3 ms·
True. But then why do we almost never hold persons criminally accountable when they do harm through a company they control. Shouldn’t this be reciprocal?
by jhrmnn 3y ago
True. But then why do we almost never hold persons criminally accountable when they do harm through a company they control. Shouldn’t this be reciprocal?
- zdragnar 3y agoA person doesn't control a company like they do a car. Proving criminal liability for an individual requires evidence tied to that individual. Much easier, and a lower bar, to hold the corporate entity liable.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y agoWe could choose to hold executives and/or majority shareholders responsible instead of a "corporate entity".
- devmor 3y agoWe certainly could and I think, given a stringent set of regulations around record keeping of corporate decisions, we should. Passing such a set of laws seems like a pipe dream at best, though.
- Obscurity4340 3y agoWhy should it be any different than for example charging a parent for his negligence in controlling his child?