Página 1 dos resultados de 2 itens digitais encontrados em 0.000 segundos

Preventive detention of sex offenders: A comparative law perspective; Detención preventiva de los abusadores sexuales: Una perspectiva comparativa de ley; Detenção preventiva dos abusadores sexuais: Uma perspectiva comparativa da lei

Calkins Mercado, Cynthia
Fonte: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana Cali Publicador: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana Cali
Tipo: info:eu-repo/semantics/article; "Artículo revisado por pares"; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion; Artículo Formato: application/pdf; application/pdf; application/pdf
ENG; SPA; POR
Relevância na Pesquisa
17%
In recent decades, criminal justice and mental health legislation across the globe has sought to manage and prevent the problem of repeat sexual violence. Perhaps some of the most restrictive measures have been those aimed at the preventive detention of those sex offenders thought to pose an elevated risk of re-offense. This paper examines Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) legislation, deemed constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in Kansas v. Hendricks (1997), and compares this post-sentence civil commitment scheme with preventive detention statutes targeted at, or otherwise applicable to, sexual offenders in several of the Commonwealth nations. Specifically, this paper examines the Australian Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act (2003), which was upheld in Attorney- General (QLD) v. Fardon (2004) and which, similar to SVP legislation in the U.S., allows for the post-sentence preventive detention of sex offenders deemed to be at high risk of serious sexual recidivism. Moreover, this paper reviews the Dangerous Offender legislation in Canada, which allows for indeterminate detention of offenders at sentencing, as well as the Dangerous and Severe Personality Disorder (DSPD) designation in England, which authorizes transfer to secure commitment facilities those offenders thought to pose a serious risk of harm to others. A brief discussion of these alternative schemes concludes the paper.; En décadas recientes...

Irretroactividad y retroactividad para los peligrosos o socialmente indeseables

Borja Jiménez, Emiliano
Fonte: Universidad Sergio Arboleda Publicador: Universidad Sergio Arboleda
Tipo: Artigo de Revista Científica
Relevância na Pesquisa
26.3%
.; Se realiza un estudio comparativo de dos casos enjuiciados ante el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos: M. contra Alemania y Del Río Prada contra España; en ambos, los tribunales constitucionales de esos países actuaron como poder del Estado y no como defensores de la Constitución, al evitar la puesta en libertad de sujetos considerados peligrosos o socialmente indeseables. Esa prolongación de la privación de libertad se llevó a cabo violando principios básicos del sistema penal y constitucional, y es fruto de una política criminal regresiva; por ello, el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos declara violados los principios de legalidad penal y de libertad, tutelados en el Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos, para lo cual no solo recurre a una interpretación material de los derechos y principios menoscabados, sino que rechaza los argumentos formales que encubren su vulneración.