Measuring the real impact of accredited offending behaviour programmes

Purpose. This paper describes an integrated model for the evaluation of offending behaviour programmes in order to assess their real impact. Arguments. To date there has been an over‐reliance on reconviction data as the sole measure of treatment efficacy. Reconviction has a fundamental role to play but cannot be considered in isolation from other empirically related treatment and re‐settlement factors. A rigorous reconviction study requires an adequate comparison group but few papers describe with transparency how this has been achieved. There is also the assumption that participation in treatment renders an individual offender as treated. A treated profile is contingent upon the treatment climate, the quality of programme delivery and how the individual responds to treatment. The influence of life‐style or dynamic risk factors must also be acknowledged in terms of their effect on reconviction. Conclusions. It is recommended that researchers use an integrated approach to the evaluation of accredited offending behaviour programmes. In order to establish a broad balance of treatment outcomes, a shift away from reconviction rates is needed. This paper presents an integrated model for the evaluation of offending behaviour programmes.     

Cognitive‐behavioural treatment for imprisoned offenders: An evaluation of HM Prison Service's cognitive skills programmes

Purpose. The effectiveness of prison‐based cognitive‐behavioural treatment programmes was evaluated using reconviction as the outcome measure. Method. Reconviction rates were compared between two groups of adult male offenders who were serving a custodial sentence of 2 years or more in Her Majesty's Prison Service, England and Wales. The treatment group (N =667) consisted of offenders who had voluntarily participated in one of two treatment programmes that targeted 'cognitive deficits' related to offending behaviour. The comparison group (N =1,801) was made up of offenders who had not participated in the treatment programme but were “matched” to the treatment group on a number of empirically relevant variables. Results. Treatment produced a robust reduction in the probability of reconviction (p < .001) when other relevant variables were controlled for. For treated offenders, the percentage point reduction in reconviction was 14% in medium‐lowrisk offenders and 11% in medium‐high‐risk offenders. Conclusion. These outcome results demonstrate that the principles of effective practice in the field of offender rehabilitation, which were identified through meta‐analytical research predominately in North America, can be applied to a UK offender population to similar effect.     

‘Consumer’ versus ‘Customer’: The Devil in the Detail

According to the European Commission, the objective of EU competition rules is enhancing ‘consumer welfare’. In EU competition law, however, ‘consumer’ means ‘customer’ and encompasses intermediate customers as well as final consumers. Under Article 102TFEU, harming intermediate ‘customers’ is generally presumed to harm ‘consumers’ and where intermediate customers are not competitors of the dominant undertaking, there is no requisite to assess the effects of conduct on users further downstream. Using advances in economics of vertical restraints and, in particular, non‐linear pricing, this article shows that there are instances where the effect on ‘customer welfare’ does not coincide with the effect on ‘consumer welfare’ and the presumption can potentially lead to decisional errors. Thus, if the law is to serve the interests of ‘consumers’, the Commission should reconsider this presumption and its interpretation of the ‘consumer’ in ‘consumer welfare’; otherwise, it remains questionable whose interests EU competition law serves.     

Of ‘Landmark’ or ‘Leading’ Cases: Salomon's Challenge

This article seeks to question the two dominant conceptions of ‘landmark’ or ‘leading’ cases in English legal scholarship, using the House of Lords decision in Salomon v. Salomon Co Ltd. – the most famous case in corporate law – as a case study. It argues that neither the first dominant conception of ‘leading’ or ‘landmark’ cases, characterized by the analysis of the intrinsic merits of a case, nor the second, which looks at the historical contexts in which cases were decided, appears sufficient by itself to determine whether a case is landmark or canonical. Rather, we have to look at how the canonicity of a case is constructed by subsequent courts. The article seeks to advance the debate concerning the formation of landmark cases and aims to challenge certain prevailing views on the canonicity of corporate law's arguably most significant case.     

Two Meanings of ‘Reasonableness’: Dispelling the ‘Floating’ Reasonable Doubt

The ‘reasonable doubt standard’ is the controlling standard of proof for criminal fact finding in several jurisdictions. Drawing on decision theory, some scholars have argued that the stringency of this standard varies according to the circumstances of the case. This article contends that the standard does not lend itself to the ‘sliding‐scale’ approach mandated by decision theory. This is supported through investigation of the concept of ‘reasonableness’. While this concept has mostly been studied as it operates with reference to practical reasoning, scant attention has been given to the meaning that it acquires when referred to theoretical reasoning. Unlike in the former case, reasonableness does not in the latter depend on the reasoner's attitudes in favour of the outcomes of a decisional process. Therefore, since criminal fact finding is an instance of theoretical reasoning, the question whether in this enterprise a doubt is reasonable is not susceptible to a decision‐theoretic approach.     

Legal ‘Elasticity’ and ‘Sidestepping’ in European Crisis Management of Financial Markets

This paper explores the roles played by law in crisis management of financial markets and some possible consequences. Three questions are raised ‐‐about the ‘elastic’ use of law, about ‘sidestepping’ existing legal order by invention of new structures and about redistributive consequences. These questions are appraised empirically in relation to three areas of financial market law: public support given to banking from 2008 onwards; English case law concerning derivatives contracts when confronted with Lehman‐style insolvencies; and the European Stability Mechanism, which during summer 2015 was being primed in relation to Greece. On the first two case studies, law, having been mightily stretched, did not break. Likewise, legal sidestepping, as epitomised by the European Stability Mechanism, may result in a less coherent legal structure; however such incoherence may be not be fatal to the ensemble. On all three fronts, redistributive questions remain controversial, but controversy in itself does not undermine legal structures. A particular form of theory, the Legal Theory of Finance, is discussed in light of the case studies. Such theory may have an unfulfilled longing to discern law‐like regularities (ironically chasing economics).     

From ‘Interinstitutional Agreements’ to ‘Interinstitutional Agencies/Offices’?

Abstract:  This article tries to trace a line between Interinstitutional Agreements (IIAs) and Interinstitutional Agencies/Offices, recently established on the basis of the new 'externalisation policy' of the European Commission. Both phenomena serve, to a certain extent, to achieve the same objective, namely a smoother and more effective cooperation between the main institutions within the European Union. On the basis of an empirical documentation of more than 100 IIAs, the article classifies and assesses the extraordinary variety and diversity of IIAs collected in this compilation—according to their chronological distribution, number of parties involved in the conclusion, denomination, and substantial content. The evaluation of these IIAs first addresses the question of their permissibility, proceeding with the examination of their legal nature and effects. The article concludes by asking which of the two dichotomous instruments—IIAs or Interinstitutional Agencies/Offices—will prevail, and hence ensure a more expeditious discharge of the Commissions bureaucracy.     

Toward a Feminist State: What Does ‘Effective’ Prosecution of Domestic Violence Mean?

This article examines domestic violence criminal prosecutions and addresses what 'effective' prosecutorial action means in such cases. The argument elaborates on a point recently articulated by the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, which links effective prosecution of violence against women to the creation of a less patriarchal society. The article concludes that 'effective' prosecution of domestic violence means prosecution which constitutes the State as less patriarchal ceteris paribus .     

‘Citizens’ and ‘Foreigners’ in EU Law. Migration Law and its Cosmopolitan Outlook

Migration has become a controversial subject across Europe and beyond. At the same time, the EU has built up an impressive set of rules for third‐country nationals over the past two decades, which—unlike the mobility of EU citizens—received comparatively little attention apart from immigration and asylum specialists. This contribution presents the constitutional framework for ‘migration law’ towards third‐country nationals and shows in how far they depart from the paradigm of intra‐European mobility. It will be argued that differences can be rationalised by divergent objectives and do, nonetheless, not present a move towards ‘fortress Europe’. EU migration law maintains the distinction between citizens and foreigners at the same time as it protects migrants, including refugees. By accommodating migrants' rights and self‐government, EU migration law can be construed as an endeavour to replace traditional notions of alienage with constitutional rules with a cosmopolitan outlook.     

EMU and the Shift in the European Labour Law Agenda: From ‘Social Policy’ to ‘Employment Policy’

This article examines the interaction between EMU and the European Union (EU) employment strategy and its implications for law. It focuses on the importance of EMU as a catalyst in the development of the EU's social and employment policy in the years following the Treaty on European Union in 1992, up to the inauguration of a new employment policy in the Treaty of Amsterdam. In analysing the EU's discourse on labour market regulation, it is arguable that a shift has occurred in the EU's position on the ‘labour market flexibility’ debate: that the EU institutions are more readily accepting of the orthodoxy that labour market regulation and labour market institutions are a major cause of unemployment within EU countries and that a deregulatory approach, which emphasises greater ‘flexibility’ in labour markets, is the key to solving Europe's unemployment ills, along with macroeconomic stability, restrictive fiscal policy and wage restraint. As the EU's employment strategy has matured, this increased emphasis on employment policy has come to displace discourses around social policy. This change in emphasis has important implications for EMU since it signals a re‐orientation from an approach to labour market regulation which had as its core a strong concept of employment protection and high labour standards, to an approach which prioritises employment creation, and minimises the role of social policy, since social policy is seen as potentially increasing the regulatory burden.     

The ‘Reasonable Man’, his Nineteenth‐century ‘Siblings’, and their Legacy

The reasonable man is the best known, but not the only, legal construct to be born into the nineteenth‐century common law. This article introduces the man's siblings – including those from the areas of trust law, criminal law, contract law, and intellectual property law (both patents and trademarks). The fact that some of these ‘men’ changed the law is not controversial; this research further highlights that while several of these came to life in that century, only some had a significant role into the twentieth century. Those that did are tied to the foundations of our society through their role in facilitating innovation and consumer protection. The argument is that it was the constructs’ nature and their capacity to accommodate public policy issues that enabled the vitality of the ‘reasonable person ‘ (negligence) and the ‘person skilled in the art’ (patents).     

Retrieving the ‘subject’ of European integration

In this article, a critical reinterpretation of citizens as subjects of European integration moves the focus of EU law from EU citizens' subjection to their subjectification. This analysis draws on post‐structural social theory in arguing that the law is instrumental to securing the material conditions for transnational political subjectification because it regulates both EU citizens' access to transnational social relations and the perception of difference between them. However, the law also reinforces constraints on the process of transnational subjectification. Systematic obstacles, which must be taken into account, are not limited to economic status, but include other variables like gender or age. It will be argued on this basis that EU law needs to develop a more coherent politics of subjectivity. Towards this goal, the law must carefully attend to what is (and is not) depoliticising in EU citizenship rights.