One of the most important monuments of juridical-legal literature in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania is the Statute (its three editions: 1529, 1566, 1588), the code of feudal law written in the “Rusian” language, which for several centuries was used as the chancery/office language in the country. This document is very important for research on the lexis and other linguistic aspects of 16th-century literary Belorussian and Ukrainian, because the lexical layer best reflects the GDL’s political, economic and cultural relations with other countries. The lexis of the Statute is thematically quite diverse, but the legal-juridical vocabulary in this code of feudal law is the richest. In the article, using the comparative method, the thematic-lexical cluster of words denoting or defining crimes, criminals and forms of punishment is analysed. The common features of this lexis, its specific traits and loanwords in the three editions are identified. The analysis shows that the Statute contains both common and specific words and terms naming various life situations, crimes, offenders and punishments. In the second (1566) and especially the third (1588) edition, which became more extensive due to new or supplementary articles, this thematic-lexical cluster was enriched with new terms, most often loanwords. From the point of view of origin, the lexis shows items inherited from Old Russian (often polysemous), from Old Belorussian and Ukrainian (with specific word-formation), as well as borrowings – mostly Polonisms, but also Polonism–Germanisms and Polonism–Latinisms. A distinctive feature of this lexical cluster is polysemy: the same words can denote both crimes and types of punishment. There are also pairs of short words for crimes and criminals, synonymic doublets of different roots expressing the same concept, and word-formation variants. The analysis confirms that in the 16th century terminology in this field had not yet been standardised, and the three editions of the Statute reflect particular stages in the formation of legal-juridical terminology. Thus, besides its legal value, the Statute is a unique linguistic phenomenon of its time.

Šiame straipsnyje pristatomi Rusijos imperijos visuomenės modernizaciją XIX a. pab. – XX a. pr. reflektuojantys bruožai, atskleisti išnagrinėjus Rusijos imperijos Teisingumo ministerijos parengtų sąvadų medžiagą apie nuteistų asmenų imtį. Pasitelkus istorikų tyrimams naudojamus klasikinius analizės ir sintezės, statistikos bei lyginamąjį metodus, apžvelgiamas ir palyginamas trijuose apygardos teismuose, veikusiuose Rusijos imperijos europinės dalies skirtinguose geografiniuose paribiuose, nuteistųjų vyraujantis socialinis profilis ir jo kismas. Tyrimo metu buvo sudarytos statistines lentelės apie 1884, 1897 ir 1912 metais užfiksuotus nuteistų asmenų socialinius rodiklius.

Straipsnyje iš šiuolaikinės vadybos teorijos pozicijų nagrinėjamos teisės ir jos kategorijų, vartojamų vadyboje, sampratos. Pateikiami siūlymai, kaip tos sampratos galėtų būti patikslintos, siekiant pašalinti jų sukeltus trukdymus keliant organizacijų vadybos efektyvumą.

The article analyses the most essential social factors that determine reasons for juvenile crime. Following the results of the research conducted in Kaunas Juvenile Remand Prison and Correction House, the main social and reasons that determine the juvenile violations of law were identified. These factors are important from legal and sociopedagogical point of view. The legal aspect is relevant because the court, interpreting juvenile criminal acts, handing down convictions and pronouncing an appropriate sentence to a juvenile, has to consider his/her living and education conditions, health situation and social maturity, the surrounding environment, his/her own characteristics and those of close to him/her people . Such position is provided for in international legal acts that contain mandatory or recommendable provisions in the sphere of criminal law: “the background and circumstances in which the juvenile is living or the conditions under which the offence has been committed shall be properly investigated “. Thus, an increasingly bigger attention is paid not only to the commitment of a criminal act but also to investigation of causality of this act. In terms of sociopedagogy, the analysis of social factors may contribute to complex solutions to juvenile crime prevention and to involvement of all participants of education process, school community: educators, school administration, social educators, psychologists, law enforcement officials, parents and children themselves.

The article analyses a specific kind of crime committed by the nobility of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, i. e. the raids on estates, in Vilnius District (administrative district in Poland, Lithuania, Ukraine). The article covers the period of the mid-18th century when the country was ruled by Augustus III (1734–1763). Attacks were well organized, armed, and violent seizures of other people’s possessions; they were organized on a large scale. According to the legal norms of that period, these raids could have been legal, having the approval of the law court, and illegal. The latter, however, were the most frequent ones; we did not come across any legal attacks. Raids were one of the most widely spread crimes in rural territories and the most frequent crime against a person and his/her property in the period under analysis. All in all, 288 cases dealing with this crime during the above-mentioned period were found. Frequency tendencies of these attacks are directly related to the general tendencies of crime rate. The boom of this kind of crime could be dated by the 5th decade of the 18th century when, on average, more than 13 attacks occurred every year; later, their number decreased. The raids usually took place in summer, at day-time; however, there were some other cases as well. The group of raiders, as a rule, consisted of a landlord, his family members, and land administrators with their subjects – household servants and peasants. Peasants and other unprivileged subjects participated in almost all attacks. Though acts of violence were abundant, homicide cases were not numerous. For example, we discovered only seven murder cases; some deaths occurred after attacks, and some women miscarried because of the acts of violence. Violence was committed against people of all social layers, and imprisonment or rapes could be defined as concrete cases of the expression of this violence.[...]

Straipsnyje, kritiškai įvertinus neskelbtą dokumentinę medžiagą ir publikuotus šaltinius, siekiama atskleisti abortų problemą tarpukario Lietuvoje. Abortas, įvykstantis savaime, šio tyrimo kontekste nėra svarbus, todėl kaip darbo objektas išskiriamas dirbtinai nutrauktas nėštumas. Dėmesys skiriamas teisiniam abortų reglamentavimui, dirbtinio nėštumo nutraukimo priežasčių išryškinimui bei priemonėms, kuriomis jis buvo atliekamas. Siekiama parodyti skirtingus abortų vertinimus, vyravusius tarpukario Lietuvos visuomenėje. Iki 1935 m. baudžiamajame statute buvo numatyta, kad už visus dirbtinius abortus turi būti baudžiama. 1935 m. priimtu įstatymu legalus dirbtinis nėštumo nutraukimas buvo galimas tik tada, jeigu moters gyvybei grėsė pavojus arba ji tapo nusikaltimo auka. Toks pokytis leidžia spręsti apie tam tikrą pažangą to meto visuomenėje, tačiau tyrimas parodė, kad to nepakako. Moterys nutraukti nėštumą pasirinkdavo vedamos tokių motyvų kaip sunki ekonominė padėtis, taip pat dėl neigiamo visuomenės požiūrio į netekėjusią besilaukiančią merginą ar asmeninio apsisprendimo neturėti vaikų. Tokia priešprieša tarp įstatymų ir kasdienio gyvenimo turėjo įtakos tam, kad abortai buvo atliekami slapta, itin kenksmingomis sąlygomis bei priemonėmis. Susiklosčiusi ydinga praktika lėmė sunkius nėščiųjų susirgimus ar net mirtis. To meto visuomenėje abortai buvo vertinami kaip sunkus moralinis nusižengimas, tačiau kartu atkreiptas dėmesys, kad tik įstatymų nepakanka siekiant išspręsti dirbtinio nėštumo nutraukimo problemą.

Abortas – ne tik nuodėmė, bet ir teisinis – kanoninis nusikaltimas. Tačiau ne kiekvienas aborto atvejis tampa nusikaltimu. Šiame straipsnyje nagrinėjama, kokiomis teisinėmis aplinkybėmis aborto nuodėmė virsta ir kanoniniu nusikaltimu, už kurį žmogus baudžiamas ekskomunika. Yra daug išimčių ir švelninančių aplinkybių, mažinančių abortą darančių asmenų atsakomybę, todėl galima teigti, kad, nors abortas visada yra didelis moralinis blogis, bet jį darantys žmonės ne visada užsitraukia atsakomybę už šį nusikaltimą ir už jo įvykdymą taikomą ekskomuniką.