Criminal Justice, Democratic Fairness, and Cultural Pluralism: The Case of Aboriginal Peoples in Canada

Melissa S. Williams
{"title":"Criminal Justice, Democratic Fairness, and Cultural Pluralism: The Case of Aboriginal Peoples in Canada","authors":"Melissa S. Williams","doi":"10.1525/NCLR.2002.5.2.451","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The place of criminal justice in democracy has been little studied in recent democratic theory. This is surprising insofar as much of the theory of democracy concerns how shared norms become binding law, and where are shared norms more forcefully expressed or enforced than in the domain of criminal law? Perhaps the reason for democratic theorists’ recent neglect of criminal justice and punishment is the fact that there is so little agreement in most democratic societies as to the purpose of punishment. Is it fundamentally retributive in purpose, and therefore appropriately measured out in proportion to the seriousness of the offense? Is its purpose deterrent, so that no greater (and no lesser) punishment should be inflicted than is necessary to dissuade individuals from violating the law? Or is its purpose rehabilitative, to “discipline” in its root meaning as synonymous with “teach”? Or, finally, we might conceive of criminal justice as restorative, with the aim of repairing victims’ injuries and reintegrating offenders into responsible membership in the community. There is clearly no settled consensus on these questions in contemporary democracies.","PeriodicalId":344882,"journal":{"name":"Buffalo Criminal Law Review","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Buffalo Criminal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/NCLR.2002.5.2.451","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

The place of criminal justice in democracy has been little studied in recent democratic theory. This is surprising insofar as much of the theory of democracy concerns how shared norms become binding law, and where are shared norms more forcefully expressed or enforced than in the domain of criminal law? Perhaps the reason for democratic theorists’ recent neglect of criminal justice and punishment is the fact that there is so little agreement in most democratic societies as to the purpose of punishment. Is it fundamentally retributive in purpose, and therefore appropriately measured out in proportion to the seriousness of the offense? Is its purpose deterrent, so that no greater (and no lesser) punishment should be inflicted than is necessary to dissuade individuals from violating the law? Or is its purpose rehabilitative, to “discipline” in its root meaning as synonymous with “teach”? Or, finally, we might conceive of criminal justice as restorative, with the aim of repairing victims’ injuries and reintegrating offenders into responsible membership in the community. There is clearly no settled consensus on these questions in contemporary democracies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
刑事司法、民主公平与文化多元:以加拿大原住民为例
近代民主理论对刑事司法在民主中的地位研究甚少。这是令人惊讶的,因为许多民主理论关注的是共同规范如何成为约束性法律,以及在哪里共同规范比在刑法领域更有力地表达或执行?也许民主理论家最近忽视刑事司法和惩罚的原因是,在大多数民主社会中,人们对惩罚的目的几乎没有共识。从根本上说,它的目的是报复吗?因此,它是否与犯罪的严重性成比例?其目的是否具有威慑力,以便不施加比劝阻个人违法所必需的更大(或更小)的惩罚?或者它的目的是为了康复,把“纪律”作为“教导”的同义词?或者,最后,我们可以设想刑事司法具有恢复性,其目的是修复受害者的伤害,并使罪犯重新融入社会,成为负责任的成员。在当代民主国家,对这些问题显然没有确定的共识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Murder After the Merger: A Commentary on Finkelstein Group Violence and Group Vengeance: Toward a Retributivist Theory of International Criminal Law Benthamite Reflections on Codification of the General Principles of Criminal Liability: Towards the Panopticon The Politics of Grace: On the Moral Justification of Executive Clemency Toward a Better Categorical Balance of the Costs and Benefits of the Exclusionary Rule
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1