Możliwość orzeczenia zakazu zajmowania stanowiska (stanowisk), wykonywania zawodu (zawodów) lub prowadzenia działalności związanej z wychowaniem, leczeniem, edukacją małoletnich lub opieką nad nimi za przechowywanie lub posiadanie treści pornograficznych z udziałem małoletniego – analiza empiryczna i formalno-dogmatyczna

Author:

Kwasiński OskarORCID,Potulski JacekORCID

Abstract

The objective of this study is to answer the question whether adjudicating a ban on holding a position (or positions), practicing a profession (or professions) or conducting activities related to the upbringing, treatment, education or care of minors for storing or possessing pornographic content with the participation of a minor child is legally justified de lege lata. The authors present their standpoint on the basis of a detailed analysis of the elements of penal measures under Articles 39(2) and 39(2a) of the Polish Criminal Code and the conditions for adjudicating these measures provided for in Articles 41(§1) and 41(§1a) of the Criminal Code. For this purpose, a review of Canadian, American, Swiss, German and Czech studies on the correlation between crimes involving child pornography and physical sexual abuse of minors has been conducted. At a later stage, a formal-dogmatic exegesis of rights protected by the types of prohibited acts criminalizing the possession or storage of child pornography, the concept of ‘damage to a minor’ and the collision arising from the application of Article 41(§1) and Article 41(§1a, sentence 2) of the Criminal Code has been undertaken. The conclusion that emerges from both the hitherto achievements of empirical research and the appropriately made formal-dogmatic analysis indicates that at present there are no legal grounds to adjudicate the said criminal ban in the case of possessed or stored, and not self-created, child pornography. Nonetheless, a possible social unrest arising from the fact of a professional contact with children by persons having or storing such materials may be accommodated by a simple amendment to the Article 41(§1a, sentence 2) of the Criminal Code, as proposed by the authors.

Publisher

Krajowa Szkola Sadownictwa i Prokuratury

Reference35 articles.

1. Abela G.G., Jordand A., Handa C.G., Hollanda L.A., Phipps A., Classification models of child molesters utilizing the Abel Assessment for sexual interest, “Child Abuse & Neglect” 2001, no. 25.

2. Berlin I., Dwie koncepcje wolności i inne eseje, Warszawa 1991.

3. Bielski M., Art. 200, teza 9, [w:] Kodeks karny. Część szczególna, t. 2, cz. 1, Komentarz do art. 117–211a, red. W. Wróbel, A. Zoll, LEX 2017.

4. Budyn-Kulik M., [w:] Kodeks karny. Praktyczny komentarz, red. M. Mozgawa, Warszawa 2007.

5. Budyn-Kulik M., Kulik M., Art. 199 KK, II. Rodzajowy i indywidualny przedmiot ochrony, [w:] Kodeks karny, t. 2, Część szczególna. Komentarz do art. 117‒221, red. M. Królikowski, R. Zawłocki, Legalis 2023.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3