I have got a first class upper degree in chemistry,a master degree in chemistry from National University,Bangladesh and currently am doing another M.Phil. degree in organic synthetic chemistry from the Bangladeh university of Eingneering and Tecnology (BUET) Bangladesh. I am interested in the PhD positions advertised.I will be most grateful if you would grant me full scholarship. emil; kamalkumar_da@yahoo.com

I wish to get admission for PhD program . I have complemented my master degree here in Bangladesh (Rajshahi University). My thesis was “Preparation, characterization & anti-microbial study of Cu(II), Cb(II), Ni(II) complexes with cyanex-301″. Please send me some appropriate programme for me.

Thanks in advance for your kind cooperation.

Best Regards,
Pran Gopal Karmaker

Sincerely,
Massoumeh Abbasi
Maesoumeh_abbasi@yahoo.com

email: shuvro070@yahoo.com

It is impossible to think society without punishment. Every society has the institution of punishment. Punishment distinguishes criminal law from all other types of law.
Not long ago, corporal punishment was widely approved. Parents and teachers were told “to is spare the word is to spoil the child.”1 Punishment is effective in reducing or eliminating undesirable behavior. Both educational and legal systems depended upon punishment. Punishment now has fallen into some disfavor. For instance physical punishment is seldom employed in schools, or with the family. But those one approved as punishment may be considered as “child abuse” or “spouse abuse.”2 Today the ultimate punishment, capital punishment, is extremely rare. But due to public attitude towards disfavor regarding some types potential punishment is still pervasive in the world today.
Punishment is the reaction of society towards the person who breach social order or commit crime.3 One has the right to act with in the right given to him. There is no right without limitation. The social contract provides individuals with the freedom of action with in certain limit. When one act beyond the provided limit, that is prohibited by law and hence made criminal. The possessor of the right should act with a limit of his right. Otherwise when the possessor of right act beyond the limit set in his favor he begins to threaten others right and that may cause full of chaos.4 In order to guarantee these rules are respected and to keep the security of society the state applies punishment to those persons who transgress the limit and commit criminal acts.
H.L.A. Hart (1968) proposed that a punishment must include the following:5
1. It must involve pain or other consequences normally considered unpleasant.
2. It must be for an offence against legal rule
3. It must be an actual or supposed offender for his offence,
4. It must be intentionally administered by human beings other than the offender,
5. It must be imposed and administered by an authority constituted by a legal system against which the offence is committed.
Many definitions of punishment forwarded by different scholars center around these characteristics provided above by Hart. Therefore for a penalty to attain the status of legal punishment it must satisfy all these elements cumulatively.
Justification of Punishment
There are many possible reasons that might be given to justify or explain why someone ought to be punished. The response of society reflects different attitudes concerning the treatment of offenders. Depending on its cultural, religious and moral attitudes different societies have different outlook as to why criminals must be punished. Based on these differences, people have different purposes for punishing criminals.
1.Retributive theory
This theory is all about correcting past wrongs. It look backward to the crime and ask what justice requires to correct the past wrong.6 This theory which is the most stringent and harsh of all other theories believes to the crime in itself. This type of justification for punishment is the oldest of the other justifications I will mention below.
The golden Rule states “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.” Law enforcement seems to have its own version on the Golden Rule, which translates as “Do unto others as they have not done to you.”7
According to this theory, punishment applied simply in proportion to the seriousness of the offence. When a judge sentences for the purposes of retribution, punishment is applied simply in proportion to the seriousness of the offence. The “eye for an eye” system justice described in the Old Testament as an early form of retribution.8 It maintains that punishment is justified because it gives wrongdoers what the deserve. Here the suffering of wrongdoer is seen as good in itself, even if it has no other benefit.
According to the retributivist theory, the more series the crime the more severe the punishment should be. This theory underlies the idea of vengeance and revenge rather than that of social welfare and security. Therefore the retributive theory, as an objective of sentencing has no effect to change the offender and provide nothing to the society except a form of revenge.
Immanuel Kant adopts an equal treatment version of retributivism, arguing that criminals deserve the same punishment as their victims( death for death etc).10 according to this theory punishment should be imposed on offences irrespective of its deterring effect on others. However some argue that this is a “zero sum game” that such acts of street justice and blood revenge are not removed from society, but responsibility for carrying them out is merely transferred to the state.11
Eventhough retribution provide nothing to the society except a form of revenge, as stats have abandoned social reform as a purpose of sentencing in recent years, the use of retribution as a justification for punishment has become more popular. In the just deserts approach to retribution, using the sentencing process as a way to reform an offenders is seen as inappropriate, for it moves attention away from culpability for the past crime for which the offender was convicted.12
Generally, retribution sets an important standard on punishment. The transgressor must get what he deserves, but not more than what he deserves. Therefore, thief put to death is not retribution; a murder to put death is.13 Here punishment is eye for an eye.
2. Deterrence Theory
This theory aims to prevent crime through the example of offenders’ being punished .14 It is to act as a measure of prevention to those who are contemplating criminal activity.
The ancient history of punishment before all things was deterrent, and the chief end of the law of crime is to make the evildoer an example and a warning to all that are like-minded with him. The argument is that persons seeing and knowing that others are punished for committing crimes, will be deterred from committing such offences themselves.15
General deterrence is directed at preventing crime among the general population, while special deterrence is aimed at preventing future crimes by a particular offender.16 The basic reasoning behind general deterrence is impeccable or it is

Myself Vedprakash Tiwari MSc in Biotechnology From Bangalore University . would like to persue my Ph.D in plant pathology. under the supervision of your stream organisation

Thanks

I am a Ugandan, already registered in a university in a foreign countryand am in my second year of study doing a PhD in Chemical Engineering (making biodiesel from non-edible plant oils).

This study is expected to be used to cheaply produce biodiesel from locally grown non-edible plant species for rural community settings to help the community reduce on the burden of energy and hence poverty alleviation. These plants are already being grown by the local people in Tanzania. I do not have enough funds to help me in this study so I am requesting for assistance from whoever is interested in this kind of studies.

Thank you.

Aldo