The Janus face of imprisonment: Contrasting judicial conceptions of imprisonment purposes in the European Court of Human Rights and the Supreme Court of the United States

This article considers how the Supreme Court of the United States and the European Court of Human Rights apply, interpret and frame abstract imprisonment purposes, and how they view their relevance to prison conditions, while discussing the constitutionality of prison conditions. The article argues...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Dagan, Netanel (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: 2021
En: Criminology & criminal justice
Año: 2021, Volumen: 21, Número: 5, Páginas: 633-649
Acceso en línea: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Journals Online & Print:
Gargar...
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Palabras clave:

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002c 4500
001 1772238287
003 DE-627
005 20211004061633.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 211004s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1177/1748895820911967  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1772238287 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1772238287 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Dagan, Netanel  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
109 |a Dagan, Netanel 
245 1 4 |a The Janus face of imprisonment: Contrasting judicial conceptions of imprisonment purposes in the European Court of Human Rights and the Supreme Court of the United States 
264 1 |c 2021 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a This article considers how the Supreme Court of the United States and the European Court of Human Rights apply, interpret and frame abstract imprisonment purposes, and how they view their relevance to prison conditions, while discussing the constitutionality of prison conditions. The article argues that the Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights view, conceptualise and interpret the purposes of imprisonment differently. Regarding the purposes of retribution and rehabilitation specifically, the analysis presented in the article exposes a ‘Janus face’, meaning that each purpose can, and is, interpreted in two different, and almost contrasting ways. The article offers three themes regarding the conceptualisation of imprisonment purposes by the Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights: First, the relationship between the purposes of sentencing and imprisonment along the penal continuum, and the role of rehabilitation in a prison regime: should sentencing purposes be relatively static during their implementation in prison, meaning that retributive-oriented sentencing purposes should be pursued (Supreme Court), or should they conversely progress with the passage of time, from retribution to resocialisation as the primary purpose of imprisonment (European Court of Human Rights). Second, the meaning of retributivism in regard to prison conditions: should prisoners pay a debt to society by suffering in restrictive prison conditions (Supreme Court), or is retributivism achieved by atonement and by finding ways to compensate or repair harms caused by crime (European Court of Human Rights). Third, the way in which prison rehabilitation is framed and understood: should prison rehabilitation be seen as a risk management tool aimed purely at lowering recidivism (Supreme Court), or as a moral concept grounded in a prisoner’s ability to change his life and belief in personal responsibility for one’s actions (European Court of Human Rights). Possible theoretical implications and general policy implications are considered in the article. 
650 4 |a Retributivism 
650 4 |a purposes of imprisonment 
650 4 |a prison law 
650 4 |a Comparative Law 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Criminology & criminal justice  |d London [u.a.] : Sage, 2006  |g 21(2021), 5, Seite 633-649  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)337806837  |w (DE-600)2063005-0  |w (DE-576)096290994  |x 1748-8966  |7 nnas 
773 1 8 |g volume:21  |g year:2021  |g number:5  |g pages:633-649 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895820911967  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 3983233295 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1772238287 
LOK |0 005 20211004061633 
LOK |0 008 211004||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)KrimDok#2021-10-03#4F1C5AD1FD6EB8B15CBEBCA76305E55AA8184D23 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw