Outsourcing Violence?

Q2 Social Sciences Law and Ethics of Human Rights Pub Date : 2011-01-01 DOI:10.2202/1938-2545.1063
Alon Harel
{"title":"Outsourcing Violence?","authors":"Alon Harel","doi":"10.2202/1938-2545.1063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Article develops a theory of “inherently governmental functions” and argues that these functions concern powers designed to execute or implement fundamental state decisions—e.g., the decision to criminalize certain behavior, the decision to inflict a certain sanction, or to the decision to initiate or end a war. While most theorists agree that fundamental state decisions of the types described above ought only to be made by the State, some believe that the power to execute or implement these decisions can be transferred to private entities. Thus, for instance, theorists maintain that while only the State can criminalize behavior, private prisons can execute the punishment; while only the State can declare a war, mercenaries can carry it out, etc. This Article disputes this claim. By transferring powers of “execution” or “implementation” of fundamental state decisions to private entities, the State severs the link between its fundamental societal decisions and the actions designed to execute or implement these decisions. Private entities that imprison people or soldiers hired to fight a war ought to be regarded not merely as executing or implementing public decisions. Instead, they ought to be regarded as private entities whose own private judgments concerning the justness of the sanctions they inflict or the justifiability of the wars they fight are prerequisite for the performance of their jobs. The contribution to the genesis of the action of the private entity made by the court’s decision to inflict a sanction or the State’s decision to go to war is, so to speak, superseded by the individual’s own judgment. The Article further argues that being punished by another private individual—rather than by the State—infringes upon one’s dignity as it subjects the will of one person to the will of another. The justifiability of the exertion of violence hinges upon the agent performing it. Hence, I maintain that it is impermissible on the part of the State to privatize the execution or implementation of some fundamental societal decisions.","PeriodicalId":38947,"journal":{"name":"Law and Ethics of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2202/1938-2545.1063","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Ethics of Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2202/1938-2545.1063","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This Article develops a theory of “inherently governmental functions” and argues that these functions concern powers designed to execute or implement fundamental state decisions—e.g., the decision to criminalize certain behavior, the decision to inflict a certain sanction, or to the decision to initiate or end a war. While most theorists agree that fundamental state decisions of the types described above ought only to be made by the State, some believe that the power to execute or implement these decisions can be transferred to private entities. Thus, for instance, theorists maintain that while only the State can criminalize behavior, private prisons can execute the punishment; while only the State can declare a war, mercenaries can carry it out, etc. This Article disputes this claim. By transferring powers of “execution” or “implementation” of fundamental state decisions to private entities, the State severs the link between its fundamental societal decisions and the actions designed to execute or implement these decisions. Private entities that imprison people or soldiers hired to fight a war ought to be regarded not merely as executing or implementing public decisions. Instead, they ought to be regarded as private entities whose own private judgments concerning the justness of the sanctions they inflict or the justifiability of the wars they fight are prerequisite for the performance of their jobs. The contribution to the genesis of the action of the private entity made by the court’s decision to inflict a sanction or the State’s decision to go to war is, so to speak, superseded by the individual’s own judgment. The Article further argues that being punished by another private individual—rather than by the State—infringes upon one’s dignity as it subjects the will of one person to the will of another. The justifiability of the exertion of violence hinges upon the agent performing it. Hence, I maintain that it is impermissible on the part of the State to privatize the execution or implementation of some fundamental societal decisions.
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
外包暴力吗?
本文发展了一种“固有政府职能”理论,并认为这些职能涉及旨在执行或实施国家基本决策的权力。对某种行为定罪的决定,施加某种制裁的决定,或发动或结束战争的决定。虽然大多数理论家同意上述类型的基本国家决策应该只由国家做出,但有些人认为执行或实施这些决策的权力可以转移给私人实体。因此,例如,理论家认为,虽然只有国家可以将行为定为刑事犯罪,但私人监狱可以执行惩罚;虽然只有国家可以宣战,但雇佣军可以实施战争,等等。本文对这一说法提出异议。通过将国家基本决策的“执行”或“实施”权力移交给私人实体,国家切断了其基本社会决策与旨在执行或实施这些决策的行动之间的联系。监禁被雇来打仗的人或士兵的私人实体不应仅仅被视为执行或执行公共决定。相反,他们应该被视为私人实体,他们自己对所施加的制裁是否公正或所进行的战争是否合理的个人判断是他们履行工作的先决条件。可以说,法院施加制裁的决定或国家发动战争的决定对私人实体行为起源的贡献,已被个人自己的判断所取代。该条进一步认为,被另一个私人而不是国家惩罚侵犯了一个人的尊严,因为它使一个人的意志服从于另一个人的意志。实施暴力的正当性取决于实施暴力的人。因此,我认为,国家方面不允许将一些基本社会决定的执行或执行私有化。
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
Law and Ethics of Human Rights
Law and Ethics of Human Rights Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
期刊最新文献
Crowdsourcing Compliance: The Use of WikiRate to Promote Corporate Supply Chain Transparency Frontmatter Crowdwashing Surveillance; Crowdsourcing Domination Illiberal Measures in Backsliding Democracies: Differences and Similarities between Recent Developments in Israel, Hungary, and Poland Frontmatter
×
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