VARGHA, WHOSE MAIN CONCERN WAS THE INTRODUCTION OF MORE HUMANE METHODS OF PUNISHMENT, HELD THE OPINION THAT THIS AIM COULD ONLY BE ACHIEVED IF THE NOTIONS OF CRIME, CRIMINAL, AND PRISONER WERE CLEARLY DEFINED AND EXPLAINED. IN DOING SO HE ARRIVED AT THE CONCLUSION THAT THEORIES OF CRIMINALITY WHICH ONLY CONSIDERED THE MISDEMEANANT DID NOT PROVIDE A SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR THIS DEFINITION. THEREFORE IT WAS NECESSARY FOR HIM TO EXPLAIN THESE NOTIONS FROM A LEGAL POINT OF VIEW. HE CAME TO REALIZE THAT THE 'CLASS' OF CRIMINALS CHANGED IF THE LEGAL SITUATION CHANGED, AND THAT FOR THIS REASON THE NOTIONS CRIME AND CRIMINAL COULD NOT HAVE AN UNEQUIVOCAL CONTENT. THEREFORE, ONLY THOSE ACTS WERE TO BE CONSIDERED CRIMES WHICH WERE DECLARED AS SUCH BY THE LEGISLATOR, AND ONLY THOSE PEOPLE AS CRIMINALS WHO IN THE COURSE OF A SUCCESSFUL PROCESS OF CRIMINALIZATION ARE 'DECLARED' OR 'LABELED' CRIMINALS BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COMMUNITY'S SENSE OF JUSTICE? THIS LABELING LATER TURNS INTO AN ADDITIONAL CAUSE OF FURTHER CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR BECAUSE SOCIETY EXPELS THE LABELED PERSON AND DOES NOT GIVE HIM ANY FURTHER CHANCE FOR A LIFE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF SOCIAL LIFE. IN VARGHA'S OPINION, THIS CLEARLY SHOWS THE JOINT RESPONSIBILITY OF SOCIETY FOR THE RISE IN CRIMINALITY. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT) --IN GERMAN. SUMMARY IN ENGLISH...ELW