In Defense of Criminal Possession

Criminal law casebooks and treatises frequently mention the possibility that criminal liability for possession is inconsistent with the Voluntary Act Requirement, which limits criminal liability to that which includes an act or an omission. This paper explains why criminal liability for possession is compatible with the Voluntary Act Requirement despite the fact that possession is a status. To make good on this claim, the paper (1) defends the Voluntary Act Requirement, (2) offers an account of the nature of omissions of the kind that need be included in that for which criminal liability is imposed in the absence of a voluntary act, and (3) argues that possession is a status that is constituted in part by an omission of this sort. The result is that to hold people criminally liable for possession is to hold them criminally liable both for a status and for an omission, an omission that is part of what it is to have that status. The paper also distinguishes possession from vagrancy, which is not a proper object of criminal liability, precisely because of constraints placed by the Voluntary Act Requirement. And the paper argues that possession incident to dispossession is not a proper object of criminal liability because it does not involve an omission of the kind that other forms of possession involve.     

More Attempts: A Reply to Duff, Husak, Mele and Walen

In this paper, I reply to the very thoughtful comments on my book by Antony Duff, Doug Husak, Al Mele and Alec Walen.     

Stereotypical Knowledge and Age in Relation to Prediction of Public Support for Rehabilitation: Data from Taiwan

Studying public attitudes toward rehabilitation is not a new phenomenon. However, not much research is available on this topic from Asian countries. The present study explores public attitudes among Taiwanese people toward rehabilitation efforts in general, and the Rehabilitation and Protection Act (RPA) in particular. Using a sample of N?=?333, we asked Taiwanese residents age d18 and older about their support for the RPA, and their support for rehabilitation initiatives for three types of criminals: drug offenders, violent offenders, and sex offenders. Using a univariate model, we found that only two variables??age and stereotypical knowledge??had a statistically significant effect on whether an individual supported rehabilitation initiatives. Findings also indicate overwhelming support for the RPA and rehabilitation in general. We discuss these findings in a cultural context, and make recommendations for future research.     

Problems in the Theorisation of Global Civil Society

Existing theories of global civil society are problematical for two reasons. First, they assume that transnational organisations can assist world-wide democratisation without questioning either the representativeness of such organisations, or their accountability, or the potentially negative ramifications of their actions for international political equality. Second, despite placing new emphasis on political agency outside of the state, many accounts of global civil society ultimately reproduce statist discourse by reducing action in global civil society to a struggle for rights. This misrepresents global civil society since arguments for rights are, inter alia , arguments for the state, whereas the agency of global civil society immanently questions the legitimacy of the state.