Rethinking the Penalty of Illicit Enrichment Crime in Ethiopia: Lessons from Comparative Analysis

Q3 Social Sciences
Diriba Tulu
{"title":"Rethinking the Penalty of Illicit Enrichment Crime in Ethiopia: Lessons from Comparative Analysis","authors":"Diriba Tulu","doi":"10.20956/halrev.v6i3.2410","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"DOI: 10.20956/halrev.v6i3.2410 The crime of illicit enrichment has been widely accepted as a useful mechanism for curbing corruption, both international and regional anti-corruption instruments. This article's main objective is to comparatively analyze the rationality and appropriateness of the penalty provided for illicit enrichment crime in the Ethiopian Corruption Crimes Proclamation compared with Hong Kong and Rwanda's legal regimes to draw some best lessons and way forwards for the identified problems. The article found that the Ethiopia Corruption Crimes Proclamation fails to set a minimum penalty limit and entails severe punishment in terms of imprisonment and fine that can convey a meaningful message to potential offenders. Thus, the penalty provided for the crime of illicit enrichment is designed in a manner in which the person who commits such crime has the chance to be less punished. In effect, this provision is inconsistent with the purpose of criminal law and major sentencing principles, but it also degenerates public confidence in the justice system. Therefore, Ethiopia needs to take a lesson from Hong Kong and Rwanda's experiences in incorporating severe and setting minimum limit of penalty for the crime of illicit enrichment that can convey a meaningful message to potential offenders.","PeriodicalId":30743,"journal":{"name":"Hasanuddin Law Review","volume":"6 1","pages":"213"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hasanuddin Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v6i3.2410","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

DOI: 10.20956/halrev.v6i3.2410 The crime of illicit enrichment has been widely accepted as a useful mechanism for curbing corruption, both international and regional anti-corruption instruments. This article's main objective is to comparatively analyze the rationality and appropriateness of the penalty provided for illicit enrichment crime in the Ethiopian Corruption Crimes Proclamation compared with Hong Kong and Rwanda's legal regimes to draw some best lessons and way forwards for the identified problems. The article found that the Ethiopia Corruption Crimes Proclamation fails to set a minimum penalty limit and entails severe punishment in terms of imprisonment and fine that can convey a meaningful message to potential offenders. Thus, the penalty provided for the crime of illicit enrichment is designed in a manner in which the person who commits such crime has the chance to be less punished. In effect, this provision is inconsistent with the purpose of criminal law and major sentencing principles, but it also degenerates public confidence in the justice system. Therefore, Ethiopia needs to take a lesson from Hong Kong and Rwanda's experiences in incorporating severe and setting minimum limit of penalty for the crime of illicit enrichment that can convey a meaningful message to potential offenders.
对埃塞俄比亚非法致富罪刑罚的再思考:比较分析的启示
内政部:10.20956/halrev.v6i3.2410在国际和区域反腐败文书中,非法致富罪被广泛认为是遏制腐败的有用机制。本文的主要目的是与香港和卢旺达的法律制度相比较,分析《埃塞俄比亚腐败犯罪公告》中对非法得利犯罪规定刑罚的合理性和适当性,以期为所发现的问题提供一些最佳的教训和前进方向。该文章发现,《埃塞俄比亚腐败犯罪公告》没有设定最低刑罚限制,并规定了监禁和罚款等严厉惩罚,可以向潜在罪犯传达有意义的信息。因此,对非法致富罪规定的刑罚是以犯下这种罪行的人有机会受到较少惩罚的方式设计的。实际上,这一规定不符合刑法的宗旨和主要量刑原则,但也削弱了公众对司法系统的信心。因此,埃塞俄比亚需要从香港和卢旺达的经验中吸取教训,对非法致富罪实行严厉的惩罚,并设定最低限度的刑罚,从而向潜在的犯罪者传达有意义的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Hasanuddin Law Review
Hasanuddin Law Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信