Disfranchisement is a penal measure meted out together with a punishment (Article 39 point 1 of the penal code) and instead of a punishment if a sentence is pronounced without a trial (Article 343 §2 point 3 of the penal procedure code), taking on a character of a self-contained penal measure. A ruling of disfranchisement depends on a kind of crime as well as type and scale of punishment. A ruling of this penal measure - in accordance with Article 40 §2 of the penal code - can take place in case of a crime committed as a result of motivation deserving special condemnation and imprisonment not shorter than three years. Motivation deserving special condemnation does not have to be a feature of a criminal offence, but it has to refer to a crime being a ground for a conviction. This motivation deserves condemnation in a special way. Disfranchisement deprives a convict of the right to perform public functions and results in a loss of decorations and titles of a public character; it refers to the public sphere of the perpetrator's activities. But it does not deprive persons of their human rights. It is related to: a) political rights, including active and passive election rights to public administration organs, professional or business self-government units and the right to take part in the administration of justice; b) civil rights, including the right to perform functions in organs and institutions of state administration and territorial or professional self-government; c) honorable rights, including the possession of orders, decorations and honorable titles; d) a military rank.
The arrival of the Revolution brought French society many changes which had been demanded for years. The privileges which oppressed the subjects of Louis XVI were abolished — people were all free and equal in the eyes of the law. However, the “Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen”, which did not mention women, allowed politicians and thinkers of the time to gradually exclude women from public life — first in the new constitutional monarchy and later in the republic. Educational deficiencies and a lack of common sense and even reason were the argument used most often to demonstrate the inability of women to exercise power and to obtain legal and civil liberty. In the new bourgeois order, women’s ambition was limited to the role of mothers and wives. Some women as well as some men did not want to come to terms with such a lack of social balance. They argued that nature equipped women with the same intellectual capacity as men and, therefore, being equal to men, they should be able to enjoy the same rights.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.