Perceived Distributive Fairness of EU Transfer Payments, Outcome Favorability, Identity, and EU-Tax Compliance

In a representative UK study (N = 1000) the link between distributive fairness perceptions, outcome favorability, identity, and tax compliance was researched in the context of European transfer payments. Results showed that both forms of tax compliance (i.e., individual and collective EU-tax compliance) were influenced by perceived distributive fairness judgments of EU transfer payments. Fairness itself was related to perceived outcome favorability (i.e., whether their own nation benefits from the EU in financial as well as socio-political terms). Additionally, national identifiers (i.e., people identifying with their own nation, but not with Europe) perceived EU membership as unbeneficial in financial as well as in socio-political terms and thus considered the transfer payments as less fair. Dual identifiers (i.e., people identifying with their own nation and with Europe) perceived the socio-political outcomes from EU membership as more beneficial and thus evaluated the transfer payments as fairer.     

Procedural Fairness,Blame Attributions,and Presidential Leadership

The removal of the President of the United States from office is a rare and significant event. This study investigated the influence of procedural fairness and blame attributions on punishment and support attitudes during the 1998 impeachment of President Clinton. This study assessed the influence of the procedural fairness of Clinton's behavior, procedural fairness of the Kenneth Starr/Congress investigation, satisfaction with Clinton policies, and blame attributions on punishment attitudes (i.e., whether Clinton should be removed from office) and support attitudes (i.e., whether individuals would vote for Clinton if an election were held today). Both the procedural fairness of Starr/Congress and procedural fairness of Clinton' behavior significantly influenced punishment and support attitudes. Procedural fairness of Clinton had indirect effects on punishment attitudes (through perceived blame of Clinton) and direct effects on support attitudes. Procedural fairness of Starr/Congress had direct effects on both punishment and support attitudes.     

Retribution as Revenge and Retribution as Just Deserts

Public attitudes towards law-breakers shape the tone and tenor of crime-control policy, and the desire for retribution seems to be the main motivation underpinning punitive attitudes towards sentencing. Yet, there is some confusion in the research literature over what retribution really means. In this paper we distinguish between retribution as revenge (as the desire to punish criminal offenders to retaliate a past wrong by making the offender suffer) and retribution as just deserts (as the preference to restore justice through proportional compensation from the offender). Results from an online survey (n = 176) provide evidence of two distinct dimensions of retribution. But we also show that these two dimensions have different ideological and motivational antecedents, and have different consequences in terms of the treatment of criminal offender. We find that retribution as revenge is associated with the motivation to enforce status boundaries with criminal offenders, as well as ideological preferences for power and dominance (as expressed by social dominance orientation) and in-group conformity (as expressed by right-wing authoritarianism). Endorsement of retribution as revenge also predicts the support of harsh punishment and the willingness to deny fair procedures. By contrast, retribution as just deserts is mainly predicted by a value restoration motive and by right-wing authoritarianism. After controlling for revenge, retribution as just deserts predicts support for procedural justice in the criminal courts. We conclude with the idea that beliefs about proportionality and compensation work as a buffer against the negative effects of revenge.     

Lay-Perspectives on Criminal Deviance,Goals of Punishment,and Punitivity

Empirical studies corroborate a relatively close relation between goals of sentencing and punitiveness. However, it is not clear what aspects of sentencing goals motivate harsh punishment. This study analyzes the structure of sentencing goals and scrutinizes in particular whether the idea of retribution is associated with punitiveness, or whether punishment considerations from a societal perspective (macrolevel) are the source of more punitive responses. A questionnaire was mailed to a random sample drawn in Bern, Switzerland. A total of 357 persons responded to items measuring constructs including goals of sentencing, punitiveness, target of justice considerations, and perceived threat to society, after reading one of three short stories about specific crimes (fraud, physical injury, assault). Results of this study reveal a two-dimensional structure of sentencing goals. One dimension represents readiness to punish and exclude the offender socially. The other dimension refers to concerns of the victim versus the needs of the society as a whole. The analysis provides a new interpretation of sentencing goals.     

复和正义和刑事调解

犯罪自产生以来 ,其恶性随着人类文明的进步而加大 ,相反 ,人类用于对付犯罪的刑罚手段却渐趋轻缓和文明。毫无疑问 ,到目前为止 ,刑罚仍是对付犯罪最为有效的手段之一 ,审判也是解决犯罪问题的主要方式。但由于建立在报应基础之上的刑罚 ,本质上是一种“以恶制恶” ,因此 ,其弊端也是显而易见的。由此 ,在处理犯罪问题时需要引入复和正义 ,并进一步扩大刑事调解范围     

Fighting the Siren's Song: The Problem of Amnesty in Historical and Contemporary Perspective

As much of the world gears itself terror, uncomfortable questions may soon nee to be asked. What is to be done with terrorists who are often more popularin their countries that those countries leaders? Can these states afford retribution snd punishment, event at the risk of provoking forces that may lead to further bloodshed and violence? Or, alternatively, should they seek reconciliation and grant offenders amnesty? Or, is the proper solution somewhere in between? It may be comforting to know that these questions are not new, and by examiningthe historical and contemporary debate between the proponents of punishment and those of amnesty, we will be in a better position to make an informed decision when our turninevitably comes to choose. We should pay particulary attention to: what amnesty is, including the problems inherent in its definition; amnesty"s roots in the virtue of foreginess, which is found in most of world"s major religious traditions; amnesty"s historical manifetations in cultures that have adhered to those traditions; the three types of amnesty (moral, just and political) and the historical shift toward exclusively political justifications for amnesty; and classical and contemporary criticsims of and justifications for institutionalized forgiveness, including amnesty. Understanding these issues will not tel us whether it is better toamnesty or not to amnesty, but it will make us equipped to answer that question for ourselves.     

Juvenile Drug Court Program Admission,Demeanor and Cherry-Picking: A Research Note

The influence of demeanor in criminal justice research has predominantly centered on arrest and sanctioning outcomes. This study examines demeanor at the juncture of juvenile drug court admission by attributing behavior perceived to be favorable or unfavorable to program compliance and success to either juveniles or their parents/guardians. Analysis of 76 juvenile drug court case files enabled examination of how parent and child demeanor impacts specialty court admission. Findings suggest that program admittance (i.e., system leniency through diversion) is largely a function of projected attitude and behavior during screening interviews, but selection decisions are made irrespective of demeanor source. Implications of the findings for drug court processes and continued system involvement are discussed.     

Retribution or restoration? Anglo–Australian's views towards domestic violence involving Muslim and Anglo–Australian victims and offenders

Abstract

The current study explored how gender, group membership and different emotional reactions to the crime of domestic violence predict attitudes and endorsement of restorative or retributive justice practices. The experiment consisted of a 2 (victim group membership: Muslim- or Anglo–Australian)×2 (offender group membership: Muslim- or Anglo–Australian)×2 (Sex of participant) between-participants factorial design. Anglo–Australian participants (43 men; 50 women) were randomly assigned to one of the four manipulated conditions, and completed an online questionnaire that involved viewing a short video clip of a woman describing her experience as a domestic violence victim. Results revealed strong preferences for restorative justice in dealing with domestic violence, with women supporting this practice more than men. The crime was perceived as most severe and retribution was endorsed most strongly when the victim was Anglo–Australian (i.e. an in-group member). Intra-group violence was also perceived to be a greater breach of shared Australian values than inter-group (i.e. cross-cultural) domestic violence. Emotional reactions further predicted participants' responses, with hatred predicting stronger support of retributive ideals and sympathy for the victim predicting greater endorsement of restoration.     

You Say Regulation, I Say Punishment: The Semantics and Attributes of Punitive Activity

Recent trends in crime control have given new energy to an age-old question, namely what kinds of activity qualify as punishment. In addressing this question, jurists and scholars have often employed a logic that either restricts interpretations of punishment to traditional forms (e.g., prison, probation, death penalty) and functions (e.g., deterrence and retribution), or expands them to include the broader forms and functions of social control. This paper examines these opposing logics and considers an alternative logic based in common stipulations in power theory. Within this particular framework, punishment is conceived as action that is necessarily relational, intentional, personal and coercive.     

Punishment justifications in rape cases: a community study

Norway is one of the countries with the most progressive criminal justice systems in the Western world. Traditionally, the Norwegian criminal justice system has been mainly based on treatment and deterrence perspectives. While it is believed that criminal justice practices should be in accordance with public attitudes, few studies in Scandinavia have investigated public attitudes towards criminal justice sanctions in a methodologically sound manner. The current study is the first to investigate the attitudes of the Norwegian public towards punishment of rapists. In a Norwegian community sample (N = 475) from 2005, participants found the typical sentencing severity of a convicted rapist too lenient. The participants did report that as a global sentencing orientation, they preferred incapacitation. When presented with a specific rape case, their sentencing judgements were oriented towards both incapacitation and retribution, but their global orientation were not related to their specific judgements. Aggravating circumstances (e.g. violence was used) were found to influence the participants’ judgements more than when no aggravating circumstances were present (e.g. no violence was used). Few gender or educational differences were found, which indicates that these attitudes towards punishment of rapists are quite consistent across demographical groups.     

Revisiting the Instrumentality of Voice: Having Voice in the Process Makes People Think They Will Get What They Want

Research on procedural justice has found that processes that allow people voice (i.e., input) are perceived as fairer, and thus elicit more positive reactions, than processes that do not allow people voice. Original theorizing attributed these effects to beliefs that the provision of voice enhances people’s sense of process control, which people were assumed to value because it impacts their perceived likelihood of receiving desired outcomes (the instrumental perspective of procedural justice). Subsequent research questioned this perspective, arguing that outcome expectations do not account for the effects of voice. However, this subsequent research failed to directly examine the interplay of voice, outcome expectations, and reactions. The current studies revisit and extend research on this topic by asking whether manipulations of voice act as shared circumstance effects. Confirming an untested implication of the instrumental perspective, we show that giving everyone voice increases their belief, ex-ante, that they are likely to win an upcoming competition. However, this instrumental belief accounts for only part of the effects of voice on perceived procedural fairness and on general reactions to outcomes. Results suggest that voice does indeed have instrumental significance, an implication not adequately recognized in current justice theorizing. However, this instrumentality does not, by itself, explain why people value having a voice in processes that affect them.     

Victims justice preferences in a collectivist,informal setting: The case of Bhutanese refugees in Nepal

An abundance of research has emerged in the last 30 years focusing on justice preferences for victims of crime. In general, findings indicate that victims are interested in aspects of procedural justice, interactional justice, restorative justice, retributive justice and behavior control. Under certain conditions, however, these preferences may vary. One dimension that may lead to individuals diverging in their justice preferences is that of culture. The large majority of victimological research on victim legal preferences has been conducted in western jurisdictions. The current research adds to that body of knowledge by examining a different group: Bhutanese refugees residing in refugee camps in Nepal. This examination focuses on their collectivist status and how such cultural differences lead to different styles and characteristics of conflict resolution. It is hypothesized that victims in a collectivist society will primarily be interested in restoration, while voice to the decision maker, voice to the other party and retribution will not be important in predicting overall satisfaction. A multiple regression analysis confirms the hypotheses regarding voice toward the offender, restoration and retribution. Possible reasons for the remaining findings are discussed.     

Informal Social Controls,Procedural Justice and Perceived Police Legitimacy: Do Social Bonds Influence Evaluations of Police Legitimacy?

Although procedural justice has been a key predictor of police legitimacy, recent findings illustrate that other factors influence this outcome (i.e., low self-control and ethnic identity). However, no research to date has evaluated whether individual-level informal social controls impact police legitimacy evaluations. Survey data are used to examine the influence of parental attachment, school commitment and procedural justice on perceived police legitimacy. While procedural justice significantly predicted legitimacy evaluations, no significant relationships were observed between parental attachment, school commitment and police legitimacy. The effects of procedural justice on legitimacy assessments, however, were modestly significantly moderated by parental attachment and school commitment. To maintain legitimacy, police officers should interact with citizens in procedurally fair manners. These results should also be of value concerning how parents and schools legally socialize adolescents.     

Regulating More Effectively: The Relationship between Procedural Justice, Legitimacy, and Tax Non-compliance

In recent years, a significant number of middle‐income taxpayers have been making use of aggressive tax planning strategies to reduce tax. In many cases, it is unclear whether these are designed and used by taxpayers to minimize tax legally or to avoid tax illegally. Those that are designed to exploit loopholes in tax law need to be dealt with in a way that restores faith and equity to the system. But how can tax authorities best manage taxpayers who may have inadvertently become involved in such illegal tax planning practices? Using longitudinal survey data, it will be shown that attempts to coerce and threaten taxpayers into compliance can undermine the legitimacy of the Tax Office's authority, which in turn can affect taxpayers' subsequent compliance behaviour. Responsive regulation, which is based on principles of procedural justice, will be discussed as an alternative enforcement strategy.     

Rethinking the restorative–retributive dichotomy: is reconciliation possible?

While the use of restorative justice within Western criminal justice systems continues to grow, its philosophical foundations remain uncertain. This inconclusiveness impacts directly upon the theoretical discussion of restorative justice and its relationship with existing paradigms of punishment, precipitating debate regarding its ability to integrate within justice systems governed by retributive paradigms. Specifically, this ambiguity of definition renders debate regarding the extent to which restorative justice philosophy exists as an alternative punishment or an alternative to punishment, and its existence as complementary or axiomatic to retributive justice unresolved. The philosophy of restorative justice, identifying its central features and addressing those previous attempts of contrasting restorative justice with the prevailing paradigm of retribution is explored here. However, it is suggested that aspirations of reconciling restorative justice philosophy with the retributive paradigm will be ultimately unsuccessful, due to the persistent latent ambiguity regarding the central foundation upon which restorative justice philosophy is built. Such concerns are also present when seeking to affirm the continued opposition of retributive and restorative justice.     

Serious tax fraud and noncompliance

Research Summary This article reviews what international evidence exists on the impact of civil and criminal sanctions upon serious tax noncompliance by individuals. This construct lacks sharp definitional boundaries but includes large tax fraud and large-scale evasion that are not dealt with as fraud. Although substantial research and theory have been developed on general tax evasion and compliance, their conclusions might not apply to large-scale intentional fraudsters. No scientifically defensible studies directly compared civil and criminal sanctions for tax fraud, although one U.S. study reported that significantly enhanced criminal sanctions have more effects than enhanced audit levels. Prosecution is public, whereas administrative penalties are confidential, and this fact encourages those caught to pay heavy penalties to avoid publicity, a criminal record, and imprisonment. Policy Implications Although it has yet to be proven that prosecution has a greater or lesser impact on these offenders, increased prosecution might be justified for purposes of moral retribution as well as perceived social fairness.     

Human Life and Human Rights: death penalty Data and sentencing Procedure during the Song Dynasty

The adjudication and amnesty system in the Song Dynasty has been thoroughly researched by academia, but the annual death penalty numbers have not been credibly determined due to insufficient and disorganized historical records. The period’s policy that no innocent person would be executed was based on the double-digit record of capital punishments for Zhenguan during the Tang Dynasty, and the execution number was adjusted accordingly. As a special procedure, Zoucai (a request for judgment) was used to reduce the death penalty numbers. The value of human life, concern about excessive execution, and trimming of the capital punishment regime resulted in conversations between the emperors and their officials about the death penalty, which allowed the law that executed capital punishments during the Song Dynasty to strike a proper balance between justice, efficiency, and mercy, while avoiding rigidity and abuse.     

教育刑理念的彰显与背离：近代中国假释制度考论

刑罚执行是刑事司法的最后环节,行刑法律的运作直接关涉刑罚功能与目的能否实现。假释作为行刑制度之一,其运作效果是刑罚观念的集中体现。近代以来假释制度完成了由恩典到权利的制度转化,因于诸多因素的制约,假释制度在清末刑事立法中虽然得以确立,却未能实践。其后的立法与司法虽对于假释制度有着较多的践行,但民众的法律情结却仍停留于报复惩戒,教育刑理念仍然未能深入人心,法律观念、法律文化的转型任重而道远。     

Overview of penal response towards tax compliance in Nigeria

Tax offences and penalties are created to tackle tax non-compliance. Tax penalties bear civil liabilities while tax offences portends criminal sanctions. This paper employs the deterrence theory of penalty to determine whether tax penalties and enforcement agencies are effective in ensuring tax compliance in Nigeria. It is found that the dwindling economic situation in the country has diminished the deterrent effect of pecuniary tax sanctions. Hence, there is need to review the tax statutes. Corroborative effort between tax authorities would facilitate the probability of detection and punishment of tax offenders, thereby improving tax compliance in Nigeria.     

Death penalty views in China, Japan and the U.S.: An empirical comparison

Many nations impose the death penalty, yet most of the literature on capital punishment has focused on Western nations, particularly the U.S. China and Japan are two retentionist nations. Based on the data collected in 2005, this study examined the level of death penalty support and views on capital punishment among college students from China, Japan, and the U.S. It was found that Chinese respondents reported the highest level of death penalty support, followed by Japanese and U.S. students. Respondents from China and Japan were more likely to believe in the deterrence value of capital punishment than their U.S. counterparts. Views on retribution differed among the respondents. U.S. students were most likely to feel that innocent people are sentenced to death. In multivariate analyses, deterrence was the strongest correlate of death penalty views among Chinese and Japanese respondents, followed closely by retribution. For both Chinese and Japanese students, the barbarity of government taking the life of a person was the strongest predictor for opposing the death penalty. For U.S. respondents, retribution was the strongest reason for supporting capital punishment and the barbarity of executions was the strongest reason for opposing the death penalty.