Economic Criminality (From Crime and Crime Control in Scandinavia, 1976-80, P 7-15, 1980, Norman Bishop, ed. - See NCJ-74060)

• NCJ Number: 74062
• Author(s): P O Traskman
• Date Published: 1980
• Length: 9 pages
• Publication Format: Document
• Language: English
• Country: Sweden

Annotation

A professor of criminal law searches for a definition and a common terminology for economic criminality by examining both Scandinavian research in the field and those characteristics of economic crime that are not found in connection with other forms of criminality.

Abstract

Economic criminality can be divided into two categories: (1) offenses committed in connection with legitimate economic activity, such as tax, environmental, and labor offenses; and (2) offenses resulting from illegal economic activity, such as embezzlement and the many types of organized crime. Most Nordic research has been focused on the first category of economic criminality, specifically the part enterprises have played in these crimes. In addition, offenses can be categorized according to the phase of economic activity in which they occur and according to the person or the object involved. To aid the researcher in isolating specific characteristics of economic crime, further discussion focuses on which acts are criminalized, how an economic offense is committed, the extent of economic criminality in society, who commits economic crimes and why, and what is to be achieved by research on economic crime. It is argued that economic activity is regulated by internal norms of economic life (gentlemen's agreements), norms of honor (legislation), official legal norms, and penal norms. In addition, economic crimes are complicated, require special skills, and affect society in ways that are thus far unmeasurable. Because registers of those who commit economic crimes are inadequate, it is impossible to point to a particular type of individual as the culprit. It is unneccessary, however, to design a penal system on the basis of preventive theories concerning individuals, because the culprits are enterprises and not physical persons. Finally, it is emphasized that severe punishments should be applied to modern economic criminality; otherwise, it will not be possible to justify the punishment of a petty theft or a simple assault. Fourteen references are supplied.