Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T05:11:31.505Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - Comparative criminal justice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2013

Mauro Bussani
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi di Trieste
Ugo Mattei
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy
Get access

Summary

Comparative criminal justice: a long neglected discipline on the rise

A past of oblivion

Traditionally, legal comparison has been mostly associated with private law. One of its masters, Gino Gorla, pointed out that ‘[comparative law] methodology has been conceived essentially, if not exclusively, in connection with civil law’. Born and developed within the private law arena therefore, comparative law in its modern foundation has for years paid almost no attention to criminal justice. Things today are rapidly changing, however. New international dynamics ask for a deep understanding of the similarities between criminal legal systems rather than of their differences, pushing criminal justice into the realm of a modern comparative law methodology, one that takes an integrative approach instead of a contrastive one.

The search for a common grammar among legal systems has been typical, indeed, of the private law domain since the second half of the twentieth century, when the need for legal uniformity stemmed from galloping globalization. Under the impact of a dramatic worldwide intensification of the transnational exchange and movements of persons, goods, and capital, private comparative law scholars began to search for a common core of legal systems. Since the Cornell seminars, they have incrementally succeeded in refining a methodology that looks beyond the narratives and discourses to grasp the deep similarities between legal systems. Closely associated with the principle of state sovereignty, however, criminal law and criminal procedure instead remained consigned within the boundaries of a contrastive comparison, one that limits itself to the analysis of the differences between legal systems (rather than searching for similarities) and that consequently is less interested in challenging the representation that each system gives of itself.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Gorla, G.Diritto ComparatoEnciclopedia del DirittoMilanGiuffrè 1964 940Google Scholar
Schlesinger, R.Past and Future of Comparative Law 1995 43 American Journal of Comparative Law477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curran, V.Cultural Immersion, Difference and Categories in U.S. Comparative Law 1998 46 American Journal of Comparative Law43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delmas-Marty, M.Vervaele, J. A. E.The Implementation of the Corpus Juris in the Member StatesAntwerpIntersentia 2000
Eser, A.Fletcher, G. P.Justification and Excuses: Comparative PerspectivesHuntington, NYJuris Publishing 1987
Wasik, M.The Grant of Absolute Discharge 1985 5 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ormerod, D.Smith and Hogan’s Criminal LawOxford University Press 2011 371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G.Criminal Law: The General PartLondonSweet & Maxwell 1961 594Google Scholar
Fletcher, G. P.Comparative Law as a Subversive Discipline 1988 46 American Journal of Comparative Law689Google Scholar
Muir-Watt, H.La fonction subversive du droit comparé 2000 52 Revue internationale de droit comparé503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grande, E.Accordo criminoso e conspiracy. Tipicità e stretta legalità nell’analisi comparataPaduaCedam 1993Google Scholar
Fletcher, G. P.Is Conspiracy Unique to the Common Law 1995 43 American Journal of Comparative Law171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grande, E.Principio di legalità e diritto giurisprudenziale: un’antinomia 1996 27 Politica del diritto469Google Scholar
LaFave, W. R.Criminal LawEaganThomson & West 2003 101Google Scholar
Pomorski, S.American Common Law and the Principle Nullum Crimen sine LegeBerlinMouton 1975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams
1982
1965
1987
Ancel, M.Utilité et méthodes du droit comparéNeuchâtelEditions Ides et Calendes 1971 10Google Scholar
Packer, H.The Limits of the Criminal SanctionPalo AltoStanford University Press 1969Google Scholar
Packer, H.Two Models of the Criminal Process 1964 113 University of Pennsylvania Law Review1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damaška, M.Evidentiary Barriers to Conviction and Two Models of Criminal Procedure: A Comparative Study 1973 121 University of Pennsylvania Law Review506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sklansky, D. A.Anti-inquisitorialism 2009 122 Harvard Law ReviewGoogle Scholar
Damaška, M.Structures of Authority and Comparative Criminal Procedure 1975 84 Yale Law Journal480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, A. S.Marcus, M.The Myth of Judicial Supervision in Three “Inquisitorial” Systems: France, Italy, and Germany 1977 87 Yale Law Journal240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langbein, J. H.Weinreb, L. L.Continental Criminal Procedure: “Myth” and Reality 1978 87 Yale Law Journal1549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pizzi, W. T.Trials without Truth: Why Our System of Criminal Trials Has Become an Expensive Failure and What We Need to Do to Rebuild ItNew York University Press 1999Google Scholar
Langbein, J. H.Mixed Court and Jury Court: Could the Continental Alternative Fill the American Need 1981 American Bar Foundation Research Journal195Google Scholar
LangbeinMoney Talks, Clients WalkNewsweek 1995 32Google Scholar
Alschuler, A. W.Implementing the Criminal Defendant’s Right to Trial: Alternatives to the Plea Bargaining System 1983 University of Chicago Law Review931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, J.French Criminal Justice: A Comparative Account of the Investigation and Prosecution of Crime in FranceOxford and PortlandHart 2005Google Scholar
Goldstein, A.Reflections on Two Models: Inquisitorial Themes in American Criminal Procedure 1974 26 Stanford Law Review1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubber, M. D.American Plea Bargains, German Lay Judges, and the Crisis of Criminal Procedure 1997 49 Stanford Law Review547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pizzi, W. T.The American “Adversary System” 1998 100 University of West Virginia Law Review847Google Scholar
Pizzi, Sentencing in the US: An Inquisitorial Soul in an Adversarial BodyJackson, J.Langer, M.Tillers, P.Crime Procedure and Evidence in a Comparative and International ContextOxford and PortlandHart 2008 65Google Scholar
Ross, J.Do Rules of Evidence Apply (Only) in the Courtroom? Deceptive Interrogation in the United States and Germany 2008 28 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damaška, Truth in Adjudication 1998 49 Hastings Law Journal289Google Scholar
Weigend, T.Is the Criminal Process about Truth?: A German Perspective 2003 26 Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy157Google Scholar
Ross, J.Undercover Policing and the Shifting Terms of Scholarly Debate: The United States and Europe in Counterpoint 2008 4 Annual Review of Law and Social Science239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langer, M.The Rise of Managerial Judging in International Criminal Law 2005 53 American Journal of Comparative Law837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, J. D.The Effect of Human Rights on Criminal Evidentiary Processes: Towards Convergence, Divergence or Realignment 2005 68 Modern Law Review737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Summers, S. J.Fair Trials: The European Criminal Procedural Tradition and the European Court of Human RightsOxford and PortlandHart 2007Google Scholar
Amann, D. M.Harmonic Convergence? Constitutional Criminal Procedure in an International Context 2000 75 Indiana Law Journal809Google Scholar
Delmas-Marty, M.Towards a European Model of the Criminal TrialDelmas-Marty, M.The Criminal Process and Human Rights: Towards a European ConsciousnessVienna and New YorkSpringer 1995 191Google Scholar
Watson, A.Legal TransplantsEdinburghScottish Academic Press 1974Google Scholar
Langer, M.From Legal Transplants to Legal Translations: The Globalization of Plea Bargaining and the Americanization Thesis in Criminal Procedure 2004 45 Harvard International Law Journal1Google Scholar
Fletcher, G. P.Rethinking Criminal LawNew YorkOxford University Press 1978Google Scholar
Robinson, P. H.Fundamentals of Criminal LawNew YorkLittle, Brown 1988Google Scholar
Dubber, M. D.Kelman, M. G.American Criminal Law: Cases, Statutes, and CommentsNew YorkFoundation Press 2005Google Scholar
Eser, A.Justification and Excuse: A Key Issue in the Concept of CrimeEser, A.Fletcher, G. P.Justification and Excuses: Comparative PerspectivesHuntington, NYJuris Publishing 1987 22Google Scholar
Robinson, P. H.Criminal Law Defenses: A Systematic Analysis 1982 82 Columbia Law Review199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, Criminal Law DefensesSt. PaulWest 1984Google Scholar
Dubber, M. D.Criminal Law: Model Penal CodeNew YorkFoundation Press 2002Google Scholar
Thaman, S. C.Europe’s New Jury Systems: The Cases of Spain and Russia 1999 62 Law and Contemporary Problems233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langer, M.Revolution in Latin American Criminal Procedure: Diffusion of Legal Ideas from the Periphery 2007 55 American Journal of Comparative Law617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogler, R.Spain, Criminal Procedure: A Worldwide StudyBradley, C. M.Criminal Procedure: A Worldwide StudyDurham, NCCarolina Academic Press 1999 361Google Scholar
Feeley, M. M.Miyazawa, S.The Japanese Adversary System in Context. Controversies and ComparisonsLondonPalgrave Macmillan 2002
Mattei, U.The New Ethiopian Constitution: First Thoughts on Ethnical Federalism and the Reception of Western InstitutionsGrande, E.Transplants Innovations and Legal Tradition in the Horn of Africa/Modelli autoctoni e modelli di importazione nei sistemi giuridici del Corno d’AfricaTurinL’Harmattan 1995 111Google Scholar
Cavadino, M.Dignan, J.Penal Systems: A Comparative ApproachNew YorkSage 2006 11Google Scholar
Grande, E.Il terzo strike. La prigione in AmericaPalermoSellerio 2007Google Scholar
Mattei, U.Why the Wind Changed: Intellectual Leadership in Western Law 1994 42 American Journal of Comparative Law195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kadish, S. H.Codifiers of the Criminal Law: Wechsler’s Predecessors 1978 78 Columbia Law Review1098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, C. M.Criminal Procedure: A Worldwide StudyDurham, NCCarolina Academic Press 2007Google Scholar
Cape, E.Suspects in Europe: Procedural Rights at the Investigative Stage of the Criminal Process in the European UnionAntwerpIntersentia 2007
Corstens, G.Pradel, J.European Criminal LawThe HagueKluwer 2002Google Scholar
Damaška, M. R.Evidence Law AdriftNew HavenYale University Press 1997Google Scholar
Dammer, H. R.Fairchild, E.Comparative Criminal Justice SystemsBelmontThompson-Wadsworth 2006Google Scholar
Delmas-Marty, M.Spencer, J. R.European Criminal ProceduresCambridge University Press 2002
Dubber, M. D.Comparative Criminal LawReimann, M.Zimmermann, R.The Oxford Handbook of Comparative LawOxford University Press 2006 1287Google Scholar
Fennell, P.Harding, C.Jörg, N.Swart, B.Criminal Justice in Europe: A Comparative StudyOxfordClarendon 1995Google Scholar
Fletcher, G. P.Basic Concepts of Criminal LawNew YorkOxford University Press 1998Google Scholar
Fornasari, G.Menghini, A.Percorsi europei di diritto penalePaduaCedam 2008Google Scholar
Grande, E.Imitazione e diritto: Ipotesi sulla circolazione dei modelliTurinGiappichelli 2000 Sgarbossa, F.Google Scholar
Hatchard, J.Huber, B.Vogler, R.Comparative Criminal ProcedureLondonBIICL 1996
Heller, K. J.Dubber, M. D.The Handbook of Comparative Criminal LawStanfordStanford Law Books 2011
Jackson, J.Langer, M.Tillers, P.Crime, Procedure and Evidence in a Comparative and International ContextOxford and PortlandHart 2008
Klip, A.European Criminal Law: An Integrative ApproachAntwerpIntersentia 2009Google Scholar
Pakes, F.Comparative Criminal JusticeCullomptonWillan Publishing 2004Google Scholar
Palazzo, F.Papa, M.Lezioni di diritto penale comparatoTurinGiappichelli 2000Google Scholar
Pradel, J.Pénal ComparéParisDalloz 1995Google Scholar
Reichel, P. L.Comparative Criminal Justice Systems: A Topical ApproachUpper Saddle RiverPearson Prentice Hall 2008Google Scholar
Sotis, C.Il diritto senza codice. Uno studio sul sistema penale europeo vigenteMilanGiuffrè 2007Google Scholar
Terrill, R. J.World Criminal Justice SystemsCincinnatiAnderson Publishing 2009Google Scholar
Thaman, S. C.Comparative Criminal Procedure: A Casebook ApproachDurham, NCCarolina Academic Press 2008Google Scholar
Trechsel, S.Human Rights in Criminal ProceedingsOxford and New YorkOxford University Press 2005Google Scholar
Vogler, R.A World View of Criminal JusticeAldershotAshgate 2005Google Scholar
Vogler, R.Huber, B.Criminal Procedure in EuropeBerlinStrafrechtliche Forschungsberichte 2008
Weigend, T.Criminal Procedure: Comparative AspectsDressler, J.Encyclopedia of Crime and JusticeNew YorkMacmillan 2002 444Google Scholar
Criminal Law and Criminal ProcedureSmits, J.Elgar Encyclopedia of Comparative LawCheltenhamEdward Elgar 2006 214CrossRef
Van Den Wyngaert, C.Criminal Procedure Systems in the European CommunityLondonButterworths 1994

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×