The Ability of Human Rights to Limit the State’s Power to Punish in Europe: Connecting Prison and Mental Health Policies through the Concept of “Transpolicies”

Gaëtan Cliquennois, Sonja Snacken
{"title":"The Ability of Human Rights to Limit the State’s Power to Punish in Europe: Connecting Prison and Mental Health Policies through the Concept of “Transpolicies”","authors":"Gaëtan Cliquennois, Sonja Snacken","doi":"10.1017/lsi.2023.81","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While scholars have pointed out the factors determining the impediments to and efficacy of international human rights rules, poor attention has been paid to human rights violations relating to transfers between prison and psychiatric detention. There is a lack of intersection of policy spheres in this regard that should be remedied. Our contribution aims to challenge traditional sociolegal boundaries by integrating the intersection of policy and subdisciplines that cover penal justice (prison and police stations), psychiatric institutions, and human rights. Raising the question of human rights’ ability to limit the state’s power to punish in Europe compels us to explore different forms of “transinstitutionalization,” especially between prisons and psychiatric institutions and between prisons and immigration detention centers that present as “total institutions” (hosting populations perceived to be “deviant”), and share many similarities, including the risk of human rights violations. We forge the concept of “transpolicies” to take into account the mutual influence and the domino effects of such detention policies that are acknowledged, and both promoted and fought, by the European human rights institutions. In the empirical part, we focus on the increasing interactions between prison and mental health policies, taking Belgium as an example as it is known to raise specific human rights challenges.","PeriodicalId":501328,"journal":{"name":"Law & Social Inquiry","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Social Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2023.81","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While scholars have pointed out the factors determining the impediments to and efficacy of international human rights rules, poor attention has been paid to human rights violations relating to transfers between prison and psychiatric detention. There is a lack of intersection of policy spheres in this regard that should be remedied. Our contribution aims to challenge traditional sociolegal boundaries by integrating the intersection of policy and subdisciplines that cover penal justice (prison and police stations), psychiatric institutions, and human rights. Raising the question of human rights’ ability to limit the state’s power to punish in Europe compels us to explore different forms of “transinstitutionalization,” especially between prisons and psychiatric institutions and between prisons and immigration detention centers that present as “total institutions” (hosting populations perceived to be “deviant”), and share many similarities, including the risk of human rights violations. We forge the concept of “transpolicies” to take into account the mutual influence and the domino effects of such detention policies that are acknowledged, and both promoted and fought, by the European human rights institutions. In the empirical part, we focus on the increasing interactions between prison and mental health policies, taking Belgium as an example as it is known to raise specific human rights challenges.
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
欧洲人权限制国家惩罚权力的能力:通过 "透明政策 "概念连接监狱与心理健康政策
虽然学者们指出了决定国际人权规则的障碍和效力的因素,但对与监狱和精神病院之间的转移有关的侵犯人权行为却关注甚少。在这方面缺乏政策领域的交叉,这一点应该得到纠正。我们的贡献旨在挑战传统的社会法律界限,将政策与涉及刑事司法(监狱和警察局)、精神病院和人权的分支学科进行整合。在欧洲,人权能否限制国家的惩罚权力这一问题的提出,迫使我们探索不同形式的 "跨机构化",特别是监狱与精神病院之间以及监狱与移民拘留中心之间的 "跨机构化"。我们提出了 "转置政策 "的概念,以考虑到欧洲人权机构所承认、提倡和反对的此类拘留政策的相互影响和多米诺骨牌效应。在实证部分,我们以比利时为例,重点关注监狱政策与心理健康政策之间日益增强的互动关系,因为众所周知,比利时的监狱政策提出了具体的人权挑战。
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
The Atrato River as a Bearer and Co-creator of Rights: Unveiling Black People’s Legal Mobilization Processes in Colombia Agency Entrenchment: Sociological Legitimacy in a Politically Contested Occupation The False Marking Gold Rush: A Case Study of the Private Enforcement of Public Laws The Legal Realists on Political Economy The Paradox of Sanctuary: How Punitive Exceptions Converge to Criminalize and Punish Latinos/as
×
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