public vices that objectively undermine collective welfare and citizens’ potential for flourishing. This approach, by avoiding both moral relativism and legal paternalism and by clearly distinguishing between individual ethics and law, offers a balanced and coherent solution to the problem of criminalization. In this model, the practical wisdom of legislators and judges replaces rigid, inflexible rules without leading to subjectivism or arbitrariness in law.
Este artigo discorre sobre a ilegitimidade da contravenção penal de exploração de jogos de azar, à luz das teorias da proteção de bens jurídicos e do paternalismo penal, situados no contexto da proporcionalidade penal, concluindo que o tipo contravencional não foi recepcionado pela Constituição de 1988.
Criminal law and procedure, Social pathology. Social and public welfare. Criminology
El uso de los criptoactivos ha experimentado un notorio aumento en los últimos años, introduciendo consigo una serie de conceptos novedosos en la economía española. Este fenómeno ha permitido a los usuarios operar de nuevas formas, lo que entraña una serie de ventajas y riesgos inherentes que deberían conocer. Las ventajas asociadas a estos activos financieros han supuesto un reclamo que ha hecho que cada vez más individuos hagan uso de los mismos. Esta atracción se ha traducido en una mayor presencia de los criptoactivos en las investigaciones policiales, utilizados como medio de pago, promocionados como inversiones con rendimientos rápidos e incluso utilizados en operativas de blanqueo de capitales procedentes de todo tipo de delitos. La versatilidad en su utilización y su cada vez más marcada presencia en la sociedad plantea desafíos significativos para las autoridades, que deben, sin limitar las oportunidades legítimas que los criptoactivos pueden ofrecer, adaptar su legislación para salvaguardar a la población frente a los posibles riesgos asociados a los criptoactivos y fomentar su uso responsable y seguro. En este sentido, las Fuerzas y Cuerpos de Seguridad están en la obligación de proteger a los ciudadanos en este nuevo ámbito virtual que se presenta.
Social pathology. Social and public welfare. Criminology, Criminal law and procedure
The principle of ultimum remedium suggests that criminal sanctions should be used as a last resort when other legal avenues have been exhausted. The principle is not explicitly stated in the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Law and is often considered a mere slogan in practice. Recently, there has been a growing trend of resolving minor criminal cases outside the formal judicial process. Instead of imposing criminal penalties, conciliation or restorative justice methods are being used. In this context, restorative justice involves reaching an agreement that resolves conflict between the offender and victim. Although not specifically regulated by the Criminal Procedure Law, there has been a shift in how criminal law enforcement views minor cases, allowing for reconciliation or peace agreements. The introduction of restorative justice mechanisms by law enforcement agencies has made the practice of reconciliation more flexible, moving away from its initially punitive nature. Additionally, including peace within restorative justice indirectly strengthens the ultimum remedium principle, ensuring that criminal sanctions are truly used as a last resort in certain minor cases.
Protecting the victims of crimes is an objective of the judicial bodies to avoid the risk of revictimization, thus exercising their obligation to defend the fundamental rights of the person (the right to life, the right to health and physical and mental integrity, the protection of dignity, private life, the right to free expression etc.), as protected by a series of national and international normative acts. The criminal procedural measures for the protection of victims of the crime of domestic violence can belong to various criminal legal or criminal procedural institutions: general protective measures, regulated in art. 113 of Criminal Procedure Code related to art. 125-130 of Criminal Procedure Code, preventive measures, accessory and complementary punishments and administrative protective measures ordered on the basis of Law 682/2002 on the protection of witnesses. The development of Romanian legislation to complete the spectrum of available instruments, protective measures imposed by international legislation or inspired by the legislation of other states or from the recommendations presented by international experts, is necessary and would follow the trend on a European scale to harmonize the practices of physical and psychological protection of victims. Thus, the capacity of the judicial bodies to obtain the willingness of the victims to cooperate with the judicial bodies will be enhanced, the risks of exposure to any danger by participating in the trial being minimized, and they will be encouraged to adopt a sincere, unhindered attitude during the hearings.
Although it is most commonly associated with financial loans, a loan is a kind of liability that can include any kind of tangible asset. Similar to other debt instruments, loans involve the redistribution of financial assets over time between the debtor and the lender. Online loans are financial assistance provided by financial institutions in which the loan application is conducted using an application controlled by the financial institution. The availability of online loans makes the loan application procedure easier, faster, and less complicated. Legal research using juridical normative research methods was conducted to understand the legal issues and legal relationships of criminal liability of online lenders. This research aims to examine the effectiveness of positive law in Indonesia in law enforcement of online money lending criminal cases and examine the actions of online money lending criminal offenders who make threats, especially through cell phones, have clear legal sanctions as an effort to protect online money loan recipients. This criminal liability is in the form of punishment. There are criminal sanctions for companies or individuals including debt collectors as part of fintech lending who commit violations in the form of disclosure of personal data subject to Article 32 juncto (jo) Article 48 of the amendment to the Bill of Act on Electronic Information and Transaction.
Terrorism has become a worldwide concern since the events of September 11, 2001, in the United States, in addition to the Bali bombings in Indonesia in 2002 and the bombings at Davao City airport in 2003. The broad impact of terrorism has caused Indonesia and the regional countries of Southeast Asia to feel very interested in actively participating in solving this problem. Forums for discussion and cooperation in the fight against terrorism have also arisen in the Southeast Asian region, such as the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Transnational Crime (AMMTC), which is a meeting forum within ASEAN to discuss issues of transnational crime. The purpose of this document is to examine and discuss the legal aspects of international cooperation in efforts to combat criminal acts of terrorism. The method that the researcher uses is a normative method, which uses a statutory approach, a case approach, and a conceptual approach. The technique of collecting legal materials used is by reviewing, identifying, and classifying primary and secondary legal materials based on library research. Then, the researcher describes qualitative description. Terrorism is all forms of actions and attitudes that are directly implemented against a country with the aim of creating terror against certain persons, groups, individuals, or the wider community. International cooperation between countries in order to maintain security against counter-terrorism crimes in ASEAN is necessary for achieving dynamic peace and stability while still prioritizing Indonesia's national interests which will also support the creation of an ASEAN Community in 2015 which consists of three mutually supportive principles, including the political-security community, the economic community, and the social and cultural community. The legal aspects of international cooperation between countries in efforts to combat terrorism include preventive, preventive, and repressive measures.
Maintaining prosecution in criminal cases in court is a specific function of
the prosecutor, which is enshrined in both the Constitution of Ukraine and the provisions of
the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. This function should meet not only the objectives
of criminal justice but also international standards in the field of criminal justice. Criminal
proceedings are divided into public and private, depending on the type of socially dangerous
act. And depending on the type of accusation, the functions of the prosecutor in the exercise of
their powers are different. Thus, in cases of private prosecution, the participation of the victim
is crucial, and his/her refusal to prosecute may be grounds for closing the criminal proceedings.
This note related to the study of the innovative approach of the Supreme Court’s law enforcement
practice shows the active role of the prosecutor in considering these categories of criminal cases
in court.
Methods: We thoroughly analysed the case-law of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, as well as
the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine and other legislative acts. We also
generalised and studied the case-law of Ukrainian courts, as well as recommendations of the
CoE and the doctrine of the criminal procedural law of Ukraine.
Results and Conclusions: The authors drew several conclusions about various forms of private
prosecution with their own specifics, which are manifested in the aspects mentioned in this note
MEHDI MUSAZADEH KOFI, alihosein najafiabrandabadi, bagher shamloo
et al.
AbstractThe legitimacy and acceptability of punishment is dependent on the legitimacy of its constructive political structures. To legitimize the political structures, we need the rule of law. Governments acting according to law consider rationality as a measure of legitimacy and credit the values and moral, social, and cultural norms of society. In modern governments based on wisdom, the principle of preserving the natural rights of humans and freedom has been established on reason. Citizens have the right to protest against it when governments fail to do their duty in protecting citizens’ freedoms. The principle of the right of states to punish, the basis and its principled structure and its effects, are the questions of the present study which has been carried out in descriptive-analytic mode. The right of citizens to rehabilitation and justice desert, as well as the rights of citizens to civil disobedience, and the right not to be punished are the results of the application of the rational-based right to punishment. The consequences of rational punishment are the mitigation and humanization of punishment and providing reasonable benefits to victims, criminals, and citizens.
Karol Karnecki, Johann Steiner, Paul C. Guest
et al.
Objectives: The paper presents the results of the statistical analyses of completed suicides in the Tri-City area, Poland from 1980 to 2009. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the trait dynamics of completed suicides in the context of drastic political and socioeconomic transformations. Methods: Statistical analysis of approximately 30,000 autopsy cases, including 3885 suicides, was performed. All data were evaluated using the STATISTICA version 10 software. Results: The analyses revealed an increasing number of suicide completers. Men committed suicide more frequently and were younger than female suicide committers. We observed also an increase in the mean age of suicide completers. More suicides occurred in the spring and summer compared to autumn and winter seasons. The most common method of suicide was hanging. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest temporal changes in trends, methods and social profile of suicide attempters related to political and socioeconomic changes in Poland in the years 1980–2009. These included the activity of the opposition movement “Solidarity”, the introduction of martial law in December 1981, the fall of communism and democratization processes, and the shifting from the system of a centrally planned economy to a neoliberal capitalism.
Given the importance of legal aid in creating justice, upholding human rights and equality before the law, as well as in achieving due process of law, the obligation of providing legal aid becomes essential to be effectively implemented. This research is very important, given the enormous benefits that will be gained when the implementation of legal assistance to the community can not be outside the court , can be implemented effectively, but also provides a form of legal reform effort in the aspect of equity distribution.
In an effort to address the legacies of massive human rights abuses and to restore the harms that have been caused, access to justice in the Democratic Republic of the Congo should be seen within a broad context. Central to the fulfilment of such a broad understanding of access to justice is victim participation. The legal framework of the DRC permits a wide range of participatory rights for victims in criminal proceedings. However, until recently the authority to prosecute serious violations of international human rights law, namely, genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, were exclusively held by the DRC’s military courts. With the adoption of legislation in 2016 amending the Congolese Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, what remains unclear is how victim participation will be operationalised once domestic courts start prosecuting these international crimes. The purpose of this article is to respond to these concerns. AFRICAN HUMAN RIGHTS LAW JOURNAL
Trinidad García, Celestino Rodríguez, Javier Rodríguez
et al.
This study aimed to describe and compare the educational, social, and family profiles of adults with and without ADHD from two different settings: a prison and an outpatient psychiatric setting. A total of 542 participants, aged between 17 and 69 years, took part in the study. The participants consisted of four groups: a prison sample with ADHD (n = 69) and without ADHD (n = 183), and an outpatient psychiatric sample with ADHD (n = 218) and without ADHD (n = 72). The results showed that, firstly, there were some statistically significant differences between the groups in academic history, social and family situation, and the adoption of risk behaviors during adolescence and early adulthood. Secondly, some of these differences were related to diagnosis (ADHD versus non-ADHD) while others were related to the sample being examined (prison versus psychiatric). The findings from the study showed the presence of significant implications in social, family, educational, and employment achievements both for adults with ADHD (both prison and psychiatric samples) and for adults without ADHD.