1.0 Introduction

Crime is one of the most discussed topics in the legal department, parliament and other legislatures. For legislators, comparative criminal law can be a source of possible approaches to certain issues and the undertaking of criminal law.But for judges, this is different. For judges, it can offer a variety of solutions to tricky problems of interpretation. Oddly enough, this important possibility may have contributed to the fact that comparative studies of criminal law have traditionally been neglected. In fact, although historically it has not, Anglo-American criminal law continues to be viewed as an exercise of the state’s police power, which is closely related to, and even integral to, the concept of sovereignty. increase. In Blackstone’s memorable expression, “public police or business” is “the proper regulation and internal order of the kingdom.
Individuals of the state are thereby obliged to conform their general conduct to the rules of decency, good neighbors and good manners, like members of a well-run family.
And to be decent, diligent and effective in their respective positions. Footnotes The educational potential of comparative criminal justice can be found in Richard S. Frase, Mainstreaming Comparative Criminal Justice:
How to Incorporate Comparative and International Concepts and Materials into Basic Criminal Law and Litigation Courses”, 100 West Virginia Law Rev7ie7w3 (1998); Markus D. Dubber, “Criminal Code. It began in the late 19th century with the first attempts to enact criminal law under the 1853 Constitution. The core of current Argentine criminal law is the Penal Code (Código Penal, abbreviated CP), enacted by the Federal Congress in 1e92119. Dated almost 70 years ago. This period began with public debate on the official draft of the National Penal Code, both in Congress and in state governments. The first draft, known as the Tejeder Code after its author, jurist Carlos Tejeder, was heavily influenced by Anselm Ritter von Feuerbach’s 1813 Bavarian Criminal Code, drafted by him. In 1887 a heavily modified version of the Tejedol Code was enacted as the Revised National Penal Code. After enactment, the Code underwent several reforms and changes within a few years, typically in the form of special penal codes. It seemed that the constitutional ideal of legislation not aimed at indoctrination had not yet been achieved through the adoption of stable ordinances. As a result, several alternative penal codes were proposed to Congress and the Executive to replace the 1887 Penal Code. One of them, his 1891 Penal Code Draft, actually led to important reforms of his 1887 Act in 1903. Influenced by the justice of the time, Giuseppe Zanardelli. The Code enacted by Congress in his 192e1n and given as the Moreno Code after Rodolfo Moreno (h), the member of Congress who led the enactment process identified and laid out the basics of the Tejedor Code in a simple and practical way. It was intended to be explained in a text oriented to Der The 1891 draft, like its immediate predecessor, was not the work of a single draft, but was the result of a collective design process that allowed representative members of various groups to be members could be included. The code that the Congress enacted in 192e1n, offered to as the Moreno Code after Rodolfo Moreno (h), the congressman who led the identified enacting process, was meant to capture in a simple and pragmatically oriented text the basics of the Tejedor Code and the 1891 draft like its immediate antecedents, it was the work of no individual draft, but the result of a collective draft process that managed to engage representative members of the different groups whose conflicting views had contributed to the instability of the previous legislative attempts (i.e., scholars with introduction of ilegal approaches legal, practitioners, and judges and other officials. As its salient antecedents suggest especially the Bavarian Code of 1813 and the Zanardelli Code the 1921 code (the CP) falls within the liberal caotdioifni tradition of the nineteenth century. It is brief and relatively simple. It established a simple regime of sanc- tions, comprising primarily imprisonment and secondly signifies and incapacitation to perform certain activities (like holding official positions or exercising a given profession). The CP indeed marks the abolition of capital punishment in Argentine criminal law in general, prison terms in the CP were comparatively mild, with a maximum prison term of 25 years only after 2004 reform could the maximum imprisonment time mount up to 50 years in the case of the commission of a plurality of crimes (article 55). It introduced a system of conditional sentencing for the first offender (Articles 26 to 28) and parole (or conditional liberty) for the last third of the sentence (Articles 13 to 17). introduced. Constitution and Criminal Law (Judicial Review and Jury) Argentine law is based on her 1853 written constitution, modeled after the United States Constitution. Broadly speaking, the Argentine Constitution is her 19th-century liberal constitution, more administratively oriented than the American model, with strong individual rights of liberal and Republican descent, but with three branch governments. Establish Laws are passed primarily by Congress, and in common jurisdictions (i.e. civil, commercial, labor and criminal) by passing national codes (while respecting constitutional obligations). Thus, Argentine law never combines American-style constitutional law with the constitutional code of the civil law tradition. Following the American model, the Argentine Constitution provides for an extensive system of judicial review by which judges in any judicial proceeding can assess the constitutionality of applicable laws and refuse to apply them if they are found to be unconstitutional. doing. My impression is that in the history of Argentine constitutional law there have been few continued declarations of unconstitutionality in the realm of substantive criminal law. Part of this history may be due to a kind of reluctance by courts to declare laws unconstitutional. This resistance can be explained by introducing another notable feature of Argentina’s criminal law. Criminal trials are conducted before professional judges for life who are appointed by the central government through a complex procedure involving her three branches of government or by state governments through various processes. A criminal trial is decided by a jury” (Article 118). Under the Constitution, the distinct constitutional functions of Parliament are to “promote the establishment of trial by jury” (Article 24) and to adopt the statutes necessary to that function (Article 75). Section 12). But for more than 150 years of constitutional life there is no such


Leave a Comment