Draft Corporate Manslaughter Bill
Important as the corporate manslaughter bill is to many people, it seems to receive much more talk than action. In 2005, Prime Minister Tony Blair promised to make the corporate manslaughter bill a priority, and that they would ensure it reached the statute books by 2007. The bill itself provides some of the parts need to make the overall concept of corporate manslaughter work, such as providing definition to certain corporate figure, like who is a Chairman, Managing Director, Chief Executive or Secretary of the Company. The Bill makes possible prosecution of an officer of the corporation, who might be found guilty of corporate killing, by default, if the corporation as an entity is found liable.
The theory is that by way of imposing penalties and jail terms on corporations and their people at the top, then that will cause the corporations to be more focused on and intent upon keeping its employees and civilian population safe and from harm's way. It relies on the presumption that corporations will develop a social conscience above and beyond the profit margins.
The Home Office presents the draft Bill on Corporate Manslaughter in this way:
CORPORATE MANSLAUGHTER and CORPORATE HOMICIDE: A REGULATORY IMPACT ASSESSMENT of the GOVERNMENT'S BILL
INTRODUCTION
1. This assessment considers the impact of proposals set out in the Government's Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill.
2. The proposals are intended to offer a more effective means of holding organisations to account for gross management failings causing death than is currently provided under the law of manslaughter in England and Wales and Northern Ireland and culpable homicide in Scotland1. In practice, it can prove very difficult to prosecute large corporations for gross negligence manslaughter/culpable homicide because the law requires proof that a "directing mind" (that is, an individual at the very top of the organisation who can be said to embody its decisions or actions) is guilty of the offence. In broad terms, the proposals would create a variant of this offence specific to organisations. Criminal liability would be attributed where the way the organisation's activities were managed or organised by its senior managers was grossly in breach of a duty of care it owed a person, causing their death.
3. The primary purpose of reform therefore is to offer a more effective sanction against organisations for whom the current law has little effective application. The new offence does not increase or decrease individual responsibility but instead provides a different basis for the criminal liability of organisations, where the focus is no longer on the guilt of a particular individual.
4. However, a consequence of reform should be a contribution to reducing the rate of work-related deaths and injuries. The proposals do not require any new standards to be met. But a more effective corporate manslaughter offence would provide an incentive for organisations where serious failings exist in the management of health and safety risks to review current arrangements and organise themselves in a way that minimises failings that might cause death. While existing health and safety legislation already provides for an unlimited fine on conviction for certain offences, the prospect of a manslaughter conviction under more effective legislation will provide an additional incentive to comply with appropriate standards.
5. This assessment sets out the background to the Bill, the options for reform and the likely costs and benefits to potential defendants, enforcing authorities and society as a whole, in the context of improving health and safety in the workplace.
The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill introduces a new offence of corporate manslaughter (for England and Wales and Northern Ireland) and a new offence of corporate homicide (for Scotland). For the remainder of this assessment, the term "corporate manslaughter" should be read to include corporate homicide.
1.4 RESEARCH FRAMEWORK
1.4.1 Hypothesis
The hypothesis posited here is that the existing definition and application of the laws of negligence and manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter are deficient in definition, application and penalty as to be applied...
Benchmarking Opportunities and Challenges of benchmarking The first question to be asked is what benchmarking can do for any organization. The process of benchmarking permits the entire organization to identify, share and use the knowledge that exists within the organization as also the best practices prevalent within the organization. The attempt is to concentrate on improving the situation of any business unit and not to just measure the best performances that have
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now