ESPACIO PUBLICITARIO
CARACAS, Friday November 09, 2012 | Update
 
|
share
|
OPINION

Organized criminal

Venezuela is the creator of this version of the individual organized criminal

FERNANDO FERNANDEZ |  EL UNIVERSAL
Friday November 09, 2012  01:56 PM

The recently enacted Organic Law against Organized Crime and Terrorism Financing ("LOCDOFT") establishes an individual mode of organized crime, when somebody acts on behalf of a corporate body or association, with intent to commit any of the offenses listed in said law. Likewise, the offenses typified in the LOCDOFT include, by means of reference, all the offenses cited in the Criminal Code and special criminal laws.

The above situation radically changes the text of LOCDO 2005, which required in addition to representation, the use of a digital device or electronic means. Thus, anybody acting in the place and stead of a legal person, such as a cashier, a clerk, a doorman, a Chairperson or whoever, intending to commit any of the almost 1,000 offenses contained in more than 80 criminal laws will be deemed an "individual organized criminal." Peanuts!

A review of the subject matter in the Palermo Convention and comparative law found interesting data, namely, among others: (i) under the Convention, illicit association means three or more persons, (ii) for the United Kingdom, it includes two or more persons, (iii) in the United States, it refers to six or more persons, provided that there is a leader in the gang of five or more members. In this sense, reference is made of criminal enterprise.

All in all, Venezuela is the creator of this version of the individual organized criminal. Where did such "great idea" come from? Is it to defend the legal entity from corruption and disloyalty of some of their "agents"? Or is it to get the legal entity, with no intent to commit a crime, into the mess? Who is the enemy? It is a mystery to unveil.

fernando.fernandez@bakermckenzie.com


More articles from this signature

|
share
|
ADVERTISING SPACE
Dossier
Gagging Twitter users

Pablo Jiménez Guaricuco was summarily dismissed from his Clerk III job at the Autonomous Service of Public Registries and Notaries' Offices (Saren). He read a notice published in a newspaper on November 5 informing the public that he was no longer employed to the Saren. He was sacked despite the fact that he was taking a leave of absence from work due to a work-related accident, and that he enjoyed security of employment under the parental job-immunity privilege. Most probably, the decision was influenced by his role as a union organizer. But what did he do, besides leading protests, to deserve the sack? Well, he allegedly sent off a series of tweets that definitely hurt the sensitivity of the Saren Directorate.

 Ranking
  •  Read 
 
fotter clasificados.eluniversal.com Estampas
Alianzas
fotter clasificados.eluniversal.com Estampas
cerrar