Abstract
This constribution addresses the issue of adverse publicity orders as a possible supplementary sentencing option for corporate offenders. In South Africa the fine is the primary sentencing option available to courts when imposing sentences on juristic persons. Fines, however, do not adequately serve the purposes of corporate sentencing. Publicity orders require the publication of an offender's conviction, sentence and the details of the offence to individulas or a group of persons (such as shareholders). An adverse publication order damages the corporate offender's reputation - a valuable asset to a corporate entity. It therefore serves the purposes of corporate deterrence. In this contribution criticim is levelled against the fine as primary sentencing option for juristic persons, the notion of corporate reputation is considered from a social and a legal perspective; a functional comparative study of adverse publication orders is presented and recommendations are made regarding the content of effective publicity orders.
 
Highlights
This contribution addresses the issue of adverse publicity orders as a possible supplementary sentencing option for corporate offenders
An adverse publication damages the corporate offender’s reputation – a valuable asset to a corporate entity. It serves the purpose of corporate deterrence. In this contribution criticism is levelled against the fine as primary sentencing option for juristic persons; the notion of corporate reputation is considered from a social and legal perspective; a functional comparative study of adverse publication orders is presented and recommendations are made regarding the content of effective publication orders
Aandeelhouers koop en hou aandele met inagneming van toekomstige beleggingsrisiko’s. ʼn Boete wat dus die verwagte voordeel watn regspersoon weens die pleeg vann misdaad verydel, is eenvoudig die teenkant van die positiewe verwagting watn aandeelhouer kan koester, te wete dat die maatskappy in strafregtelike gedrag betrokke kan raak en strafregtelike aanspreeklikheid en bestrawwing kan vryspring
Summary
Een van die voorste kundiges op die gebied van korporatiewe strafregtelike aanspreeklikheid en korporatiewe straftoemeting, die Australiese juris Brent Fisse[1] hetn aantal oogmerke van korporatiewe straftoemeting geïdentifiseer, naamlik: (i) afskrikking, (ii) interne dissipline, (iii) besondere voorkoming, (iv) algemene voorkoming, (v) vergoeding, restitusie en herstel, (vi) vergelding en (vii) die openbaarmaking van inligting.[2]. Publisiteitsbevele isn moontlike alternatiewe of aanvullende opsie tot die boetevonnis wat steeds die primêre vonnisopsie vir regspersone in SuidAfrika is. Die prosedurele handleiding van die Advertising Standards Authority of South Africa, maak byvoorbeeld voorsiening vir publisiteitsbevele wat dan ook van tyd tot tyd afgedwing word.[5]. Dit is noodsaaklik dat herbesin moet word oor die boete as primêre vonnisopsie vir regspersone. In hierdie bydrae sal die tekortkominge van die boete daarom eerstens beskryf word. Justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/report_102.pdf para 11.2; Skeel 2001 U Pa L Rev 1811, 1814. Dit geskied vanuitn funksioneel vergelykende perspektief.[6] Die regshervormingskommissie van die Australiese deelstaat Nieu-Suid Wallis het in 2003, nan grondige ontleding van die onderwerp korporatiewe straftoemeting, aanbevelings gemaak met betrekking tot publisiteitsbevele, welke aanbevelings ook kortliks in hierdie bydrae aangestip word. Hierna saln gevolgtrekking bereik word waarin die wesenselemente vann publisiteitsbevel beskryf word
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
