93 research outputs found

    Not gods but animals : human dignity and vulnerable subjecthood

    Get PDF
    Drawing on earlier work on the conceptual structure of dignity, this paper will suggest a particular type of connectedness between vulnerability and human dignity; namely, that the ‘‘organizing idea’’ of human dignity is the idea of a particular sort of ethical response to universal human vulnerability. It is common ground among many, if not all, approaches to ethics that vulnerability requires us to respond ethically. Here, I argue that human dignity is distinctive among ethical values in that it values us because of, rather than in spite of, or regardless of, our universal vulnerability. The term ‘‘dignity’’ is used synonymously with ‘‘human dignity’’ here, since an investigation of the dignity of non-human entities forms no part of the present examination

    The High Court on crime in 2014: Outcomes and jurisprudence

    Full text link
    This article examines the Australian High Court decisions in 2014 which relate to criminal matters. This systematic analysis of all High Court judgments commenced in this Journal in 2010 and is now undertaken annually. The article explains the principles that derive from these cases and identifies jurisprudential themes from the decisions. It also sets outthe significance of the cases and the possible wider consequences of the decisions

    Proportionality in sentencing: the need to factor in community experience, not public opinion

    Full text link
    This is the first book to address the question of what role public opinion should play in the way criminal offenders are punished.Should public opinion determine—or even influence—sentencing policy and practice? Should the punishment of criminal offenders reflect what the public regards as appropriate? These deceptively simple questions conceal complex theoretical and methodological challenges to the administration of punishment.In the West, politicians have often answered these questions in the affirmative; penal reforms have been justified with direct reference to the attitudes of the public. This is why the contention that politicians should bridge the gap between the public and criminal justice practice has widespread resonance. Criminal law scholars, for their part, have often been more reluctant to accept public input in penal practice, and some have even held that the idea of consulting public opinion constitutes a populist approach to punishment.The purpose of this book is to examine the moral significance of public opinion for penal theory and practice. For the first time in a single volume the editors, Jesper Ryberg and Julian V. Roberts, have assembled a number of respected criminologists, philosphers, and legal theorists to address the various aspects of why and how public opinion should be reflected in the way the criminal justice system deals with criminals. The chapters address the myriad complexities surrounding this issue by first weighing the justifications for incorporating public views into punishment practices and then considering the various ways this might be achieved through juries, prosecutors, restoratifve justice programs, and other means

    Rich offender, poor offender: why it (sometimes) matters in sentencing

    Full text link

    Australia

    Full text link

    Strategic (and popular) sentencing

    Full text link

    Criminal Law of Victoria, New South Wales and South Australia

    Full text link
    An introduction to the fundamentals of criminal law of Victoria, New South Wales and South Australia; contains case and legislative extracts
    • …
    corecore