Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T10:16:21.210Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Reconciliation Theory of State Punishment: An Alternative to Protection and Retribution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 April 2022

Thaddeus Metz
Thaddeus Metz*
Affiliation:
University of Pretoria
*
th.metz@up.ac.za
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I propose a theory of punishment that is unfamiliar in the West, according to which the state normally ought to have offenders reform their characters and compensate their victims in ways the offenders find burdensome, thereby disavowing the crime and tending to foster improved relationships between offenders, their victims, and the broader society. I begin by indicating how this theory draws on under-appreciated ideas about reconciliation from the Global South, and especially sub-Saharan Africa, and is distinct from the protection and retribution theories that have dominated the Western philosophy of punishment for about 250 years. Then I argue that it neatly avoids objections to them and is prima facie plausible in its own right. I conclude that this reconciliation theory of state punishment should be taken seriously by philosophers of law and policy makers.

Type
Paper
Information
Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements , Volume 91: A Philosophers' Manifesto: Ideas and Arguments to Change the World , May 2022 , pp. 119 - 139
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 2022

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

Balogun, Oladele, African Philosophy: Reflections on Yoruba Metaphysics and Jurisprudence (Lagos: Xcel Publishers, 2018).Google Scholar
Bentham, Jeremy, ‘The Rationale of Punishment’, (1830), https://www.laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/bentham/rp/.Google Scholar
Bewaji, John Ayotunde, The Rule of Law and Governance in Indigenous Yoruba Society (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2016).Google Scholar
Bornkamm, Paul Christoph, Rwanda's Gacaca Courts: Between Retribution and Reparation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braithwaite, John and Pettit, Philip, Not Just Deserts (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990).Google Scholar
Davis, Michael, To Make the Punishment Fit the Crime (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992).Google Scholar
Duff, R. A., Punishment, Communication and Community (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001).Google Scholar
Farrell, Daniel, ‘The Justification of Deterrent Violence’, Ethics (1990) 100, 301–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrell, Daniel, ‘Capital Punishment and Societal Self-Defense’. In Aiken, William and Haldane, John (eds), Philosophy and Its Public Role (Charlottesville, VA: Imprint Academic, 2004), 241–56.Google Scholar
Feinberg, Joel, Doing and Deserving (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1970).Google Scholar
Government of the Republic of Colombia, ‘Final Agreement to End the Armed Conflict and Build a Stable and Lasting Peace’, (2016), http://especiales.presidencia.gov.co/Documents/20170620-dejacion-armas/acuerdos/acuerdo-final-ingles.pdf.Google Scholar
Hamber, Brandon, Nageng, Dineo, and O'Malley, Gabriel, ‘“Telling It Like It Is….”; Understanding the Truth and Reconciliation Commission from the Perspective of Survivors’, Psychology in Society (2000) 26, 18–42.Google Scholar
Hamber, Brandon and Wilson, Richard, ‘Symbolic Closure through Memory, Reparation and Revenge in Post-conflict Societies’, Journal of Human Rights (2002) 1, 35–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampton, Jean, ‘The Retributive Idea’. In Hampton, Jean and Murphy, Jeffrie (eds), Forgiveness and Mercy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 111–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Husak, Douglas, ‘Why Punish the Deserving?’ Nous (1992) 26, 447–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel, ‘The Metaphysics of Morals’, Gregor, Mary (trans.). In Gregor, Mary (ed.), Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 353–603 (originally published in 1797).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kershnar, Stephen, Desert, Retribution, and Torture (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, Inc, 2001).Google Scholar
Metz, Thaddeus, ‘Reconciliation as the Aim of a Criminal Trial: Ubuntu's Implications for Sentencing’, Constitutional Court Review (2019) 9, 113–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metz, Thaddeus, ‘Why Reconciliation Requires Punishment but Not Forgiveness’. In Scheiter, Krisanna and Satne, Paula (eds), Conflict and Resolution: The Ethics of Forgiveness, Revenge, and Punishment (Cham: Springer, 2022).Google Scholar
Montague, Philip, Punishment as Societal-Defense (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1995).Google Scholar
Moore, Michael, Placing Blame (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997).Google Scholar
Murphy, Jeffrie, Retribution, Justice, and Therapy (Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, Jeffrie, Retribution Reconsidered (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International, Penal Reform, Eight Years on…A Record of Gacaca Monitoring in Rwanda, (2010), https://cdn.penalreform.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/WEB-english-gacaca-rwanda-5.pdf.Google Scholar
Sadurski, Wojciech, Giving Desert Its Due (Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shafer-Landau, Russ, ‘The Failure of Retributivism’, Philosophical Studies (1996) 82, 289–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smart, J. C., ‘Utilitarianism and Punishment’, Israel Law Review (1991) 25, 360–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Hirsch, Andrew, Past or Future Crimes (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1986).Google Scholar