Restitutionism

Social Theory and Practice 38 (2):279-301 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

According to the restitutionist view on justice, criminals should compensate their victims for the losses they have suffered as the result of crime. The discussion amongst proponents and critics of restitutionism has, to a large extent, focused on the question as to whether the theory is capable of dealing with many of the complicated challenges that arise within a criminal justice system. However, in this paper it is suggested that the restitutionist theory of justice should be rejected from the very outset. Given an empirical assumption, referred to as the Third Parties Assumption, it is argued that the theory is practically self-defeating in the sense that it cannot be applied without violating its own prescriptions.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Punishment : restitutionism : for what and to whom?Jesper Ryberg - 2007 - In Jesper Ryberg, Thomas S. Petersen & Clark Wolf (eds.), New Waves in Applied Ethics. Palgrave-Macmillan.
Restitutionism Defended.Joseph Ellin - 2000 - Journal of Value Inquiry 34 (2/3):299-317.
Responsibilities of criminal justice officials.Kimberley Brownlee - 2010 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 27 (2):123-139.
Retributivism and multiple offending.Jesper Ryberg - 2005 - Res Publica 11 (3):213-233.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-04-04

Downloads
39 (#356,630)

6 months
1 (#1,040,386)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references