The Communicative Theory of Punishment and Repentance
Аннотация
The paper argues that the repentance of an offender can make his punishment inappropriate and that courts must consider repentance as a sufficient reason not to inflict punishment at all or to reduce it. The discussion begins with an examination of the communicative theory of punishment which acknowledges that punishment must aim at the repentance of offenders. However, this theory, as brilliantly presented in the works of Antony Duff, does not admit generally that repentance is a sufficient reason to remit punishment. Another representative of the communicative theory, John Tasioulas, argues that repentance must be considered as a ground for mercy. Both writers, however, perceive repentance outside the normative framework of criminal justice process. The author argues that repentance can and must be an essential element in inflicting or remitting punishment. The reasons to support such a conclusion are drawn from a variety of writings ranging from traditional criminology to the theological writings of Augustine, Aquinas, and Calvin.
Литература
Bibas S. (2012) The Machinery of Criminal Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 398 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195374681.001.0001
Braithwaite J. (2002) Restorative Justice and Responsive Regulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 408 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195136395.001.0001
Duff A. (2001) Punishment, Communication, and Community. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 651 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195104295.001.0001
Duff A. (2007) The Intrusion of Mercy. Ohio St. J. Crim. L., vol. 4, p. 361.
Duff A., Green S. (eds.) (2013) Philosophical Foundations of Criminal Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 535 p.
Duff A. (2014) Towards a Modest Legal Moralism. Criminal Law and Philosophy, no 2, pp. 1-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-012-9191-8
Farmer L. (2007) Criminal Responsibility and the Proof of Guilt. Dubber M.(ed.) Modern Histories of Crime and Punishment. Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 42-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804768412-005
Johnston G. (2002) Restorative Justice. Cullompton: Willan, 258 p.
Kunz K. (2004) Kriminologie: eine Grundlegung. Bern: Haupt, 419 p.
Lee A. (2017) Defending Communicative Theory of Punishment: the Relationship between Hard Treatment and Amends. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 37, issue 1, pp. 217-237.
London R. (2014) Crime, Punishment, and Restorative Justice: A Framework for Restoring Trust. Eugene (Or.): Wipf and Stock, 370 p.
Murphy J. (2007) Remorse, Apology, and Mercy. Ohio St. J. Crim. L., vol. 4, p. 423, 440.
Paul J. (2012) The Legal Realism of Jerome N. Frank: A Study of Fact-Skepticism and Judicial Process. Brill: Martinus Nijhoff, 288 p.
Smith N. (2016) Justice Through Apologies: Remorse, Reform, and Punishment. Queen's Law Journal, vol. 41, pp. 527-529.
Tasioulas J. (2007) Repentance and the Liberal State. Ohio St. J. Crim. L., vol. 4, p. 487.
Tasioulas J. (2011) Where is the Love. The Topography of Mercy. Cruft R. et al (eds.). Crime, Punishment, and Responsibility: The Jurisprudence of Antony Duff. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 37-53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199592814.003.0003
Triplett R. (2017) The Handbook of the History and Philosophy of Criminology. Chicago: Wiley, 712 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119011385
Copyright (c) 2018 Право. Журнал Высшей школы экономики

Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution-ShareAlike» («Атрибуция — На тех же условиях») 4.0 Всемирная.












