Retribution,Restitution and Revenge

Law and Philosophy -     

Incapacitation and Just Deserts as Motives for Punishment

Law and Human Behavior - What motivates a person's desire to punish actors who commit intentional, counternormative harms? Two possible answers are a just deserts motive or a desire to...     

Revenge,Retribution, and Values: Social Attitudes and Punitive Sentencing

This study examined the pattern of relations between vengeance attitudes, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), and social dominance orientation (SDO) using the structure of value types proposed by Schwartz (Adv Exp Soc Psychol 25:1–65, 1992). Relations between these variables and support for a variety of sentencing options, including capital punishment, were then investigated. One hundred and forty-eight students in Adelaide, South Australia, completed a Vengeance Scale (Stuckless and Goranson, J Soc Behav Pers 7:25–42, 1992), measures of RWA and SDO, the Schwartz Value Survey (1992), and a Sentencing Goals Scale. As predicted, vengeance attitudes and SDO were found to be positively related to the importance of power values and negatively related to the importance of universalism and benevolence values. Vengeance attitudes were negatively related to rehabilitation and positively related to support for retribution and incapacitation sentencing goals, while RWA was positively related to the endorsement of deterrence and incapacitation as sentencing goals. Regression analyses indicated that only RWA and vengeance attitudes were unique predictors of death penalty support. Results provide support for the suggestion that vengeance is closely associated with our notion of retributive justice.     

Time and Retribution

Retributivists believe that punishment can be deserved, and that deserved punishment is intrinsically good or important. They also believe that certain crimes deserve certain quantities of punishment. On the plausible assumption that the overall amount of any given punishment is a function of its severity and duration, we might think that retributivists (qua retributivists) would be indifferent as to whether a punishment were long and light or short and sharp, provided the offender gets the overall amount of punishment he deserves. In this paper I argue against this, showing that retributivists should actually prefer shorter and more severe punishments to longer, gentler options. I show this by focusing on, and developing a series of interpretations of, the retributivist claim that not punishing the guilty is bad, focusing on the relationship between that badness and time. I then show that each interpretation leads to a preference for shorter over longer punishment.     

Fallibility and Retribution

The fact that human fallibility virtually ensures that punishment will sometimes befall the innocent presents a theoretical puzzle to all forms of retributivism. Retributivists usually say that desert is a necessary condition for justified punishment. It remains unclear, following this view, how retributivists can support punishment in (imperfect) practice. The paper investigates a number of possible replies available to the retributivist. It concludes that one reply in particular can overcome the problem posed by fallibility, but it is not obvious that this reply is convincing.     

复仇与法律--以《赵氏孤儿》为例

复仇是一种高度分散执行的社会制裁制度或控制机制,其诸多核心要素至今仍然是实践中的传统法律必须具有的。复仇制度的衰落最主要应归功于社会经济、政治条件的结构性变迁。在一个存在集中化公权力的社会,如果公权力不能有效地以公道的方式解决其内部成员的纠纷和冲突,或者受到不公甚或冤屈的人们无法诉求这种公权力获得公道,那么复仇现象就仍然会出现。     

Review, Revenge and Retreat

The article deals with a wide-ranging legal and political conflict of considerable constitutional significance, the attempt by UK ministers to restrict formal challenge of asylum decisions using a variety of devices and the fierce and partly successful opposition that this engendered. The article examines the legal and administrative roots of the controversy; the anatomy of the government's generalised counter-attack or 'revenge package'; the main juridical elements in the resulting public furore; and the character of the government's eventual retreat. In so doing, it raises, and elaborates on, a series of linked themes: the powerful dynamics of judicial review in this policy domain; the historical sense of a gathering storm in relations between ministers and judges; the practical interplay of rule of law arguments with developments in common law constitutionalism; and an expanded role for legal elements in the political process.     

Shame Creeps Through Guilt and Feels Like Retribution

Law and Philosophy -     

对刑罚报应性的理性思考

在西方刑罚目的理论上一直存在着报应刑和目的刑的争论。作为罪刑法定原则、罪责刑相适应原则的体现以及刑罚正义原则的要求,报应已成为我国刑罚的首要目的。刑罚的报应性贯穿于我国刑罚体系的始终,只是不同的刑种体现出来的报应性的程度不同。     

Beyond Retribution: Conceptualizing Restorative Justice and Exploring its Determinants

Previous research considering reactions to injustice has focused predominantly on retributive (i.e., punitive) responses. Restorative justice, a relatively understudied concept, suggests an alternative justice response which emphasizes bilateral discussion in an attempt to reach a consensus about the meaning of the offense and how to address the transgression. The current research explores the additional contribution of restorative justice processes, examining the extent to which bilateral consensus is viewed as a fairer response to transgressions than unilateral decisions. Results show that, independent of the punishment, restorative responses are generally regarded as fairer than nonrestorative responses. And compared to punishment, which tends to be moderated by offender intent and seriousness of the harm, restorative responses are regarded as particularly fair when the involved parties share an identity. Findings suggest the importance of distinguishing retributive justice from a “restorative notion of justice”—a notion that focuses on addressing concerns over the maintenance of existing social relationships and identity-defining values.

Beliefs in a Just World as a Buffer Against Anger

Anger is the emotion typically accompanying unfairness appraisals. Belief in a just world (BJW) was expected to buffer against angry feelings because subjects high in BJW play down unfairness, justify unfairness as being self-inflicted, and avoid self-focused rumination. Three studies were run to test this hypothesis. A questionnaire study revealed that subjects who strongly endorse the belief in a personally just world are less likely to experience anger and, if they do experience such feelings, are less likely to suppress them. In two experiments, an angry, a happy, or a sad mood was induced. In the anger-evoking condition, subjects high in BJW were less angry and suffered no decrease in self-esteem compared to subjects low in BJW, who reported increased feelings of anger and decreased self-esteem. It is concluded that individuals high in BJW are better able to cope with anger-evoking situations, and that BJW can be seen as a personal resource protecting not only mental but also physical health.     

Inhuman and Degrading Punishment,Dignity, and the Limits of Retribution

The recent judgment of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Vinter and others v United Kingdom provides a much needed clarification of the parameters of the prohibition on inhuman and degrading punishment under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as it applies to whole life orders of imprisonment under mandatory life sentences – essentially, life imprisonment without parole. The Grand Chamber's judgment refines Strasbourg doctrine on life imprisonment and the prospect of release and illuminates key principles concerning inhuman and degrading punishment under Article 3 of the ECHR. This article considers the judgment's profound significance in relation to both human rights and penology.     

Belief in a Just World as a Resource of Victimized Students

In a cross-sectional questionnaire study with N?=?2593 German students, aged between 12 and 17 years (M?=?14.1, SD?=?0.5), we investigated the relation between students’ personal belief in a just world (BJW) and their victimization in bullying situations. According to the just-world theory and research, we expected that the more strongly the students endorsed the personal BJW, the less likely they were to report being victimized by other students. We aimed to extend previous findings that failed to confirm this negative relation by considering students’ personal experience of teacher justice as a possible mediator in this relation, while statistically controlling for sex and school type. We further considered the nested data structure with regard to school classes in our analyses. The results of latent mediation analyses at the individual and group levels showed that the more the students endorsed personal BJW, the more they evaluated their teachers’ behavior toward them personally as being just, and the less likely they were to report that they were bullied. However, the students’ personal experience of teacher justice did not mediate the relation between personal BJW and victimization at the individual or group level when controlled for sex and school type. We discussed the adaptive functions of BJW and implications for future school research and practice.