Question

求帮忙翻译这段文字，谢谢，不要google直接翻译的那种。。

The most critical issue in corporate governance and Canadian capital marketstoday is that the law is too lenient on corporate crime. In the case of corporate crime thelaw should not necessarily be a deterrent but should encourage compliance. It might notbe the same as violent crimes as harsher sentences are sometimes thought to deter violentcrime but to reduce the incidence of corporate crime the penalty should be monetarilyharsh. The law is too lenient on corporate crime as due to the inherent nature of thecrime, it is viewed by society as less harmful. The case of Westray is an example of thelaw not adequately handling the proper punishment for misconduct. “Many people takefor granted the integrity of the financial system. Sometimes I was told that capitalmarkets fraud is not the same as other crimes. This is wrong. Fraud is not a victimlesscrime. Confidence in the integrity of capital markets translates into real benefits for oureconomy and for individual Canadians.”1 The law in Canada should be changed in orderto increase enforcement and compliance in order to reduce corporate crime.
The problem of corporate crime is caused by: 1) lack of strong legislation, 2)inefficient enforcement, and 3) weak sentencing/ penalties. Without strong legislation the other two factors suffer as a result. Even strong enforcement of weak legislation wouldnot solve the problem. Corporate crime is pervasive and hard to describe. “Economic crime, by the very disparate nature of its component activities, is incapable of simpledefinition.”2 Due to the complex nature of many corporate crimes the amount ofresources that goes into enforcement needs to be efficient and streamlined. The currentstructure of numerous commissions and other bodies (self regulating organizations('SROs'), etc.) enforcing the same or similar provisions and laws needs to be revamped.The overall system needs to be revitalized so that potential criminals are given lessopportunity to evade the rules and laws and less ability to do so without facingconsequences. The current system is stagnant and does not seem to discourage crime, asthe punishment sanctioned usually does not outweigh the potential benefits if the criminalsucceeds. While this is true of non-corporate crimes as well the effect is more potent inthe corporate realm. This is due to the overarching effects that can be caused by criminalsin the corporate sphere, which is usually missing in the non-corporate criminal realm.

Answer 1

兄弟，太长了吧……
今天在公司治理和加拿大资本市场上的最关键的问题是，法律对法人犯罪过于宽松。对法人犯法的情况下不应该没有一定的阻吓作用，但应鼓励遵守。更严厉的判决有时可能不是想阻止暴力犯罪，但法人犯罪的发生，以减少刑罚应对金钱比较苛刻。对公司犯罪的法律太宽松，由于固有性质的犯罪，它被视为由社会危害性较小。韦斯特雷的情况下是法律不充分的处理失当行为给予适当的惩罚的例子。 “很多人采取授予金融系统的完整性。有时有人告诉我，是不是其他罪行的相同资本市场欺诈。这是不对的。是不是欺诈一个被害人犯罪。增加执法和遵守，以减少企业的犯罪的信心，让资本市场转化成实实在在的好处，为我们的经济和个别加拿大人利益的完整性。“1日在加拿大的法律应该改变。
法人犯罪的问题造成的：1）缺乏强有力的法律，2）执法效率低下，以及3）弱判刑/罚款。如果没有强有力的法律，其他两个因素，因此受到损失。即使强有力的执法和立法也不能解决这个问题。法人犯罪是无孔不入，很难形容。 “经济犯罪，其组成活动非常不同的性质，是能力的简单的定义。”由于许多企业犯罪的复杂性，金额资源进入执法需要高效和简化。许多委员会和其他机构的自我调节机构（分区域办事处）等，执行相同或类似的规定和法律需要被改组.系统的整体需要振兴，使潜在的犯罪分子逃避规则和法律的机会和可能越来越少，所以没有面对后果做。当前系统处于停滞状态，似乎并没有阻止犯罪，作为处罚制裁通常不超过如果刑事成功的潜在好处。虽然这是真正的非企业的罪行，以及效果是更有效的在企业领域。这是因为可以通过罪犯企业领域，通常是在非企业刑事领域中缺少造成的总体影响。
同志，你……错别字真多，这篇文章挺难的（对于我来说……）有些语句真的很不通顺……望见谅