زمان بندی خنثی سازی جرم شرکت
ترجمه نشده

زمان بندی خنثی سازی جرم شرکت

عنوان فارسی مقاله: انکار و اعتراف. تجزیه و تحلیل زمان بندی خنثی سازی جرم شرکت
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله: Denials and confessions. An analysis of the temporalization of neutralizations of corporate crime
مجله/کنفرانس: مجله بین المللی حقوق ، جرم و عدالت – International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice
رشته های تحصیلی مرتبط: حقوق
گرایش های تحصیلی مرتبط: حقوق جزا و جرم شناسی، حقوق بین الملل، حقوق عمومی
کلمات کلیدی فارسی: جرم شرکت، رشوه، جرایم علیه قوانین بین المللی، خنثی سازی، انکار، اعتراف، تجزیه و تحلیل چارچوبی
کلمات کلیدی انگلیسی: Corporate crime، Bribery، Crimes against international law، Neutralizations، Denials، Confessions، Frame-analysis
نوع نگارش مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی (Research Article)
نمایه: Scopus – JCR
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2020.100389
دانشگاه: Lund University Department of Sociology of Law SE- Box 42, 221 00, Lund, Sweden
ناشر: الزویر - Elsevier
نوع ارائه مقاله: ژورنال
نوع مقاله: ISI
سال انتشار مقاله: 2020
ایمپکت فاکتور: 0.947 در سال 2019
شاخص H_index: 25 در سال 2020
شاخص SJR: 00374 در سال 2019
شناسه ISSN: 1756-0616
شاخص Quartile (چارک): Q2 در سال 2019
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی: PDF
تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی: 12
وضعیت ترجمه: ترجمه نشده است
قیمت مقاله انگلیسی: رایگان
آیا این مقاله بیس است: خیر
آیا این مقاله مدل مفهومی دارد: ندارد
آیا این مقاله پرسشنامه دارد: ندارد
آیا این مقاله متغیر دارد: ندارد
کد محصول: E15061
رفرنس: دارای رفرنس در داخل متن و انتهای مقاله
فهرست انگلیسی مطالب

Abstract


۱٫ Introduction


۲٫ Theoretical approaches to corporate neutralizations


۳٫ Method and material


۴٫ The Telia affair – from corporate denial to confession


۵٫ ″No guts, no glory” Lundin Petroleum in Sudan


۶٫ Comparative analysis between the corporations


۷٫ Concluding remarks


Funding


Ethical Standards


Declaration of competing interest


References

نمونه متن انگلیسی مقاله

Abstract


In recent years two Swedish companies, Telia and Lundin Petroleum, have had to work hard to legitimate their actions as a result of allegations of criminal activity. In this paper, the corporate framings employed to deal with allegations of crime will be analysed on the basis of Stanley Cohen’s (2009) theoretical work on processes of denial and neutralization techniques. More specifically, the paper focuses on the temporalization of neutralizations of corporate crime and aims to answer the following questions: How have the corporations’ defence mechanisms changed over time? How might the types of crime of which they have been accused, and their corporate structures, affect the ways in which particular defence mechanisms are employed? The analysis demonstrates that although there are similarities, such as both companies framing their businesses as contributing to the development of democracy, human rights, prosperity and peace, the companies follow two different lines of development in their defences. While Telia moves from literal denial to confession, Lundin Petroleum stays with its literal denial in parallel with a strong condemnation of the condemners. These differences seem to be grounded both in the crimes of which the companies have been accused and their respective corporate structures.


Introduction


In recent years two Swedish companies, Telia and Lundin Petroleum, have had to work hard to legitimate their actions as a result of allegations of criminal activity. The telecommunications provider Telia’s1 dealings in Central Asia, and in Uzbekistan in particular, have attracted a substantial amount of media attention and criminal investigations both in Sweden and abroad. In 2012, the so-called “Uzbekistan affair” was uncovered, resulting in criminal charges against the former CEO and two other senior officials for their involvement in the company’s bribery scheme, and in legal proceedings against the company in Sweden for a disgorgement (i.e. giving up illegally gained profits) and a global settlement in which Telia agreed to pay $965 million to resolve charges relating to violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). The Swedish government is the company’s principal shareholder with almost 40 percent of the company’s shares. Lundin Petroleum was awarded a contract for Block 5A in southern Sudan in early 1997, and ever since that time the company’s operations have faced allegations of participating in crimes against humanity. A report entitled “Unpaid Debt”, written by the European Coalition on Oil in Sudan (ECOS),2 led to the initiation of an ongoing police investigation in Sweden into violations of international law. The Lundin family are the largest shareholder in the business, with 30 percent of the company’s shares. As a result of these allegations, the two companies have for more than a decade been faced with a need for ‘crisis management’ in order to legitimate themselves and their business in relation to public opinion, the media and their shareholders. Corporate selfdefences, which belong to a broader category of offenders’ neutralizations and denials, constitute a form of speech acts known as accounts (Scott and Lyman, 1968) that are employed when someone has to explain a gap between actions and expectations.

  • اشتراک گذاری در

دیدگاه خود را بنویسید:

تاکنون دیدگاهی برای این نوشته ارسال نشده است

زمان بندی خنثی سازی جرم شرکت
نوشته های مرتبط
مقالات جدید
لوگوی رسانه های برخط

logo-samandehi

پیوندها