Protocol on Water and Health, Essay Example

Criminal liability is determined by the legal and actual guilt. In the Capstone Case, the jury had to prove actual guilt, by establishing the legal liability of Hanousek. There was a distinction established between the standard practice used by the Pipeline and the negligent practice used by Hanousek. The Clean Water Act (1319c) does state that the conduct was criminal. However, the term of “negligently” was not clearly defined by the text of the law. Simple negligence should not be a basis for criminal liability, however, negligence that does endanger the environment and lives should be punished by law. The legal system should be able to prove that the individual was aware of the risks their actions carried, and was in the position to prevent the environmental damage (Schmalleger and Smykla). The Clear Water Act does not define negligence, therefore, it needs to be clarified in order to avoid misinterpretation and discrepancies of application. Further, measures to protect the living environment should be defined by industries, the legal system, and companies themselves, as standard. Willfully ignoring the standards of conduct can, therefore, be criminalized by the legal system. For this, there is a need for legislators, environmental agencies, companies, and workers coming to an agreement about reasonable standard conduct. Another question is whether the responsibility for the spillage should be carried by the company or the individual worker (based on who made the decision). Therefore, governments, NGO-s and industry leaders should be working together to create and maintain industry standards for the protection of environment, in line with the United Nations’ Protocol on Water and Health in Europe (1999).

Correction facilities have gone through several changes during the centuries. The three Enlightenment thinkers: Beccaria, Bentham, and Howard would have thought that the reforms that they initiated were partly carried out by the proceeding generations. If they were alive today, they would, however, still criticize some of the institutions and the legal system. While Howard called for more human treatment of prisoners, the human rights movement has brought forward a subsequent change in prisons of the Western civilization. Still, in some parts of the world, and during war, many prisoners still suffer unnecessary torture and maltreatment. The 2012 Human Rights Report of Kenya clearly shows that “police corruption; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; prolonged pretrial detention; some

” (1) is still a problem today. Beccaria concluded that punishment was not necessary and created more crime. Indeed, even today many people argue that many imprisoned for smaller crimes will sink deeper into crime after the years spent in corrections. The degree of punishment, according to Beccaria, should be based on the social damage. Prison should not be the right solution for crimes against society; he suggested fines instead. The above mentioned thinkers would certainly take side with activists claiming that prisons are unnecessarily overcrowded. Bentham also embraced utilitarianism, and stated that people were deterred by pain, and invented the “panopticon” type of prison: the example of utilitarian correction (Schmalleger and Hall). Unfortunately, his ideas did not prove to be valid, as several serious crimes punishable by life sentence or death are still being committed worldwide. At the same time, keeping people in prison who committed smaller crimes costs taxpayers a substantial amount of money each year. Utilitarianism has not provided a solution for reducing crime, while today’s prisons are not proven to be effective, either.

Works Cited

Kenya 2012 Human Rights Report. 2012. Web.

Schmalleger, F. and Smykla, J. Corrections in the 21^st Century. Seventh Edition. Chapter 2. pp. 52-54, 201. Print.

Schmalleger, F. and Hall, D. Criminal Law Today. Fifth Edition. pp. 42-45. 2013. Print.

United Nations. Protocol on Water and Health. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. 1999. Web.

[1]Conclusion – Opinion

[2]Quoted from page one of the document (1) as per MLA formatting

[3]Conclusion- opinion