This page or section is written from a primarily Brazilian perspective and may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. |
Passive corruption, in Brazilian criminal law, is one of the crimes committed by public officials against the general administration.
Corruption can be of two types:
Some legislations define both behaviors as the same crime. [1] In the case of the crime of corruption, Brazilian legislation adopted, exceptionally, the pluralistic theory, as it chose to define two different crimes: active corruption, in Article 333 of the Penal Code, and passive corruption, in Article 317.
The Penal Code, in Article 317, defines the crime of passive corruption as "soliciting or receiving, for oneself or for others, directly or indirectly, even if outside the function or before assuming it, an undue advantage, or accepting a promise of such an advantage."
The crime known as passive corruption is practiced against public administration in general. Its provision is found in Article 317 of the Brazilian Penal Code, which characterizes it as the act in which the public official requests or receives, for oneself or for others, directly or indirectly, even if outside the function or before assuming it, an undue advantage, or accepts a promise of such an advantage. The peculiarity of this illicit act is that it is practiced solely and exclusively by the public official, even though the letter of the law does not explicitly define the active subject. This deduction arises from the chapter in which the article is inserted, the first (crimes committed by public officials against the administration in general) of Title XI (crimes against public administration). However, the article states in its text that even an agent who is outside the function or has not yet assumed it will be penalized.
For passive corruption, the penalty is imprisonment, from two to twelve years, and a fine. The penalty will be increased by one-third in the event that, as a result of the advantage or promise, the official delays or fails to perform any official act or performs it in violation of their duty. Passive corruption is one of the three forms that the crime called corruption can take. In addition to the passive form, we have active corruption.
The intention of the legislator in criminalizing passive corruption was to maintain the normal functioning of public administration in order to preserve principles intrinsic to the institution, such as legality or morality, thus preventing an implosion of the structure of public institutions in case corruption proliferates among its members.
Thus, from the legal provision, we can understand that the crime of passive corruption occurs when the public official solicits a bribe, advantage, or similar in order to do or refrain from doing something related to their function. It does not matter whether the individual agrees with the illicit act and gives what the corrupt agent asks for. The crime is already configured at the moment of solicitation of the thing or advantage. Furthermore, the act that the official performs or refrains from performing can be classified as illicit, illegitimate, or unjust, resulting in proper passive corruption. Now, when analyzing an act or the omission of an act that is legal and just, but benefits the public official themselves or another individual, we are faced with improper passive corruption. The other party can/must appeal to the police to arrest the criminal, but if they participate in the illicit act, active and passive corruption is established.
The penalty is two to twelve years of imprisonment, in addition to a fine. It can be increased by one-third if such an advantage entails some non-compliance with the duty of the official.
It is a specific crime, that is, it can only be committed by someone who holds the status of a public official.
However, there may be the participation of individuals through inducement, incitement, or secondary assistance. [2]
The penalty is aggravated "if, as a result of the advantage or promise, the official delays or fails to perform any official act or performs it in violation of their duty." If they only delay or fail to do what they should do, it is improper passive corruption. If they perform an act in violation of their duty, it is proper passive corruption.
If the public official holds a commission position or a management or advisory function, the penalty is also aggravated (Article 316, § 2, of the Penal Code).
Child sex tourism (CST) is tourism for the purpose of engaging in the prostitution of children, which is commercially facilitated child sexual abuse. The definition of child in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is "every human being below the age of 18 years". Child sex tourism results in both mental and physical consequences for the exploited children, which may include sexually transmitted infections, "drug addiction, pregnancy, malnutrition, social ostracism, and death", according to the State Department of the United States. Child sex tourism, part of the multibillion-dollar global sex tourism industry, is a form of child prostitution within the wider issue of commercial sexual exploitation of children. Child sex tourism victimizes approximately 2 million children around the world. The children who perform as prostitutes in the child sex tourism trade often have been lured or abducted into sexual slavery.
Bribery is the offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of any item of value to influence the actions of an official, or other person, in charge of a public or legal duty. With regard to governmental operations, essentially, bribery is "Corrupt solicitation, acceptance, or transfer of value in exchange for official action." Gifts of money or other items of value that are otherwise available to everyone on an equivalent basis, and not for dishonest purposes, are not bribery. Offering a discount or a refund to all purchasers is a legal rebate and is not bribery. For example, it is legal for an employee of a Public Utilities Commission involved in electric rate regulation to accept a rebate on electric service that reduces their cost of electricity, when the rebate is available to other residential electric customers. However, giving a discount specifically to that employee to influence them to look favorably on the electric utility's rate increase applications would be considered bribery.
Disorderly conduct is a crime in most jurisdictions in the United States, the People's Republic of China, and Taiwan. Typically, "disorderly conduct" makes it a crime to be drunk in public, to "disturb the peace", or to loiter in certain areas. Many types of unruly conduct may fit the definition of disorderly conduct, as such statutes are often used as "catch-all" crimes. Police may use a disorderly conduct charge to keep the peace when people are behaving in a disruptive manner, but otherwise present no danger.
The ages of consent vary by jurisdiction across Europe. The unrestricted ages of consent – hereby meaning the age from which one is deemed able to consent to having sex with anyone else of consenting age or above – are between 14 and 18. Some countries have close-in-age exceptions that go as low as 12 if both parties engaging in sexual acts are under 18. The vast majority of countries set their unrestricted ages in the range of 14 to 16; only four countries, Cyprus (17), the Republic of Ireland (17), Turkey (18), and the Vatican City (18), set an unrestricted age of consent higher than 16. The laws can also stipulate which specific activities are permitted or specify the age at which one or other sex can legally participate. The highlighted age is that from which a young person can lawfully engage in a non-commercial sexual act with an older person, regardless of their age difference, provided the older one is not in a position of power, a relative, or is committing another form of exploitation. In some jurisdictions, including Italy and Hungary, there are exemptions if the age difference is within prescribed bounds. All jurisdictions in Europe have equal and gender-neutral age limits.
The age of consent in Africa for sexual activity varies by jurisdiction across the continent, codified in laws which may also stipulate the specific activities that are permitted or the gender of participants for different ages. Other variables may exist, such as close-in-age exemptions.
The legal system of South Korea is a civil law system that has its basis in the Constitution of the Republic of Korea. The Court Organization Act, which was passed into law on 26 September 1949, officially created a three-tiered, independent judicial system. The revised Constitution of 1987 codified judicial independence in Article 103, which states that, "Judges rule independently according to their conscience and in conformity with the Constitution and the law." The 1987 rewrite also established the Constitutional Court, the first time that South Korea had an active body for constitutional review.
Although the legal system of Singapore is a common law system, the criminal law of Singapore is largely statutory in nature and historically derives largely from the Indian penal code. The general principles of criminal law, as well as the elements and penalties of general criminal offences such as assault, criminal intimidation, mischief, grievous hurt, theft, extortion, sex crimes and cheating, are set out in the Singaporean Penal Code. Other serious offences are created by statutes such as the Arms Offences Act, Kidnapping Act, Misuse of Drugs Act and Vandalism Act.
The Revised Penal Code contains the general penal laws of the Philippines. First enacted in 1930, it remains in effect today, despite several amendments thereto. It does not comprise a comprehensive compendium of all Philippine penal laws. The Revised Penal Code itself was enacted as Act No. 3815, and some Philippine criminal laws have been enacted outside of the Revised Penal Code as separate Republic Acts.
The age of consent for sexual activity refers to an age at or above which an individual can engage in unfettered sexual relations with another who is of the same age or older. This age varies by jurisdiction across South America, codified in laws which may also stipulate the specific activities that are permitted or the gender of participants for different ages. Other variables may exist, such as close-in-age exemptions.
Philippine criminal laws is the body of law and defining the penalties thereof in the Philippines.
The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted to combat corruption in government agencies and public sector businesses in India.
The Bribery Act 2010 (c.23) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that covers the criminal law relating to bribery. Introduced to Parliament in the Queen's Speech in 2009 after several decades of reports and draft bills, the Act received the Royal Assent on 8 April 2010 following cross-party support. Initially scheduled to enter into force in April 2010, this was changed to 1 July 2011. The Act repeals all previous statutory and common law provisions in relation to bribery, instead replacing them with the crimes of bribery, being bribed, the bribery of foreign public officials, and the failure of a commercial organisation to prevent bribery on its behalf.
Commercial bribery is a form of bribery which involves corrupt dealing with the agents or employees of potential buyers to secure an advantage over business competitors. It is a form of corruption which does not necessarily involve government personnel or facilities.
The freedom of expression in Brazil, is protected by section IV and XII of Article 5 of the Constitution of Brazil. Freedom of expression is not absolute.
Criminal responsibility in French criminal law is the obligation to answer for infractions committed and to suffer the punishment provided by the legislation that governs the infraction in question.
Corruption in Azerbaijan is considered high and occurs at all levels of government. In Transparency International's 2022 Corruption Perceptions Index, which ranked 180 countries from those perceived to be least corrupt to those perceived to be very corrupt, Azerbaijan was ranked 128, compared to 45 for its northwestern neighbor Georgia and 58 for its western neighbor Armenia. In the Azerbaijani laundromat money-laundering scheme, $2.9 billion was paid to foreign politicians and Azerbaijani elites by companies linked to Azerbaijani ruler Ilham Aliyev, government ministries, and the International Bank of Azerbaijan between 2012 and 2014. Azerbaijan is a member of Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO) and OECD's Anti-Corruption Network.
This glossary contains Brazilian terms related to criminal or corruption investigations, and supporting concepts from politics, the law, government, criminology, and law enforcement.
French criminal law is "the set of legal rules that govern the State's response to offenses and offenders". It is one of the branches of the juridical system of the French Republic. The field of criminal law is defined as a sector of French law, and is a combination of public and private law, insofar as it punishes private behavior on behalf of society as a whole. Its function is to define, categorize, prevent, and punish criminal offenses committed by a person, whether a natural person or a legal person. In this sense it is of a punitive nature, as opposed to civil law in France, which settles disputes between individuals, or administrative law which deals with issues between individuals and government.
Illicit enrichment generally refers to a situation in which a person has enjoyed some sort of wealth that cannot or has not been justified as coming from a legitimate source of income. The exact definitions for illicit enrichment, and the terminology used to describe the concept, vary considerably between international legal instruments and domestic laws.
Active corruption consists of the act of offering an advantage, any kind of benefit, or satisfaction of will that may affect the morality of Public Administration. It is only characterized when the advantage is offered to a public official. If there is a request or imposition (extortion) by the official for the offered advantage, the act of yielding to this request or pressure through payment does not constitute active corruption, since the penal code only includes the verb "offer".