Punishment,Fair Play and the Burdens of Citizenship

The fair-play theory of punishment claims that the state is justified in imposing additional burdens on law-breakers, to remove the unfair advantage the latter have enjoyed by disobeying the law. From this perspective, punishment reestablishes a fair distribution of benefits and burdens among all citizens. In this paper, I object to this view by focusing on the case of civil disobedience. I argue that the mere illegality of this conduct is insufficient to establish the agent’s unfair advantage over his lawabiding fellows, hence the imposition of additional burdens upon him through legal punishment. I articulate a broader account of citizens’ fair-play duties, able to capture disobedience as well as obedience to the law. While claiming that some law-breakers may not be treated as free-riders, I also gesture at the fact that some law-obeying citizens may not be ‘playing fair’: in some cases, a failure to engage in civil disobedience represents a failure to do one’s own part within the cooperative scheme of society.

     

Intoxication as a defence to murder in Seychelles

In Seychelles, the mens rea of murder can be established, as an alternative to an intention to cause death or grievous harm, on the basis of the defendant’s ‘knowledge’ that the act or omission causing death will probably cause death or grievous harm. However, a defendant is only allowed to plead intoxication as a defence where it had become impossible for him to form the necessary ‘intention’ due to intoxication. This article highlights the difficulties in the application of the defence of intoxication to cases where the mens rea for murder is based purely on a defendant’s ‘knowledge’. In analysing the defence of intoxication in Seychelles in cases of murder, the article examines the position under English and Australian law.     

认罪认罚案件上诉问题探讨

认罪认罚案件上诉权的设置存在多元价值冲突的情形,基于公正价值与效率价值的平衡需要,应当明确赋予认罪认罚案件被告人上诉权。在上诉权的设置上,应当对适用速裁程序审理的认罪认罚案件被告人的上诉权进行限制,要求速裁案件被告人上诉必须有正当理由,而认罪认罚案件适用其他程序审理的则无需附加理由。速裁案件被告人上诉的正当理由主要包括:定罪问题,主要包括被告人一审程序中的认罪是非自愿的以及一审判决作出后出现影响定罪的新事实、新证据等,量刑问题以及重大程序违法问题。为保障认罪认罚案件被告人上诉权的行使,应当要求被告人上诉向二审法院提出申请、二审法院对被告人的申请应当迅速及时审查;同时,二审法院在审理案件时应当遵循重点审查原则和上诉不加刑原则;采取措施限制检察机关提起"技术性抗诉"。     

Gender ‘Hostility’, Rape,and the Hate Crime Paradigm

This article examines whether crimes motivated by, or which demonstrate, gender ‘hostility’ should be included within the current framework of hate crime legislation in England and Wales. The article uses the example of rape to explore the parallels (both conceptual and evidential) between gender‐motivated violence and other ‘archetypal’ forms of hate crime. It is asserted that where there is clear evidence of gender hostility during the commission of an offence, a defendant should be pursued in law additionally as a hate crime offender. In particular it is argued that by focusing on the hate‐motivation of many sexual violence offenders, the criminal justice system can begin to move away from its current focus on the ‘sexual’ motivations of offenders and begin to more effectively challenge the gendered prejudices that are frequently causal to such crimes.     

有利被告论探究——以实体刑法为视角

实体意义上的有利被告,作为罪刑法定与刑法的明确性原则的一条派生与补足原则,指的是当刑法适用上遇有暂时"解释不清"的疑难时,应该做出有利于被告的选择。它可以从国家作为立法者应对刑法规定不明承担的责任、刑法的人权保障机能、刑法与刑事诉讼法的立法精神、刑法的正当目的以及传统刑事政策等诸多维度得到证成。从有利被告的立场出发,在刑法解释领域,应当排除违背立法精神的不利被告的解释,允许不违背立法精神的有利被告的解释;在定罪环节,应当坚持"疑罪从无"与"罪疑惟轻"的规则:在量刑环节,应当排除违背立法精神的重刑选择,而允许不违背立法精神的轻刑选择。     

Lessons from the Wolfenden Report

The article traces the recent history of homosexual law reform in the UK and the countries of the Commonwealth of Nations, using as its point of departure the Report of the Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution, 1957 (‘Wolfenden Report’). In light of the Wolfenden principle – that certain matters of private morality are not the law's business and especially not the proper business of punishment under the criminal law – the article proposes a methodology for law reform in those countries of the Commonwealth that inherited the penal offences but have not yet acted to repeal them.     

Criminal benefit,the confiscation order and the post-conviction confiscation regime

Governments and law enforcement agencies around the world seek to identify and confiscate the ‘proceeds of crime’ on the assertion that doing so will deter offending and symbolise to citizens and communities that ‘crime does not pay’. In the UK such assertions have underpinned the enactment of legislation, the investment in law enforcement agents and the development of wide ranging new technologies to facilitate the identification of assets and their recovery. This paper critically considers two key concepts which fundamentally drive the post-conviction confiscation regime in the UK. First, ‘criminal benefit’ which is the amount that a defendant is adjudged to have made from ‘criminal conduct’. Second, the ‘available amount’ which is the amount that the state hopes to recover from a defendant via the court ordered ‘confiscation order’. In so doing, this paper explores the assumptions at the heart of the 2002 Proceeds of Crime Act and their application in practice, concentrating on the nature of the powers accorded to financial investigators and how these powers have been interpreted and applied. It is argued that far from representing the ‘profit’ generated from crime these values are constructs founded in the relationship between legislation, the discretional practice of police officers and financial investigators, organisational restrictions and constraints and informal negotiation and compromise between the defence and prosecution. This has implications for both conceptualising the nature of the post-conviction confiscation regime as well as for shaping what the state might expect to recover from defendants.     

The Economics of Bail Setting and Social Welfare

In most jurisdictions, there is a statutory preference for releasing on bail an accused in custody that has not yet been convicted unless the accused is charged with very serious offence like homicide. Nonetheless, the courts are vested with the powers to decide on the quantum of bail or to even refuse bail outright. To induce the defendant to surrender for trial [Lim, B.-T., & Quah, E. (1998). Economics of bail setting. Bulletin of Economic Research, 257–264] demonstrate that the bail quantum should be based on the expected cost of punishment and the probability of re-arrest if the defendant jumps bail. However, there are costs to society if the defendant absconds, which include, inter alia, the cost of re-arresting the defendant. In this paper, we derive the optimal bail quantum on the assumption that the probability of re-arrest and the penalty for absconding are chosen by the courts whose objective function is to minimize the sum of the expected harm to society and the net costs to law enforcement if the defendant jumps bail. The cost and benefit of being released on bail are examined. A model is proposed which may be useful to the court officials in bail setting as an effective means to secure the defendant's attendance at trial as well as to achieve social equity.     

‘Inappropriate but not crime’? Policing racial hatred in Sweden

ABSTRACT

Racial bias afflicts police practices across the globe. Police discrimination against and mistreatment of racial and ethnic minorities is indeed difficult to underestimate. While much attention has been thus paid to racially biased policing, fewer studies examine the question from the reverse angle, namely how the police themselves combat racist offences. This article offers empirical insights into the policing of racial hatred in Sweden, a relevant yet relatively understudied case. Drawing on interviews with police officers and crime investigators, I discuss law enforcement perspectives, e.g. perceptions and reasoning in relation to the investigation of racist offences. Findings evince a rather narrow approach as regards the constructions of racist motive that involves a relatively restricted use of bias labelling in identifying hate incidents, especially when the boundaries of racial hostility are perceived as blurred. I argue that while such an approach may reflect a legitimate effort to demonstrate the existence of a motive behind an offence, it may also lead to an underestimation of more mundane forms of racism and their harms inflicted upon racialized individuals and communities. The results have implications for ‘recognition’ and ‘belonging’ as benchmarks of democratic policing, and ‘the promise of inclusion’ associated with combatting hate crimes.     

被告人认罪认罚反悔问题研究

自认罪认罚从宽制度实施以来,被告人认罪认罚反悔问题引发了学界热议。从效果上看,被告人反悔权是一把"双刃剑",其有助于保障被告人认罪认罚的自愿性,确保认罪认罚案件的质量,但被告人滥用反悔权造成的负面影响亦不容忽视。为避免认罪协商程序运行受阻,有必要从规范反悔权行使、完善量刑激励制度、强化法律文书的释法说理、发挥值班律师作用、加强自愿性审查与监督、恰当使用认罪供述证据等方面构建被告人反悔应对机制,以减少被告人反悔机率。     

Queer Necropolitics and the Expanding Carceral State: Interrogating Sexual Investments in Punishment

This article examines the changing relationship between sexual politics and the carceral state. While sexual and gender nonconforming people have been historically punished for transgressing social norms, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) activists in Europe and North America have begun to invest in the state punishment of others. Whether supporting hate crime legislation, calling for more police in gentrifying neighborhoods, or participating in police recruitment campaigns, organisations that formerly fought against criminalisation trends now actively support expanding forms of state violence and punishment. Focussing on examples from the British and US context—and drawing from the concept of ‘queer necropolitics’—this article considers how the carceral state has shifted from a key target of queer protest to celebrated guardian of sexual citizenship. Arguing that this process constitutes more than just another story of queer assimilation and co-optation, the article suggests this shift reflects a deeper reconfiguration of sexual politics, where citizenship norms and practices are increasingly infused with a chillingly punitive and deathly logic.     

Combatting those who intentionally access images depicting child sexual abuse on the Internet: A call for a new offence in England and Wales

In England and Wales, there are four main categories of offence surrounding images depicting child sexual abuse, those of making/taking, publishing, distributing and possession. Despite being in force for almost 40 years, it is argued that now, additional regulation is required. In response to technological provision such as private browsing, streaming and encryption which are providing investigative difficulties for digital forensic analysts, this article proposes the need to implement a fifth offence, one of ‘intentional accessing’ and debates the feasibility and justifications for doing so. Such an offence would also arguably support the effective transposition of Directive 2011/93/EU into English law. This proposal also coincides with the recent enactment of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016, which enforces new data retention requirements on Internet Service Providers allowing offender Internet connection records to be stored for up to 12 months and potentially retrospectively investigated.     

Violence against Women in Scandinavia: a Description and Evaluation of two new Laws Aiming to Protect Women

Violence against women by a present or former male partner has over the last decade been given a higher priority in the political discussion in all of the Scandinavian countries. Increasingly, violence in intimate relationships is viewed as a public rather than a private matter in these countries. With this change in attitudes and levels of political interest, higher expectations are placed on official authorities, including the criminal justice system, to deal actively with this social problem. In all of the Scandinavian countries it may, for example, be decided by a prosecutor that a woman should be protected from a man by issuing a restraining order. Moreover, a new offence called ‘gross violation of a woman's integrity’ was introduced into the Swedish penal code in 1998. With this offence, less serious but repeated violent acts committed by a man against a present or former female partner are to be judged as one serious offence. The stipulated sanction for this offence is imprisonment between 6 months and 6 years. The purpose of this article is to evaluate how the police, the prosecutors and the courts deal with this new offence. The article also present results from an evaluation of restraining orders in Sweden.     

Mitigation Evidence and the Ethical Role of a Defense Attorney in a Capital Case

In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Furman v. Georgia. This landmark case changed the death penalty in the United States. In Gregg v. Georgia (1976), the Supreme Court made it clear that mitigating factors were to be heard before sentencing to ensure individualized sentencing. Every defendant has a story, a family, a childhood, trauma, and celebration—a reason their life should be spared from execution. In a capital case, a defense attorney’s ethical role is to craft that story and articulate it in a way that enables the jury to have a complete picture of the defendant’s background and character as they decide his punishment. Mitigating factors are not an excuse for the defendant’s behavior, but rather an insight into who the defendant is and what has shaped his life. A defense attorney’s ethical duty in a capital case is to argue the case on all legal points and to present a thorough investigation of mitigating evidence. A thorough investigation of all such evidence is required by case law and explained by the standards set forth by the ABA guidelines.     

禁止体罚儿童的国际法律规定与国内法律实施——以家庭内体罚儿童为视角

普遍存在的体罚儿童现象随着国际社会对儿童权利的关注逐渐进入人们的视野,特别是家庭内部的儿童体罚问题也开始受到关注。近年来,禁止一切形式的儿童体罚的观念逐渐被越来越多的国家所接受。探析儿童体罚问题的原因和危害,从国际人权文件和我国国内法律体系中寻找家庭内部禁止体罚儿童的依据,以类型化分析的方法比较世界各国保护儿童的立法例及其进展,借鉴外国禁止体罚的立法实践,针对我国在禁止家庭内体罚儿童中存在的种种问题,提出若干改进方向,以求尽快达到禁止体罚儿童的国际人权法律标准、不断改善国内儿童权利保护状况十分必要。     

刑事诉讼视角下辩护权界说

在现代刑事诉讼中,被指控人的辩护权是一项贯穿始终的诉讼权利,主要表现为根据事实和法律提出和论证对被指控人有利的材料和理由,在实体上反驳指控,提出证明被指控人无罪、罪轻、应当减轻或免除其刑事责任的材料和意见,以及在程序上主张被指控人所拥有的合法的诉讼权利,防止其受到不公正的待遇和不应有的侵犯。但是由于司法理念和制度的弊端使得我国现实层面的辩护权呈现出与应然状态的脱节与偏离,因此,立足现状,改革与完善我国的刑事辩护权就显得尤为重要。     

交通肇事后的报警行为不成立自首之法理抉微

《刑法》第133条规定的逻辑结构决定了如若将交通肇事者肇事后报警并保护事故现场的行为认定为自首,将违反刑法禁止重复评价原则。通过与交通肇事罪同质的其他过失犯罪的法定刑配置对比,可得出交通肇事罪的基本法定刑适用情形中包含了肇事者报警并保护事故现场的内容之结论。其他法律、法规为肇事者设定自首义务有其心理学基础且契合作为法的整体精神。肇事者逃逸后又自动投案并如实供述自己罪行的成立本罪之自首。     

Is the power of a state to impose sales tax in Nigeria fettered by the imposition of value added tax by the federal government?

The imposition of sales tax by some states in Nigeria has been resisted on the grounds either that a state lacks the power to impose taxes under Nigeria’s constitution or that a state cannot validly impose sales tax as long as the Value Added Tax Act, a federal law, remains in force, the Value Added Tax Act having ‘covered the field’. This article contends that none of these grounds is valid under Nigeria’s constitution: a state government can impose sales tax in exercise of its residual powers; and the doctrine of covering the field is inapplicable in the inquiry.     

Legislating Dangerously: Bad Samaritans,Good Society,and the Heroism Act 2015

The Social Action, Responsibility and Heroism Act 2015 is a troublesome statute. The Act requires that, when considering a claim brought against a defendant in negligence or for breach of statutory duty, the court must assess whether that party was ‘acting for the benefit of society or any of its members’ (section 2), or ‘demonstrated a predominantly responsible approach towards protecting the safety or interests of others’ (section 3), or was ‘acting heroically’ (section 4). However laudable the Coalition Government's attempts to foster a ‘Big Society’ might have been, this enactment was not the proper vehicle to achieve it. Some provisions merely repeat longstanding common law principles. Others may have been intended to amend the common law to encourage ‘good citizenship’, but fall well short of that aim. And some aspects of the Act's drafting have the (perhaps unintended) potential to sit uncomfortably with established common law negligence principles.