Joe McGrath
Search for other papers by Joe McGrath in
Current site
Google Scholar
Conventional crime methods
in Corporate and white-collar crime in Ireland
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

The third chapter explores how the social and political inertia documented in Chapter 2 impacted on policy choices in addressing corporate crime. It is shown that addressing corporate wrongdoing by a conventional criminal justice model meant that corporate wrongdoers were entitled to a whole range of due process safeguards. The burden was on the prosecution to prove that the company officer committed the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. In general the accused had to be found subjective culpable and he was protected by the right to privacy, the right to liberty, the right to silence, the right of reasonable access to a lawyer, among others. Though not fully settled in Irish law, companies also seem to be able to claim constitutional protections in criminal proceedings, reflecting the traditional respect for fairness and 42 the fundamental principles of justice. Finally, the accused was entitled on conviction to proportionality in sentencing, whereby his punishment reflected both the particular personal circumstances and those surrounding the commission of the offence. The purpose of this chapter is to show that this system of punishment was developed under an equality of arms framework to act as a check on government power, and against the sweeping use of criminal sanction for instrumental purposes. In keeping with conventional criminal justice, punishment was personal and individuated because the traditional system emphasised punishing blameworthy conduct which was morally reprehensible.

  • Collapse
  • Expand
  • Top

Corporate and white-collar crime in Ireland

A new architecture of regulatory enforcement


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 85 8 2
Full Text Views 34 0 0
PDF Downloads 19 0 0