Andere
Retribution and restitution: a synthesis – Peter J. Ferrara (1982)
- Kurs
- Hochschule
This document goes through retribution and restitution as functions of the CJS rather than punishment.
[ Mehr anzeigen ]vorschau 2 aus 5 Seiten
Vorschau 2 aus 5 Seiten
In den Einkaufswagen
In den Einkaufswagen
Verkäufer
Folgen
fatimaahmed1458
Inhaltsvorschau
Retribution and restitution: a synthesis – Peter J. Ferrara- Advocates of a totally new approach to criminal justice challenge the current
paradigm of criminal justice – which emphasizes punishment of the criminal – and
supports instead a radically different paradigm, which emphasizes compensation or
restitution to the victim for losses suffered as a result of the crime. E.g tax paying
after being robbed is unfair; the victim shouldn’t have to pay for this prisoners
settings through tax
3 distinct justifications for punishment
- Deterrence – punishment is justified because of its dettering effect on future crimes
by the criminal or others.
- Rehabilitation – punishment is justified because it allows ‘experts’ the opportunity
to rehabilitate the criminal. Rehabilitators see themselves as prescribing treatment
rather than inflicting punishment.
- Retribution – punishment is justified as the moral and just desert of a criminal who
wants to only transgress against the right of his fellow men and fails to accept the
immorality of his acts.
Generally, the popular viewpoint is that deterrence and rehabilitation are the correct,
valid justifications for punishment whilst retribution was more primitive and barbaric.
In recent years – many have found deterrence and rehabilitation inadequate
justifications for punishment and retribution is once again becoming more widely
accepted as not just a valid justification, but the sole justification for criminal
punishment.
The Theory of Restitution
- Barnett and Hagel – based on an explicit concept of individual rights.
- A crime has only been committed when the rights of an individual, rights that
everyone possess, is violated in some way.
First, crime is defined as any act which violates or threatens to violate the rights
of 1 or more individuals rather than as any action that has been prohibited by
statute.
Secondly – it becomes clear that crimes are committed against individuals with
resulting damage to those individuals, rather than against the state as under the
current concept.
Third – this insight leads to the conclusion that there are 2 parties to any criminal
proceeding, the aggressor and the victim rather than the aggressor and the state
as is currently the case in criminal law.
Fourth – prime purpose of a true CJS is to force the criminal to compensate the
victim for the damages caused by the criminal act. This is because the criminal
, act creates an imbalance between the parties since the criminal has infringed
upon the rights of the victim. The imbalance must be corrected by forcing the
criminal to restitute the victim for the loss caused by this violation of rights.
- The initial focus on individual rights in this theory leads to the conclusion that the
prime function of the CJS is to make restitution to the victim rather than punish the
criminal.
- This act of reparation should be designed to put the victim or the victim’s heirs in
the position that they would have been in if the original criminal act had never
occurred. Once the victim has been compensated, no further sanctions should be
imposed on the criminal.
- A further characteristic of the restitutionary theory of criminal justice; the restitution
paradigm is backward looking or past-oriented while the punishment paradigm is
forward-looking or future-oriented. The emphasis in restitution is to determine what
has happened in the past and to make amends for it; to punish a criminal for past
actions. The emphasis in punishment theories is to prevent future crime by
deterring, incapacitating or rehabilitating potential criminals.
- Another characteristic of this approach is that none of the goals of crime prevention
of the current punishment paradigm can be pursued through the criminal justice
system except as incidental-by products of the pursuit of restitution. This is because
the need for restitution arises from the violation of rights which constitute the crime.
To sacrifice the restitutive goal for crime-prevention goals would be to ignore the
rights of the victim and to allow them to be infringed.
- The restitutionary theory does not permit the pursuit of any goals except
restitution through the criminal justice system. It follows that third parties to a
criminal proceeding, parties other than the criminal or the victim do not have rights
to be enforced in the proceeding. The purpose of the criminal proceeding is solely to
provide restitution to the victim and therefore only the victim has the right to
enforce his claim. Under the restitution doctrine, only the victim can decide whether
to prosecute the criminal, and no one else has any right to pursue such prosecution
in his name.
- Restitutionary theory implies important rights for the criminal as well as the victim.
The criminal as well as the victim has rights which cannot be abridged; he can be
punished to only to an extent commensurate with the harm he has caused by his
criminal act. Any further punishment or sanctions against him will violate his rights
and will therefore be unjustifiable. Therefore, the criminals right as a rational being
is the right to be protected from a sanction that goes beyond the nature and
consequences of his acts.
- While Barnet and Hagel have outlined a system of law fully consistent with a
libertarian concept of rights and one rather appealing from that view-point; they
overlooked 1 significant fact as well as its implications for a proper system of
criminal justice; we already have a system of resitutionary penalties, that defined by
the ‘tort doctrines of the civil law’ as distinct from the criminal law.
Alle Vorteile der Zusammenfassungen von Stuvia auf einen Blick:
Garantiert gute Qualität durch Reviews
Stuvia Verkäufer haben mehr als 700.000 Zusammenfassungen beurteilt. Deshalb weißt du dass du das beste Dokument kaufst.
Schnell und einfach kaufen
Man bezahlt schnell und einfach mit iDeal, Kreditkarte oder Stuvia-Kredit für die Zusammenfassungen. Man braucht keine Mitgliedschaft.
Konzentration auf den Kern der Sache
Deine Mitstudenten schreiben die Zusammenfassungen. Deshalb enthalten die Zusammenfassungen immer aktuelle, zuverlässige und up-to-date Informationen. Damit kommst du schnell zum Kern der Sache.
Häufig gestellte Fragen
Was bekomme ich, wenn ich dieses Dokument kaufe?
Du erhältst eine PDF-Datei, die sofort nach dem Kauf verfügbar ist. Das gekaufte Dokument ist jederzeit, überall und unbegrenzt über dein Profil zugänglich.
Zufriedenheitsgarantie: Wie funktioniert das?
Unsere Zufriedenheitsgarantie sorgt dafür, dass du immer eine Lernunterlage findest, die zu dir passt. Du füllst ein Formular aus und unser Kundendienstteam kümmert sich um den Rest.
Wem kaufe ich diese Zusammenfassung ab?
Stuvia ist ein Marktplatz, du kaufst dieses Dokument also nicht von uns, sondern vom Verkäufer fatimaahmed1458. Stuvia erleichtert die Zahlung an den Verkäufer.
Werde ich an ein Abonnement gebunden sein?
Nein, du kaufst diese Zusammenfassung nur für 7,61 €. Du bist nach deinem Kauf an nichts gebunden.
Kann man Stuvia trauen?
4.6 Sterne auf Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
45.681 Zusammenfassungen wurden in den letzten 30 Tagen verkauft
Gegründet 2010, seit 14 Jahren die erste Adresse für Zusammenfassungen