* He explained that currently, the application of criminal law is approached as an inverted pyramid. Be located above the widest part, or the judicial power in the right half and in the narrowest part, the tip, is the interest of the victim. And this group proposed that the pyramid is reversed, and the widest part and important is the interest of the victim.

There is much to be done.

Ignorance to clarify, electioneering and morbidity to cut / remove, exaggerations to put into perspective and bold steps, though politically incorrect, to give.

Platform and other rights are possible and are doing this. Now it is necessary for society to want to face the reality that prison is not like under the carpet, the place where we hide everything that disturbs us rather than seeking solutions.

We are in time of change and deep cleaning every one of the sectors and fields. Nobody is going to deliver: education, medicine, politics, economics, religion, art, breeding, industry, food, …

The judicial system is compromised (The Country). We talked about the New Consciousness in the Bar, and now new life in the criminal law.

The prison is neither the only nor the best social systems of conflict resolution and while that’s not managed positively, NOT a better world is possible.

Incoming search terms for the article:

The Platform calls for an informed and calm debate on imprisonment and punishment, and thus seek to remove the false myths created around the criminal justice system who are these 13, each of which is explained in depth here:

1. The myth “the Spanish penal system is a benevolent system,” a “is the most repressive in Europe”

2. The myth “the life sentence does not exist in Spain: implántese” to “there are in fact life sentences in the Spanish State and, in some cases by the inability of this review, is stricter than other states that do have it in their Codes ”

3. The assumption that “the profile of the average prisoner is highly dangerous” to “prisoners, mostly are not in prison for committing serious or violent crimes”

4. The myth “prisons are institutions comfortable and secure” a “are spaces in which death is a constant presence”

5. The myth of the “existence of a direct correlation between increased crime and the number of prisoners,” the disconnect between the number of criminal offenses and the increase of people in prison ”

6. The myth “offenses are an expression of human freedom, a free individual decision by each one must pay” to “a large majority of them have a direct link with social exclusion”

7. The myth “the criminal justice system to protect victims”, to “the criminal justice system keeps on suffering without offering different possibilities of repairing the damage”

8. The myth “the penalties are met in a small part” to “are met in full and the vast majority of people do within the prison compound in the ordinary regime”

9. The myth “permits should be limited by the insecurity generated” to “exit permits are a necessary part of rehabilitation, humanizing and low risk”

10. The myth “the law of the child has generated impunity for minors, it is very soft and does not punish,” to “criminal action on over 14 years and under 18 is higher than that of the adults and even punishable by imprisonment and harsh penalties ”

11. From Myth “called efficiency of the penal system” to “the apparent inability of the criminal justice system for the satisfactory resolution of conflicts”

12. The myth “enter through a door and out the other” to “many enter prison even without being judged”

13. Budget “offenders are, in general, people without morals and compassion,” a “in more cases than we think, have feelings of regret and be willing to repair the damage caused”

“Spain has a much lower crime rate than the European average (in the United Kingdom doubled ours) and a downward trend in crime for 20 years. However, 90% of citizens believe the country is becoming more dangerous and a higher percentage of prisoners than any other European country: the figure has increased fourfold in 30 years ”

“Society seems to believe that the prison is full of very dangerous criminals, but not true. The vast majority are imprisoned for drug offenses or against property. The prison should be used when really necessary. Not valid for all ”

“The prison is hard. Society is not aware of what it means to be imprisoned, it is a vital devastation ”

“Spain has to consider effective alternatives to prison, with experts and so quiet. There can be no more prisoners in our jails ”
Carlos Rios Julian Martin, a professor at the University of Comillas, criminal law expert and author of book

“Revenge or reintegration? How do we ensure the provision of justice? Do we need a collective reflection, serious and serene on the role of prisons, the reasons for their overbooking and type of convictions?

Of course, in a country with an uncontrolled expansion of the penal system, with few but very serious crimes based on media coverage that create alarm morbid social and political pressure on legislators, and public demonstrations clamoring for tougher sentences, chains sentences and to the gallows, there is clearly fertile ground for an initiative such as the Platform Other Criminal Law Is Possible to see the light.

More temperance rather stick to reality, more technical and less blind fits of rage are the essential ingredients for reform and clean prisons and criminal law. And this cleansing and renewal is underway.

Judges, prosecutors, law professors, teachers, lawyers, psychiatrists, doctors, sociologists, institutions, organizations and ordinary citizens, increase the list to join the Platform is Possible Another Criminal Law which aims to report the problems and shortcomings of Spanish prison system performance and “humanized, creating a criminal law that creates the least possible personal violence, to ensure respect for fundamental rights and protect the legitimate interests of repair material and emotional support to victims.”

CONDE MUÑOZ, Francisco 2.002-CRIMINAL LAW-party General-Editing Editorial 5ta.-Valencia-TIRANT BLANCH. 56 pp. MIR PUIG, Santiago 1.998-CRIMINAL LAW-Party-General, the 5th edition Barcelona. Editorial TECFOTO S.L. PEÑA CABRERA, Raúl.1 ,997 He tried CRIMINAL LAW – Programmatic Study of the General. 3rd. edition Grijley E.I.R.L-Editor

Welzel Hans tells us that the co-authorship is authorship, its particularity is the fact that the domain unit is common to several people. Co-author is who possess the personal qualities of the author carries the joint decision regarding the fact and by virtue of it taking part in the commission of the crime. The independent co-authorship is a form of authorship and is based on the principle of division of labor. Each co-turn complemented by the fact that of all others in the offense: therefore also account for the crime.

Co-authorship is, subjectively, community spirit and objectively, a division of tasks of importance of the contributions. It is indeed the domain of functional, through the distribution of agreed contributions. Fluency in fact not exercised unfair one, but all through a joint and mutual fulfillment.

Enrique Bacigalupo co defines those who take part in the commission of the crime codominado the fact. As stated, the existing law Argentinean, Colombian, Spanish, Mexican and Venezuelan gives no express rule on co-authorship. The Co-authoring depend not dogmatic in their existence express legal recognition, as it is – as the author mediate-implicit in the notion of the author.

Finally, we consider the co-authorship occurs when several people, after the conclusion of a common agreement – carried out a joint fact way through an objective contribution to its realization; this figure, then, is also based on the domain of fact – that here is a collective – by which each co-dominates the event in conjunction with another or others.

Criminal Law Concept : General Concept

Coauthorship believe it when a crime is carried out jointly by two or more people sharing mutual agreement between all the domain of fact. The crime is then committed “together”, sharing the speakers together, the tasks imposed on the type of author, but with collective consciousness of the global plan concerted unit. Dr. Raul Peña Cabrera coauthored defines as “the execution of a crime committed jointly by several persons who participate voluntarily and knowingly agree to a division of functions necessary in nature. The Co-authoring needs no explicit legal recognition because it is implicit on the notion of copyright …. “

Felipe Villavicencio T. defines the co-authorship as a form of authorship with the peculiarity that in it, the domain of fact is common to several people .- Co-authors are taking part in the commission of the crime, the fact condominium (functional domain of fact. Example: the murderers of one disables the victim’s arms, while others will infer sharps injuries.

Francisco Muñoz Conde defined as the joint co-authorship of a crime by several people who contribute knowingly and voluntarily. Co-authorship is a conspiracy put into practice and this figure differs in the fact that the co intervened in some way in the completion of the crime, which by definition does not happen in the conspiracy.

Santiago Mir Puig defines that the sponsors are doing together and by mutual agreement a fact (in German legal literature for all). Co-authors are authors because they committed the crime together. The sponsors share the realization of the type of authorship. Since none of them alone can carry out the fact can not be considered to any participant in the act of another.

The crime victims outside the detection to get you an injustice. If the investigation is organized around the victim then the punishment also designed for this purpose. The bulk of the punishment will be to indemnify the victim. In addition to an extra amount paid for the inconvenience and cost tracking.

The detection and punishment is primarily aimed to compensate the victim. In the present situation, the victim plays a little role. Financial compensation is certainly not all. In fact the criminals are locked up and he always costly. If you’re aiming to compensate the victim you would want to ensure that the criminal remains productive and thus can earn money to pay off his debt. The main duty of a convicted criminal should be compensating the victim.

A crime creates an orderly and safe situation. The charges were limited because the focus goes to the things that really matter. The key is that aggression against people and property are prohibited. Miscellaneous moral rules are left out. The damage to the victim is central in the search process. And this is also justified because it does justice to the victims. The crime is committed against a person. And the criminal was arrested after he was the victim full payment.

Now the police cannot identify victims of crimes is also reason to significantly expand the powers. The judiciary itself may initiate prosecution. The police search powers which often include a significant invasion of privacy mean. People accept this under the guise that if you do nothing wrong you have nothing to hide.

The cost of the detection device are also pretty far. There is much time and energy to the opsorings of drug trafficking and other forms of crime without victims. This naturally means that the tax increases. But it also means that resources are not or less used for the detection of violent crimes. And that is precisely the burden of crime we have. If we suffer then we want the offender is detected. Do you now declare such an intrusion, you get the impression that they are busier with other things. The technical investigation comes days after once watching the detectives and make only a few routine questions.

Cases of a crime are often punishable under the guise of a morality. Perhaps there is a group that is reprehensible that the women sell their bodies and therefore like to criminalize prostitution. They want this reprehensible behavior banished from society. They succeed then it’s citizens no longer able to make that moral choice itself. The individual does not have the freedom to make moral choices. In this situation there are no good people anymore. There are only people who follow the rules. In this ‘ideal’ society, there are no moral choices possible and is therefore no question of morality.

The current criminal justice are also included crimes not involving victims. An example is the drug trade. But this is the voluntary exchange. They are outsiders who find it inappropriate and therefore have made punishable. In many countries, is that prostitution is punishable. Again there is no victim and therefore there is no libertarian by the crime.

Even if someone thinks that he is victim is not always a crime. This allows you to people who limits of freedom of expression search. It may be that someone is offended, and feel themselves thereby harmed. But offense was not aggressive and therefore no crime. The calls for a consumer boycott is not a crime. When Lakeman called for the savings away from DSB exercised his right to freedom of expression. This is not a crime because DSB is not damaged by the opinion of Lakeman. The DSB was because the savers’ money by taking away DSB. It was these savers to the DSB did not fall and Pieter Lakeman. Would you Lakeman criminalization of action than as a result, the behavior of savers offense. In other words if you behavior of the individual you would not criminalizing conduct that calls should not make criminal.

In libertarianism is only one crime and that is aggression against a person or property of that person. A legal action for any crime does not seem to grasp, but the definition is so broad that it is sufficient to define crime. However, major differences with what is currently seen as a criminal.

Aggression against persons and property implicate natural things like murder and theft. But slavery and human trafficking to that definition. Many environmental crimes are also covered. If someone under someone else polluted than it does harm to the possession of that person. This definition is very broad and covers very many cases.

This approach is always a victim. There is always the one who has committed aggression. Compensation of the victim plays a central role in the handling of the proceedings.