Criminal liability of a legal entity in the light of the principle of individualization of punishment

The liability caused by other’s actions has been believed in previous societies. Hence, people used to destroy a tribe because of the murder of a person. With the advent of legal systems, the principle of individualization of punishment was established, so that no other person is punished because of other’s actions. However, with the creation of legal entities, assumptions were presented and led to the criminal liability of legal entities. Now, the question is that whether considering criminal liability for the legal entity is consistent with the principle of individualization of punishment or not? And whether such a person can be punished or not? The answer is that the principle of individualization of punishment has a relative and not absolute impact. When a person is punished for the commitment of a crime, the other people around that person will be damaged physically and spiritually and even other social classes with no relationship with the offender are harmed. On legal entities, the same issue is true. Criminal liability and punishment of legal entity can impose harm on stockholders and other people connected to the person. However, this is not inconsistent with the principle of individualization of punishment. This is because; firstly, the said principle has a relative effect, and secondly, criminal liability of a legal entity is a proxy and not a liability caused by the other’s action. Thirdly, the legal entity has the capability of tolerating the punishment. Fourthly, considering liability for the legal entity and punishing that person can leave impacts in the society to make interest for those people, who were harmed by the punishment of the legal entity.