uib.no university of bergen punishment as communication who decides the fair volume of the...

7
uib.no UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN Punishment as Communication Who decides the Fair Volume of the Conversation? Prof. Ragna Aarli 5th Int. Conference on Law, Language and Discourse in Örebro 29th September 2015 Faculty of Law

Upload: mark-dickerson

Post on 14-Dec-2015

213 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Uib.no UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN Punishment as Communication Who decides the Fair Volume of the Conversation? Prof. Ragna Aarli 5th Int. Conference on Law,

uib.no

UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN

Punishment as CommunicationWho decides the Fair Volume of the Conversation?

Prof. Ragna Aarli5th Int. Conference on Law, Language and Discourse in

Örebro 29th September 2015

Faculty of Law

Page 2: Uib.no UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN Punishment as Communication Who decides the Fair Volume of the Conversation? Prof. Ragna Aarli 5th Int. Conference on Law,

uib.no

The Voice of the Victims in Criminal Trials

Justice Secretary Chris Grayling, UK:

”I want to create a fairer criminal justice system where victims have a louder voice

and those who break the law are more likely to go to prison for longer.”

Is the alleged nexus between giving victims a louder voice and a more punitive system inescapable?

Faculty of Law

Foto: colourbox.com

Page 3: Uib.no UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN Punishment as Communication Who decides the Fair Volume of the Conversation? Prof. Ragna Aarli 5th Int. Conference on Law,

uib.no

Dramatis personae of the criminal trial

Faculty of Law

Perpetrator

Victim 1 Victim 2

Right to -counsel-victim compensation-be present-be informed-be heard before the offender-pose questions-give Victim Impact Statements

A right to influence on sentencing?

Factual context

Page 4: Uib.no UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN Punishment as Communication Who decides the Fair Volume of the Conversation? Prof. Ragna Aarli 5th Int. Conference on Law,

uib.no

National traditions of Punishment

Norwegian Criminal Code 1902

•Max penalty 21 years (now 30 y)•No capital punishment•No lifetime imprisonment (preventive detention available since 2002)•Fixed maximum lengths•Few fixed minimum lengths•Wide court discretion•Mitigating and aggravating circumstances•Principle of statutory limitations to all crimes (max 25 y) left in 2014

5,2 mill inhabitants

Faculty of Law

Criminal Law of PRC 1997 (1979)

•Capital punishment•Lifetime imprisonment•Fixed minimum lenghts•Fixed maximum lengths•Wide court discretion•Mitigating and aggravating circumstances•Principle of statutory limitations to all crimes (max 20 y), but the Supreme People´s Procurate may approve prosecution after 20 years.

1,4 bill inhabitants

Foto: colourbox.com

Page 5: Uib.no UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN Punishment as Communication Who decides the Fair Volume of the Conversation? Prof. Ragna Aarli 5th Int. Conference on Law,

uib.no

After listening to Victim´s voices in Norway:

Minimum and maximum penalties are increased:•maximum for assault 6 mth > 1 year•maximum for assault with injury 2/5 > 4/6 year•maximum for bodily harm 3/6/8 > 4/6/10 years•minimum for murder 6 > 8 years•minimum for rape 2 > 3 years•maximum for rape 10 > 15 years

New criminalized Acts:•Grossly negligent rape (sexual activity by means of violence or threats)•Sexual activity without consent

No statutory limitations to the prosecution of terrorism, murder, rape, sexual activity with a child and arson causing death

Faculty of Law

Foto: Colourbox.com

Page 6: Uib.no UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN Punishment as Communication Who decides the Fair Volume of the Conversation? Prof. Ragna Aarli 5th Int. Conference on Law,

uib.no

A new double-tracked system?

Faculty of Law

Perpetrator

Victim 1

Victim 2

Perpetrator

Economic crime

Violent crime

Page 7: Uib.no UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN Punishment as Communication Who decides the Fair Volume of the Conversation? Prof. Ragna Aarli 5th Int. Conference on Law,

uib.no

Final questions/discussion

How can listening to the voice of the victims contribute to create a “fairer” criminal justice system?

•We must accept the necessity of victim awareness in our time, but how do we avoid penal excess and secure equality before the law?

•Is a double tracked system “fair”?

[email protected]

Faculty of Law

Foto: Colourbox.com