Moral Judgments & International Crimes: The Disutility of Desert

The international criminal regime exhibits many retributive features, but scholars and practitioners rarely defend the regime in purely retributive terms—that is, by reference to the inherent value of punishing the guilty. Instead, they defend it on the consequentialist grounds that it produces the...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Woods, Andrew Keane (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Libro
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: 2012
En:Año: 2012
Acceso en línea: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866313045
003 DE-627
005 20250325045333.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231019s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866313045 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866313045 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |8 1\p  |a Woods, Andrew Keane  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)1198716002  |0 (DE-627)1680888188  |4 aut 
109 |a Woods, Andrew Keane  |a Woods, Andrew K. 
245 1 0 |a Moral Judgments & International Crimes: The Disutility of Desert 
264 1 |c 2012 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The international criminal regime exhibits many retributive features, but scholars and practitioners rarely defend the regime in purely retributive terms—that is, by reference to the inherent value of punishing the guilty. Instead, they defend it on the consequentialist grounds that it produces the best policy outcomes, such as deterrence, conflict resolution, and reconciliation. These scholars and practitioners implicitly adopt a behavioral theory known as the utility of desert, a theory about the usefulness of appealing to people's retributive intuitions. That theory has been critically examined in domestic criminal scholarship but practically ignored in international criminal law. This Article fills this gap and argues that whatever its merits in the domestic realm, there are special reasons to be skeptical about the utility of desert claim in the international context. Moral intuitions as heuristics for moral judgments are error-prone, and the international criminal regime has a number of extraordinary features that may increase the likelihood and cost of these errors. These features include the complexity of the crimes; the diversity of stakeholders who possess heterogeneous intuitions; and the regime's multiple goals, some of which may be inhibited by moral condemnation. After examining these differences, the Article outlines the implications of the analysis for regime design. Some of these design implications accommodate the international criminal regime's current retributive approach, and some are fundamentally incompatible with retributivism 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/232565016.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
883 |8 1  |a cgwrk  |d 20250301  |q DE-101  |u https://d-nb.info/provenance/plan#cgwrk 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4392956687 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866313045 
LOK |0 005 20231019043637 
LOK |0 008 231019||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE69231693 
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 core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw