Graduate studies at Western
Criminal Law and Philosophy 6 (2):187-205 (2012)
|Abstract||The paper argues for attaching a significant role to the dignity of offenders as a limitation on the scope of substantive criminal law. Three different aspects of human dignity are discussed. Human dignity is closely connected with the principle of culpability. Respecting the dignity of offenders requires that we assign criminal liability according to the actual attitudes of the offenders towards the interests protected by the offence. The doctrine of natural and probable consequence of complicity, which allows us to assign liability for mens rea offenses to a negligent offender, violates the dignity of the offender; it treats the incautious offender as if she had willfully expressed disrespect towards the protected interest. The human dignity core of privacy is invaded by criminalizing the private possession of child pornography. By extending the prohibition of the creation, sale and distribution of child pornography to the private possession of pornography, the State attempts to control the way the individual expresses an essential part of the self—his sexual fantasies—within himself. Dignity demands that our actions convey an attitude of respect towards human beings. The expressive meaning of disrespect is culture-dependent. The historical association with totalitarian regimes explains our reluctance to impose a legal duty to report past crime: the individual who is legally required to turn a suspect into the police is viewed as an “informant.”|
|Keywords||Human dignity Criminal law Offenders|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Susan Dimock (2011). What Are Intoxicated Offenders Responsible For? The “Intoxication Defense” Re-Examined. Criminal Law and Philosophy 5 (1):1-20.
Miriam Gur-Arye (2008). The Nature of Crime: A Synthesis, Following the Three Perspectives Offered in the Grammar of Criminal Law. Criminal Justice Ethics 27 (1):91-98.
David Dolinko (2012). Review of “Crime and Culpability: A Theory of Criminal Law”. [REVIEW] Criminal Law and Philosophy 6 (1):93-102.
Leslie Pickering Francis & John G. Francis (2012). Criminalizing Health-Related Behaviors Dangerous to Others? Disease Transmission, Transmission-Facilitation, and the Importance of Trust. Criminal Law and Philosophy 6 (1):47-63.
Douglas N. Husak (1999). Review Essay / Philosophical Analysis and the Limits of the Substantive Criminal Law. Criminal Justice Ethics 18 (2):58-67.
Helen Lam & Mark Harcourt (2003). The Use of Criminal Record in Employment Decisions: The Rights of Ex-Offenders, Employers and the Public. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 47 (3):237 - 252.
James Edwards (2011). Coming Clean About the Criminal Law. Criminal Law and Philosophy 5 (3):315-332.
Tatjana Hörnle (2012). Criminalizing Behaviour to Protect Human Dignity. Criminal Law and Philosophy 6 (3):307-325.
J. H. Bogart (1987). Legislative Duty and the Independence of Law. Law and Philosophy 6 (2):187 - 203.
Shaoping Gan (2009). Human Dignity as a Right. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 4 (3):370-384.
Debra Bergoffen (2011). Exploiting the Dignity of the Vulnerable Body: Rape as a Weapon of War. Philosophical Papers 38 (3):307-325.
Miriam Gur‐Arye (2001). A Failure to Prevent Crime Should It Be Criminal? Criminal Justice Ethics 20 (2):3-30.
John R. Rowan (2000). Privacy, Safety, and Human Dignity. Social Philosophy Today 16:171-181.
Zachary Hoskins (2011). ''Deterrent Punishment and Respect for Persons''. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 8 (2):369-384.
Doris Schroeder (2012). Human Rights and Human Dignity. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (3):323-335.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-04-27
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?