A Multicriteria Standard to Rank Plea Bargain Proposals

Standards Pub Date : 2023-06-06 DOI:10.3390/standards3020016
A. P. Sant’Anna, L. Gavião, Tiago Lezan Sant’Anna
{"title":"A Multicriteria Standard to Rank Plea Bargain Proposals","authors":"A. P. Sant’Anna, L. Gavião, Tiago Lezan Sant’Anna","doi":"10.3390/standards3020016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article presents a model for the comparison of plea bargain proposals. The use of the model increases the possibility of the satisfactory development of the negotiation of rewarded collaboration agreements recently permitted under Brazilian law. A novelty in the model is the objective consideration of society’s interest in adequately punishing defendants whose guilt can be proven. To allow for the inclusion of this element, a multicriteria approach that adds the criteria representing the prosecution’s aims to the criteria regarding the accused’s positions is adopted. The importance of the criteria is derived without direct criteria weighting. A novel joint treatment to criteria collinearity and interaction is developed, which enables the model to accommodate any number of defendants, proposals, and criteria. The framework so developed enhances transparency and encourages collaboration. By assigning a new meaning to the plea bargain, it is able to bring about the necessary shift in cultural standards that can lead to the effective weakening of criminal organizations.","PeriodicalId":21933,"journal":{"name":"Standards","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Standards","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/standards3020016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article presents a model for the comparison of plea bargain proposals. The use of the model increases the possibility of the satisfactory development of the negotiation of rewarded collaboration agreements recently permitted under Brazilian law. A novelty in the model is the objective consideration of society’s interest in adequately punishing defendants whose guilt can be proven. To allow for the inclusion of this element, a multicriteria approach that adds the criteria representing the prosecution’s aims to the criteria regarding the accused’s positions is adopted. The importance of the criteria is derived without direct criteria weighting. A novel joint treatment to criteria collinearity and interaction is developed, which enables the model to accommodate any number of defendants, proposals, and criteria. The framework so developed enhances transparency and encourages collaboration. By assigning a new meaning to the plea bargain, it is able to bring about the necessary shift in cultural standards that can lead to the effective weakening of criminal organizations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
辩诉交易提案排名的多标准
本文提出了一个辩诉交易方案比较模型。该模式的使用增加了巴西法律最近允许的有偿合作协议谈判取得令人满意发展的可能性。该模型的一个新颖之处在于,它客观地考虑了社会的利益,即充分惩罚那些可以证明有罪的被告。为了纳入这一要素,采用了一种多标准办法,将代表控方目的的标准加入关于被告立场的标准。标准的重要性是在没有直接标准加权的情况下推导出来的。开发了一种新的标准共线性和相互作用的联合处理方法,使模型能够容纳任何数量的被告、建议和标准。这样制定的框架提高了透明度并鼓励合作。通过赋予辩诉交易新的含义,它能够带来文化标准的必要转变,从而有效削弱犯罪组织。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Towards Life Cycle Assessment for the Environmental Evaluation of District Heating and Cooling: A Critical Review Towards The Development of a Governance System for Central Purchasing Body Collaboration and Performance Benefit–Risk Assessment in Sport and Recreation: Historical Development and Review of AS ISO 4980:2023 Seasonal Data Cleaning for Sales with Chase Demand Strategy Are Stakeholders’ Opinions Redundant?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1