5.5 Transportation

Since the early 1990s, reports on topics ranging from neighbourhood renewal and low demand to social exclusion have highlighted the damaging effects of anti-social behaviour. Local authorities are urged to develop a 'holistic' response to anti-social behaviour. Recent research into the effectiveness of legal remedies reveals a tension between attempts to address the underlying causes of anti-social behaviour and the government's emphasis on legal action to control and punish perpetrators. Drawing on this research, the article examines why many landlords are still evicting perpetrators rather than dealing with the underlying causes of their behaviour. The article concludes by outlining the barriers that landlords and other agencies must overcome in order to develop a holistic approach to the problem.     

Should the Law Convict Those Who Act from Conviction? Reflections on a Demands-of-Conscience Criminal Defense

How should the judge or jury in a just criminal court treat a civil disobedient, someone who performs a conscientiously motivated communicative breach of the criminal law? Kimberley Brownlee contends that all else equal a court of law should neither convict nor punish such offenders. Though I agree with this conclusion, I contend that Brownlee mischaracterizes the nature of the criminal defense to which civil disobedients are entitled. Whereas Brownlee maintains that such actors ought to be excused for their criminal breach, I argue that they ought to enjoy a justification defense. Acts of civil disobedience are not (morally) wrongful violations of the law for which an actor ought not to be blamed; rather, they are violations of the law that are not (morally) wrong in virtue of their illegality. It is the absence of wrongdoing, and not merely the absence of fault, that renders the conviction and punishment of those who perform acts of civil disobedience inappropriate.     

Liberal Forms of Governing Australian Indigenous Peoples

This article considers three different historical events from the point of view of their connections to aspects of the history of liberal political reason: the actions of the British in New South Wales in the early nineteenth century in their claim to sovereignty over Indigenous lands; the establishment of Aboriginal missions and subsequent removal of Aboriginal children in the early twentieth century; and the Northern Territory Emergency Response and suspension of the Australian Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act (1975) early in the twenty‐first century. The aim is to point to gaps between present claims about liberalism and ‘actual existing liberalism’, review the basis for examining accounts of governance deploying ‘authoritarian liberalism’ and ‘race war’ as central concepts, and call into question the Northern Territory campaign as an ‘exceptional’ event.