After an introduction that is focused on the general feature of the issue, and it’s relevance on the practical point of view, the first part of this work examines the different legislative techniques used for the individuation of the author of the crime in companies organized according to structural criteria of management such as: the division of duties and competences. The main techniques may be described as “ substantial”, when they refer to concepts like “direction” and “administration”, or “formal” when they consist in impersonal formulas or in the detention of a certain authorizing power. The examination of different laws is made with the aim of recognize its own meaning to any single rule, starting with definition of who could be liable for these crimes. The research is pursued with particular attention towards those general clauses that, in shame to the principle of “personal liability”, try to set the liability at the highest level of those companies. The main goal is to make a systematic reconstruction of the meaning of those rules, according to other rules operating in the same context, the peculiarity of the subject and especially their coherence with general principles like the so called “duty of guarantee” and the delegation of duties, That is also made to stop dangerous jurisprudential trends that raise “vertically” the liability in those companies and tend to modify the usual regime of evidences, especially for what concern the discipline of the delegation of duties. The second part of the work, according with the general statements made in the first part, analyzes deeply the criminal liability among journalistic companies. In this kind of companies the editor is usually liable, according to the art. 3 L. 47/1948. In spite of this general clause, there are many single crimes where other subjects are liable, for example the owner of the company and the publisher. The study wants to link the general rules of the code of law and the specific legislation, in order to recognize who should be liable for those crimes and making a distinction between the so called “Press crimes” and the crimes made by publication. The aim is to exclude that the editor may be holder of “duty of guarantee” for all those crimes linked with journalism, in order to delimitate his liability according to the general principle of personality of the punishment, which radically excludes any kind of “positional liability”. In the conclusions the results of the analyze are summarized and is underlined how the meaning of these rules, especially for the recognition of the author, should be red literally and together with the general principles of the chosen charging system, because a good interpretation should never go beyond the literal meaning of the law, and the observance of constitutional guarantees become fundamental in a subject where criminal punishments are inflicted.
Piva, D. (2009). Tecniche di individuazione del soggetto attivo del reato: contributo all’analisi della responsabilità penale nelle organizzazioni complesse, con particolare riferimento all’impresa giornalistica.
|Titolo:||Tecniche di individuazione del soggetto attivo del reato: contributo all’analisi della responsabilità penale nelle organizzazioni complesse, con particolare riferimento all’impresa giornalistica|
|Data di pubblicazione:||29-lug-2009|
|Anno Accademico:||A.A. 2006/2007|
|Corso di dottorato:||Diritto penale|
|Settore Scientifico Disciplinare:||Settore IUS/17 - Diritto Penale|
|Tipologia:||Tesi di dottorato|
|Citazione:||Piva, D. (2009). Tecniche di individuazione del soggetto attivo del reato: contributo all’analisi della responsabilità penale nelle organizzazioni complesse, con particolare riferimento all’impresa giornalistica.|
|Appare nelle tipologie:||07 - Tesi di dottorato|