Økonomisk Kriminalitet Nordiske Perspektiver - Scandinavian ...

that is carried out in a reintegrative fashion, as opposed to a stigmatizing fashion,
can decrease offending behaviour, because of its superior moralizing qualities.
Empirical research supports that reintegration of offenders will lead to lower
reoffending–while its opposite–stigmatization–leads to greater reoffending
(Murphy and Harris, 2007). High status corporate criminals have much more to
lose in terms of reputation compared to ordinary criminals and are therefore more
vulnerable to naming and shaming. In my interviews with the former employees of
the FME they all emphasized that many individuals subject to supervision had
expressed their opposition to publications of the names of offending firms.
Corporations fear of adverse publicity presents an effective tool for regulators in
naming and shaming. Further Braithwaite argues that societies with higher
interdependence of individuals are better able than others to reintegrate
lawbreakers by shaming the offence without stigmatizing the offender. Baumer,
Gunnlaugsson, Kristinsdóttir and Wright (2002) found Iceland to be a good
example of such a society. A model for economic crime prevention should be
implemented, in the spirit of an accountability model introduced by John
Braithwaite and Brent Fisse (1993).
A pyramid form or an escalation of control measures, ranging from
administrative to criminal, could be used to maximize compliance, deterrence, and
the efficient use of scarce enforcement measures 9 . For minor violations the
authorities would be in a position to give advice or mediate advice from the proper
regulatory agency, impose a warning or even a civil monetary penalty. For more
serious offences, including repeated non-compliance the corporation and
individuals implicated in the offence would be subject to criminal liability at an
escalated level. The range of sanctions in the pyramid for individuals is entirely
conventional, from fines to imprisonment, the range of sanctions for corporations
however would call for a wider array of sentencing options than are currently
available. This model suggests corporate capital punishment or liquidation as the
most severe form of sentence available against corporations. Another option is
punitive injunction and yet another court ordered adverse publicity (Fisse and
9 The Financial Supervisory Authority does use escalating enforcement measures to some extent.
119