Question

1. Alex owns a small grocery store in a residential area. Due to a recent increase in theft incidents, the local government passed an ordinance prohibiting the sale of certain items, including pocket knives, within the vicinity of residential areas. Any person found violating this ordinance shall be fined and the prohibited items shall be confiscated. Alex was unaware of this ordinance and continued selling pocket knives in his store. One day, a local law enforcer saw the pocket knives being displayed for sale and confiscated them. Alex argued that he was not aware of the ordinance and therefore should not be penalized. Discuss the legality of the confiscation and the liability of Alex in relation to the generality principle of penal laws.

2. The government passed a new law punishing drug trafficking with imprisonment and a hefty fine. Juan, a drug dealer, was charged and convicted of violating this law. However, during the trial, it was discovered that the law was not published in a widely-circulated newspaper as required by law. Juan's lawyer argued that since the law was not effectively promulgated, Juan should not be held liable for drug trafficking. Analyze the validity of this argument and discuss the importance of the generality principle of penal laws in relation to the application of this case.

3. Maria, a college student, was caught cheating during an important exam. The school has a strict policy against cheating and imposes severe penalties, including expulsion, for academic misconduct. However, Maria claimed that she was not aware of the school's policy on cheating as it was not clearly stated in the student handbook. Evaluate the validity of Maria's claim and discuss the significance of the generality principle of penal laws in relation to the enforcement of institutional rules and regulations.