The aim of this report is to delineate trends of radicalization in Poland by evaluating specific ‘hotspots.’ The main source of data are the court files of twelve subjects, which are supplemented with academic literature, as well as offenders’ perspectives available in the legal documentation and their (social) media. The study provides rich qualitative evidence about how personal characteristics of the offenders, their direct environment, as well as systemic and structural factors that might have contributed to the offence. The proposed micro, meso and macro factors for the specific hotspots in this report are evidenced with court files, examples of subjects’ narratives and supported with findings of well-established criminological research traditions of the past fifty years, while the evidence for facilitating factors is derived from the court files and jurisprudence. The report then situates three purposively sampled participants of the hotspots on the injustice-grievance-alienation-polarization (I-GAP) spectrum. This study reinforces pre-existing research about what contributes and motivates offenders and adds to the understanding of the relationship between radicalization and crime. The absence of criminal records among the subjects indicate that radicalization is not necessarily connected with criminal lifestyle. It also suggests how in the Polish context the type of radical group might impact upon offending patterns, as well as how the normative beliefs about gender acting might be conductive to crime. Moreover, it demonstrates, consistently with the criminological research, that individuals who belong to extreme groups do not always share common traits or trajectories. It indicates that for some hotspot participants just the experience of being subjected to criminal proceedings or secret service supervision has a deterrent effect, while for others rehabilitation and deradicalization might be necessary. Finally, the absence of agreement among scholars and judges regarding hate speech and appropriate criminal justice responses continues to present difficulties.
Celem niniejszego opracowania jest zaznajomienie polskich czytelników z doktryną Komisji Weneckiej w sprawie prawa do zgromadzeń. Taka wiedza wydaje się być przydatna nie tylko legislatorom i konstytucjonalistom, czy osobom naukowo zajmującym się tę tematyką, ale także każdemu obywatelowi,który jest zainteresowany tę formą aktywnego udziału w życiu publicznym. Szczególna uwaga została zwrócona na problematykę zgromadzeń o charakterze spontanicznym, gdyż ich sytuacja prawna jest nie do końca jednoznacznie określona w polskim systemie.
Obecnie w państwach Rady Europy, organizacji stojącej na straży praw człowieka, można zaobserwować ożywioną działalność ustawodawcy w dziedzinie ochrony praw dzieci, a w szczegołności ochrony przed przemocą w rodzinie. Przemoc wobec dzieci najczęściej jest ukrywana pod pozorem dozwolonego przez państwo fizycznego karania za przewinienia. Rada Europy przewidując, jakie konsekwencje powoduje brak zakazu fizycznego karania dzieci, opracowała szereg instrumentów prawnych dotyczących tego problemu.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.