CorporateCriminalResponsibility.Pop

CorporateCriminalResponsibility.Pop - CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF CORPORATIONS—COMPARATIVE JURISPRUDENCE by Anca Iulia Pop Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the King Scholar Program Michigan State University College of Law under the direction of Professor Adam Candeub Spring, 2006
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
2 1. INTRODUCTION Criminal liability of corporations has become one of the most debated topics of the 20 th century. The debate became especially significant following the 1990s, when both the United States and Europe have faced an alarming number of environmental, antitrust, fraud, food and drug, false statements, worker death, bribery, obstruction of justice, and financial crimes involving corporations. The most recent and prominent case in the United Sates has been the Enron scandal in which one of the largest accounting firms in the world, Arthur Andersen LLP, was charged with obstruction of justice. 1 Some corporations, including Dynergy, Adelphia Communications, WorldCom, Global Crossing, Health South, Parmalat (in Italy), and Royal Ahold (in Netherlands) falsified their financial disclosures. Other corporations, among which are Royal Caribbean, Olympic Pipeline, Exxon, Pfizer, Bayer, and Shering-Plough Corporation, 2 breached the environmental or health and safety laws. McWane Inc., one of the world largest manufacturers of cast-iron pipes, has an extensive record of violations causing deaths. 3 These corporate crimes resulted in great losses. The consequences that most directly affect our society are the enormous losses of money, jobs, and even lives. At the same time, the long-term effects of these crimes, such as the damaging effects upon the environment or health, which may not severely affect us now, should not be underestimated. The reaction to this corporate criminal phenomenon has been the creation of juridical regimes that could deter and punish corporate wrongdoing. Corporate misconduct has been addressed by civil, administrative, and criminal laws. At the present, most countries agree that corporations can be sanctioned under civil and administrative laws. However, the criminal liability of corporations has been more controversial. While several jurisdictions have accepted
Background image of page 2
3 and applied the concept of corporate criminal liability under various models, other law systems have not been able or willing to incorporate it. Critics have voiced strong arguments against its efficiency and consistency with the principles of criminal law. At the same time, a large pool of partisans, to which I belong as well, has vigorously defended corporate criminal liability. In the following sections, I will attempt to determine the purposes of corporate criminal liability, the reasons why some jurisdictions adopted this concept, but others still refuse to accept it, the models of corporate criminal liability developed so far, the reasons why corporate criminal liability developed differently in different countries, and the lessons we could learn from these developments. Different countries have adopted various models of criminal liability or refused to
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 59

CorporateCriminalResponsibility.Pop - CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online