[Criminologic manifesto].

There is conventional crime and unconventional crime. The first is mostly made up of offences against persons, property, morals and public order; the second of crimes committed under cover of official positions; against international laws; by "intelligence services"; terrorism; economic and financial frauds; illicit trade; criminal corruption at high levels; discriminatory practices; pollution; illicit traffic drugs, etc.. The vast majority of them are defined as criminal offences by national penal codes and special laws, but largely go unpunished. Unconventional crime cannot be explained by the traditional references to the personality of the offender. The explanation for the failure of contemporary criminology lies mostly in regarding the phenomenon of criminality as the ensemble of crimes which may be individually explained, instead of considering it as a sociopolitical phenomenon. If criminology is to survive, it must realize that the conventional is only one aspect of the sociopolitical phenomenon of crime, and that the study of unconventional crime demands an approach that the self-satisfied criminologies of our time cannot provide. The discussion and the study on unconventional crime will raise political difficulties, but the time has come that criminology and criminal justice face the fact that science can no longer be (or assume to be) neutral.