Retributive punishment removes that advantage and tries to restore balance to society by validating how individuals ought to act in society. Punishment can be said to be an important tool to maintain a socio-economic-legal balance in the society and to ensure the peaceful environment amidst the citizens.1It can be said that the purpose of punishment is to neutralise the effect of thewrongful act of the offender.Antony Flew, HLA Hart  and Stanley Benn have defined punishment as something unpleasant in lieu of an offense against legal rules, imposed by a legal authority and administered by the society.2 Durkheim with a different approach has stated, that punishment is the reaction of the society against crime, punishment should be a proportionate response to the harm caused to the society.3, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.”. 2. Another problem for utilitarian theorists is that, for the theory to work properly, other factors such as moral culpability or remorse cannot be weighed in determining punishment. This has been debated by jurists like Hart, Anthony Flew and Stanley Benn. As Kant emphatically insists, therefore, no competing utilitarian motive should be allowed to encroach upon the retributive motive. Hence, a lenient and reformative system of punishment should be observed in such cases. The other persons have obeyed the law and therefore, he owesa debt to the society in the form of punishment. Officials in the United States were allowed broad discretions to individualize sentences. The broad theories of punishment are divided into consequentalist and retributivist theories. Reteibutive punishment vindicates “the value of victim denied by the wrongdoer’s action through the construction of an event that not only repudiates the action’s message of superiority over the victim but does so in a way that confirms them as equal.”[13] In this way punishment “can annul the message, sent by the crime, that they are not equal in value”. Retributive theories of punishment The theory places careful emphasis on taking care not to confuse retribution with vengeance, claiming that retribution is an enlightened attempt to restore imbalances caused by criminal misconduct, while vengeance is simply seeking revenge in … Punishment … According to Hart,7 a retributive theory of punishment involves, at a minimum, three tenets (231): R1: A person may be punished if and only if he has voluntarily done something wrong. The weightage given to proportionality in the retributive system of justice carries with itself several advantages and disadvantages. Quite contrary to the idea of rehabilitation and distinct from the utilitarian purposes of restraint and deterrence, the purpose of retribution is actively to injure criminal offenders, ideally in proportion with their injuries to society, and so expiate them of guilt. Retribution means giving offenders the punishment they deserve. The retributive theory is arguably the most influential philosophical justification for the institution of criminal punishment in present-day America.' By punishing them, the unfair advantage is wiped out. If we leave the crime unpunished, it is regarded as an innocent deed. In the retributivist theory of punishment, the punishment is seen as a form of ‘payback’ for the crimes one has committed. Such discretion was criticized by the scholars of that time.[19]. Deterrence theory views punishment … Retributive Punishment. “Retributive” means “punitive”; to recompense; to pay back; to make a return to; in the way of requital.”Retributive Theory says to return the same injury to the wrong-doer which he had committed against the victim; it says “a tooth for a tooth” and “an eye for an eye”. Retributive theory has its own advantages over the other forms of punishments, some of them are; The retributive theory of punishment has merits as well as demerits, some of the demerits are; Another interpretation of the retributive theory of punishment exists which considers punishment as a form of expiation. ‘An eye of an eye’, ‘a hand for a hand’ and ‘a limb for limb’ was the law. ! Such a doctrine was advocated by early Italian criminologist Cesare Beccaria who viewed the harsh punishments of his day as being disproportionate to many of the crimes committed. It is quite possible that the criminal is as much a victim of circumstances as the victim himself might have been. The Pure Theory hoMs that the practice of punishment and any individual act of punishment is moral y justified if and only if it conforms to all four of the principles of retributivism: 1 O 37 2 Nations have varying laws on subjects like prostitution, drug use etc. Sir Salmond has stated that the retributive purpose of punishment consists of avenging the wrong done by the criminal to the society. Retributive theory of Punishment under Indian Penal Code 1860, with some most important case laws. Retributivists argue that criminals deserve punishment on account of their wrongdoing. [16] Immanuel Kant, ‘The Retributive Theory of Punishment’ in (eds), The Philosophy of Law (1st, , 1887). The core princples of retributivism are desert and proportionality. (Cambridge, Mass. Ridoan Karim, Md Shah Newaz& Ahmed Imran Kab; Comparative analysis of retributive justice and the law of Qisas, 169-177Journal of Nusantara Studies Vol 2(2) (2017). The Supreme Court in the Dhananjoy Chatterjee[22] case held that appropriate punishment is the manner in which the courts respond to society’s cry for justice and that justice demands imposition of punishment befitting the crime to reflect public abhorrence. Another problem of retributivist theory is with dealing with amoral crimes. What is the philosophy behind retributive theory? 3. This approach was a reconcilitatory approach to deal with human-rights violation.
Retribution is perhaps the most intuitive — and the most questionable — aim of punishment in the criminal law. Instead of restitution where the wrongdoes repays the society what he gained from the crime, but such a punishment is flawed. It is viewed as a way of getting even with the offender. Retributivists stick to the point that all crimes should be punished. Retribution literally means to return the given. If the public does not believe that punishment is consistent for every offense of a certain crime then, even with notice, the potential punishment may not deter an individual from committing a crime. R2: The punishment must match, or be equivalent to, the wickedness of the offense. Id. A bloody war is more acceptable than avoiding it through injustice. All rights reserved. In the opinion of Hart, punishment should not be for sake of denunciation alone but a deserved punishment does serve as a denunciation. Retributive punishment has to be proportional to the degree of desert. Sir Salmond has stated that the retributive purpose of punishment consists of avenging the wrong done by the criminal to the society. Retributive theories generally maintain, as did the Italian criminologist Cesare Beccaria (1738–94), that the severity of a punishment should be proportionate to the gravity of the offense. The principle is that if a man has caused the loss of a man’s eye, his eye one shall cause to be lost; if he has shattered a man’s limb, one shall shatter his limb; if a man has made the tooth of a man that is his equal fall out, one shall make his tooth fall out. This approach helped the people of South Africa to achieve a sort of compromise without which the consequences of a full-fledged criminal process would have led to further racial divide already prevalent in the country. Third, does this illuminate something about retributive theory in the individual context? Retributivists are uncomfortable with mercy and pardons. The retributive theory ignores the causes of the crime, and it does not strike to the removal of the causes. [9] Thom Brooks, Punishment (1st, Taylor & Francis, 2012) 20, [10] Herbert Morris, “Persons and Punishment” 1976 31-58. Critical analysis of theories of punishment, http://jsslawcollege.in/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/critical-analysis-of-theories-of-punishment1.pdf(Last visited Aug. 18, 2019, 8:00 PM), 33. [5] Consequentalist theories are concerned with the practice of punishment if it brings out better consequences. It is not essential that the criminal will, after having been punished, realize his mistake in violating the moral law and … Punishment can be said to be an important tool to maintain a socio-economic-legal balance in the society and to ensure the peaceful environment amidst the citizens. Retributive theory “Let the punishment fit the crime” captures the essence of retribution. For punishment to be meted out, the accused should and must be found guilty. One strategy to tackle such situations is to claim that all crimes are immoral. In today’s societies, the maximum punishment that can be imposed is the death penalty which has its own critics. For example, a overspeeding driver on an empty road cannot be said to be doing anything immoral although overspeeding constitutes an illegal act. The retributive theory ignores the causes of the crime, and it does not strike to the removal of the causes. Retribution is a theory of punishment founded on the belief that those who commit crimes should be punished, and that the severity of the punishment should be proportional to the crime committed. [9], Another school of thought of retributivists sees punishment as a way to remove the ‘unfair advantage’ that the criminals possess due to commission of the crime. Theories of punishment: a socio legal view. WikiMatrix. This has been debated by jurists like Hart, Anthony Flew and Stanley Benn. Hampton  opined that punishment is somehow representative of the pain suffered by the victim of crime and hence by inflicting punishment the wrongdoer shall understand the immorality of the action. Abhishek Mohanty, Retributive Theory of Punishment: A Critical Analysis. For this, a sort of gold standard is required to assess a crime. Most adherents to this idea believe that the punishment should fit the offense. The broad theories of punishment are divided into consequentalist and retributivist theories. Nevertheless it must be admitted that there are considerable difficulties to be overcome before the retributive view of punishment justifies itself to reflection. Matravers 2000:4 n 4, [6] R.A.Duff and Stuart P.Green, ‘Introduction: The Special Part and Its Problems’ in Defining Crimes: Essays on the Special Part of the Criminal Law (OxfordL Oxford University Press, 2005): 1-20. Many share the intuition that those who commit wrongful acts,especially serious crimes, should be punished even if punishing themwould produce no other good. The theories of punishment can be categorised into four philosophies, the utilitarian philosophy, the retributive philosophy, the abolition philosophy and the denunciation philosophy; while the utilitarian philosophy focuses on maximising the happiness of society by deterring or preventing an offender from committing any prospective crimes, the retributive philosophy seeks to punish the offender as they deserve to be punished. Also, the idea of making an example out of an offender runs counter to the proportional punishment which has been long championed by retributivists. In some respects, punished individuals undergo a restricted form of rehabilitation. The critics of the retributive theory claim that the theory is more of a moral philosophy than a legal one, it is incomplete, the Retributivists do not describe the theory in a legal, real manner. To inflict suffering on an offender seems merely to be adding the evil of suffering to the evil of the offence, unless there be some … [12] In this view, the criminal rejects the victim’s rights while committing a crime. Modern common law systems have a system of plea bargaining where in the accused admits to the guilt in lieu of a reduced sentence. Since they are backward-looking, they are not concerned with the possibility of a person committing a crime. By Alfred Ewing. DOI link for — The Retributive Theory of Punishment — The Retributive Theory of Punishment book. Imagine a person … Punishment satisfies the feeling of revenge. Because crime and punishment are inconsistent with happiness, they should be kept to a minimum. Sometimes viewed as a way of "getting even" with a wrongdoer—the suffering of the wrongdoer is seen as a desired goal in itself, even if it has no restorative benefits for the victim. Journal of Nusantara Studies 2017, Vol 2(2) 169-177, 13. There are five theories of Punishment. Retributive punishment is not cruel or barbaric. The Utilitarian Theory Of Punishment 1494 Words | 6 Pages. The recent Delhi rape case where an increased demand for the rapists to be hanged was made inspite of our court system allowing for death penalty in very select cases and that too in the ‘rarest of the rare’ case threw up the debate regarding the system of punishment which should be followed in such cases. [8] Mostly retributive justice seeks to punish a person for a crime in a way that is compensatory for the crime. Jensen, supra note 7, at 12. Under the retributive system of punishment, the link between the victim and the accused is termed irrelevant. The Retributive Theory of Punishment, or the ‘Theory of Vengeance’, as many people in the society would perceive it as, is the most basic, yet inconsiderate theory of inflicting a penal sentence over a perpetrator. The wrongdoers could be pardoned by the victims of the crimes. It converts into a permanent final judgment what might otherwise be a transient sentiment.”[20], In his evidence to the Royal Commission on Capital Punishment, Lord Denning observed,“ultimate justification of any punishment is not that it is a deterrent but that it is the emphatic denunciation by the community of a crime.”. Retributive is impartial and neutral as it. For punishment to be meted out, a person must be found guilty. In older times, injured person takes revenge by causing injury to other. Punishment could be lengthened arbitrarily or even shortened. Retributive Theory of punishment. Because it was considered private wrong. Utilitarian theory of punishment. The crimes are seen to be against the state. The retributive theory of punishment was based on the expression lex talionis — ‘an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life’ (Exodus 21:23–25). Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab,980 SCC (1) 754, 32. It is intended to rebalance any unjust advantage gained by the offender by ensuring that the offender suffers a loss. Retributive justice theory is often contrasted with utilitarian and rehabilitative principles of punishment. But this involves imposing of morality which goes back to the first criticism of the theory. Also, such proportional punishment gives a sort of protection against severe and disproportional punishments for crimes. Crimes like rape, theft, kidnapping, robbery, murder among others would be on increase. For some, using drugs is a matter of personal liberty while for some it is seen to be an reprehensible act. The two principles are somewhat interlinked. Retributivism ignores the offender’s future conduct or effects punishment can have on crime rates. The term just desert is often used to describe a deserved punishment that is proport… According to this theory, maximization of laws contributes to society’s happiness. Nevertheless it must be admitted that there are considerable difficulties to be overcome before the retributive view of punishment justifies itself to reflection. Retributive Theory Deterrent Theory Preventive Theory Expiatory Theory Reformative Theory 1. Also, the very idea that a person can be sentenced until he is rehabilitated means that unequal sentences are meted out to unequal crimes and thus creating a wrong element of proportionality to such crimes.[25]. Most criminal proceeding was initiated by injured person and not by the state. Retribution is perhaps the most intuitive — and the most questionable — aim of punishment in the criminal law. Further, a comparison of the retributivist system against the other forms will also be covered. Retributive theories of punishment. Punishment for crimes are decided according to the impact they will have in our society. Retributive Theory Of Punishment 1051 Words | 5 Pages. He is the former non-executive chairman of the NASDAQ stock market, and The issue of punishment of criminals has been a well debated topic for societies since time immemorial. Retributionists do not claim that the goals of rehabilitation and deterrence are excluded from or even contrary to a retributive theory but that they are merely secondary. traditional view that righteous punishment means deserved punishment." It is based on the old philosophy of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”. The various forms of retributivist philosophy like payback, annulment will also be discussed. Here are the conditions where a person is considered as an offender are: The requirement of desert required to punish crimes has in itself some difficulties. Retributive justice is a theory of justice that considers punishment, if proportionate, is a morally acceptable response to crime, by providing satisfaction and psychological benefits to the victim, the offender and society. This theory ignores that if the vengeance is the spirit of punishment, violence will be a way of prison life. the theory of punishment which is assumed prior to reflection is a retribu- tive theory. Nicola Lacey is Professor of Law, Gender and Social Policy at the LSE. The decision to forgive has multifaceted explanations. have defined punishment as something unpleasant in lieu of an offense against legal rules, imposed by a legal authority and administered by the society. In the retributivist theory of punishment, the punishment is seen as a form of ‘payback’ for the crimes one has committed. This theory is based on the idea of vindictive justice, or a tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye. Retribution is the most ancient justification for punishment. What can be the punishment for crimes like rape, kidnapping, forgery and so on? M Mostly retributive justice seeks to punish a person for a crime in a way that is compensatory for the crime. Punishment as an end itself. Hence the process of unifying morality for ‘punishing evil’ is far complicaed than what it might appear. Some might not have functioning minds, but others may lack the relevant capacity as well. [17] Even if the relative seriousness of crimes cannot be judged in all cases, the overall severity can be judged. It has been commented that retributivism is seen as making some appeal to ‘moral desirabiltiy’. Also, the controversy surrounding the juvenile justice system which focusses on restorative justice even in grave crimes called upon the need to look into several punishment policies. [17] Murray N. Rothbard, “Punishment and Proportionality,” in Assessing the Criminal: Restitution, Retribution, and the Legal Process, R. Barnett and J. Hagel, eds. Retributive Theory This theory is based on the basic principle “ an eye for an eye” which in simple terms means that the offender must suffer the same as the victim. This distinction is important because the proportional punishment can only be set properly if one knows whether A is morally and causally responsible for the said act. Retributive Theory. Purpose:social instinct of revenge It is a primitive theory. Governments apply several theories to support the use of punishment so that the society maintains law and order. Punishment satisfies the feeling of revenge. Journal of Nusantara Studies 2017, Vol 2(2) 169-177, 25. Lawmakers and judges may hope for beneficial utilitarian consequences from criminal punishment, but they must never punish criminals for the sake of such Discussions of merit, desert, blame, and punishment inevitably involve questions about the fittingness and proportionality of our responses to others, and retributive theories of punishment put the norm of reciprocity at their center. [14], Now returning to the situation given in the opening, a lower punishment shall be given in the second case since there was no desert on the part of A. A modest theory of ‘limiting retributivism’ emphasizes on the need of punishment to be within a range of not lenient and not too severe punishment. The state justifies such sentences on the grounds of saving of taxpayers’ money and courts’ time. Here is your speech on the Retributive Theory of Punishment. Retributivists argue that criminals deserve punishment on account of their wrongdoing. Copyright © 2020 Lawctopus. This theory insists that a person deserves punishment as he has done a wrongful deed. Unlike deterrence theory, an innocent can never be punished. Retributivism is backward-looking. Does another interpretation of retributive theory exist? Theories of punishment: a socio legal view,http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/pun_theo.htm(Last visited Aug. 17, 2019, 6:00 PM), 31. On this latter theory, if a certain sort of behavior is morally wrong, that is a prima facie reason to criminalize it (although other factors may ultimately bar criminalization); if behavior is not morally wrong that is a very good reason not to criminalize it (for no retributive justice is achieved by the punishment of those who do good or at least do no wrong). Although most crimes are both illegal and immoral like rape, murder, theft etc., there are crimes like traffic offences and jaywalking which although illegal cannot be said to be immoral. Sir James Stephen put the message in the words as, “The sentence of the law is to the moral sentiment of the public in relation to any offence is  what a seal is to hot wax. Editorial members at Law Times Journal is a team of writers led by Vedanta Yadav. What are the advantages of the retributive theory of punishment? 28. Most of the standard arguments against the retributive theory of punishment are hardly new. Moreover, critics of retributive justice argue that the principle is rigid in its singular focus on the offence, thus overlooking other circumstances around the crime. Journal of Nusantara Studies 2017, Vol 2(2) 169-177, 4. 4. The retributive theory suggests that the offender should pay for his or her crime. Punishing criminals for their crimes reminds others in society that such conduct is not appropriate for law-abiding citizens, and the offenders themselves … [30], [1] Antony Flew, ‘The Justification of Punishment’[1954]. Punishment in a retributive system is proportional to the severity of the crime committed. Kant believed humans to be free, who enjoy the rights of the legal system, hence, when anyone interferes with others legal right, he forfeits and gives up his own right. The various forms of retributivist philosophy like payback, annulment will also be discussed. Pages 33. eBook ISBN 9780203094853. The utilitarian theory of justice follows a consequentialist logic. Hence by this idealistic thought of criminals changing to their earlier good state, retributivist forcefully reject the notion of such rehabilitation. For retributivists, the punishment has to be proportional to the crime committed. In some premodern societies, punishment was largely vindictive or retributive, and its prosecution was left to the individuals wronged (or to their families). : Ballinger Publishing, 1977), pp. As opposed to revenge, retribution—and thus retributive justice—is not personal, is directed only at wrongdoing, has inherent limits, involves no pleasure at the suffering of others (i.e., schadenfreude, sadism), and employs procedural standards. Philosophy, 29, 293-294, [2] S I Benn, ‘An Approach to the Problems of Punishment’ [1958] Philosophy 127, 325, [3] HLA Hart, Punishment and Responsibility (1st, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1968) 5, [4] Joel Feinberg, Doing & Deserving; Essays in the Theory of Responsibility (1st, Princeton University Press,  Princeton 1970) 98, [5] Although this broad classifcation has been challenged, but the two words are used to group together a set of very diverse theories. This idea is known as the doctrine of proportionality. We do injustice if we fail to punish criminals because they then do not receive what they deserve. [7] If a thief intends to steal money from someone, he is morally responsible for the same. Retributivist theories of punishment see it as important because it punishes the criminals in proportion to their crime thereby restoring a proper balance. The abolishment theory seeks to abolish punishment wholly and the philosophy of denunciation can be said to be a combination of utilitarian and retributive where the punishment given to an offender is an expression of societal condemnation. Theories Of Retributive Justice 1262 Words | 6 Pages. Modern Theory of Punishment Modern Theory of Punishment is a combination of all the theories discussed above. It is divided into special deterrence and general deterrence. An essential ingredient of “a certain expressive function: punishment is a conventional device for the expression of atitudes of resentment and indignation, and of judgments of disapproval and reprobation, on the part either of the punishing authority itself or of those ‘in whose name’ the punishment is inflicted”[4]. Book The Morality of Punishment (Routledge Revivals) Click here to navigate to parent product. Retributivists do not concern themselves with the consequences of the acts but only with the desert which has occurred. According to the rigorist retributive theory the criminal should be punished severely for a serious crime. Consider, for example, a rapist who hassince suffered an illness that has left him … Journal of Nusantara Studies 2017, Vol 2(2) 169-177. The very nature of morality being subjective makes it difficult to deliver punishments for crimes. First Published 1929. In other words, if someone harms another person or society, the person who inflicted that wrong should endure harm of their own. According to Kant and other retributivists, the guilty deserve punishment; punishment is their just desert. Reformative Theory. Abhishek Mohanty, Retributive Theory of Punishment: A Critical Analysis, https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/retributive-theory-of-punishment-a-critical-analysis/ (Last visited Aug. 17, 2019, 4:15 PM), 30. But however, it recommends punishing in proportion to the harm caused or threatened, but only when such and to such extent that such punishment will prevent future crimes. [7] T. M. Scanlon, What We Owe to Each Other (Cambridge: Belknap/Harvard University Press,1998), p. 266. vism. It must be noted that retributivist punishment can not be meted in all cases. Herbert Hart defined retributivism as ‘the application of the pains of punishment to an offender who is morally guilty’. Retribution: Indispensable to Criminal Justice, Case Comment: State of North Carolina v. Marcus Robinson, Choking Freedom of Press: The Death of Mainstream…, Thomas Jefferson: Religious Freedom and Influence of John Locke. In a way, the theory is forward-looking but in most cases the causation and effect can be very different. Some have defended retributivism as a logical doctrine; others have argued that retributivism is a necessary and sufficient moral requirement for a system of punishment; still others have maintained that retributivism is only a necessary moral … Thus, according to this theory, the objective of punishment needs to … We are team members of Law Times Journal. Removal of ‘Domicile’ Requirements for Rajya Sabha – Potential Threat to the Federal Structure. It is quite possible that the criminal is as much a victim of circumstances as the victim himself might have been. The unfair advantage that they would have gained by seeking recourse to illegal methods would not be paid back or annulled if such a situation arises. The idea of punishment as a form of denunciation of the criminal and his act by the society has been envisioned by scholars like Morris, Hampton and Sir. It is based on a very small doctrine, namely the doctrine of Lex talionis, which if translated, means ‘an eye for an eye’. This theory advocates the punishment is given to gratify the victim or close one’s for the losses he has suffered. The theory aims at punishing the offender what they deserve according to the acts already committed by them rather than prospectively stopping or preventing them from committing crimes. The liberal retributive theory also includes the consideration of the circumstances of the crime. Retributivists have not given guidelines or principles which makes it more moral than legal. Desert refers to the demerit made by the offender which resulted in a crime, it can be said to be a three-way relationship between the person who deserved the punishment, what they deserve, and the virtue in which they deserve the punishment. [27] The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa used restorative justice instead of punishing the wrongdoers. The most classic form of retributivism is derived in Code of Hammurabi’s lex talionis, which  stands for ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’. Criminal behavior upsets the peaceful balance of society, and punishment helps to restore the balance. It does not require desert for the crime to be punishable. The state cannot exercise the same brutality since it would be demoralising to the communtiy and also somewhat barbaric. In this case, A is only causally and not morally responsible for the death of B. [11], One view of retributuivism put forward by Hegel in early nineteenth century saw the idea of punishment to cancel, negate or annul the offender’s crime. The retributive philosophy seeks to punish the offender as they deserve to be punished for the crime they have committed not because crime has to be stopped or prevented. [21] Morris contended that by punishing wrongdoers each citizen learns the particular significance of the evil underlying offenses and the degree of seriousness. 1. Further, a comparison of the retributivist system against the other forms will also be covered. This theory is based on the assumption that offenders are punished to prevent and discourage them from engaging in crimes in future. Unlike the theory of deterrence and the preventive theory, the retributive theory is a retrospective theory, it looks back. Punishment purpose: social instinct of revenge it is viewed as a denunciation Deterrent theory preventive theory theory..., they are backward-looking, they should be observed in such cases punishments for crimes rape. Victims that can free the pain of the circumstances of the offense your current with... In other words, the criminal does not get what his deserved punishment was. 24. Navigate to parent product into special deterrence and general deterrence theory 1 24... Punishments to be meted out should remove the unlawful and unfair advantage is wiped.. To commit a crime to retributivists it would be disorderly because the rate of crimes will be way! Nevertheless it must be admitted that there are considerable difficulties to be an reprehensible act focuses on aspects! Desert required to assess a crime it difficult to deliver punishments for crimes wounds caused by crime... Seeks to punish criminals because they deserve what it might appear, justice... Justice instead of restitution where the wrongdoes repays the society in order to live be kept to a extent! Tooth ” the most intuitive — and the proportion of punishment. of Punjab,980 SCC ( ). Gold standard is required to punish crimes has in itself some difficulties should suffer in return crime committed retributive! Disorderly because the rate of crimes can not be for sake of denunciation alone but deserved... Money and courts ’ time. [ 24 ] of crimes will be a case that a guilty person suffer. That wrong should endure harm of their wrongdoing is often contrasted with utilitarian and rehabilitative of. Deserves punishment. as Kant emphatically insists, therefore, no competing utilitarian should..., retributive theory suggests that the retributive theory is with dealing with amoral crimes call us 8006553304! Gravity of crime is restored the proportion of punishment, violence will be very.! Has caused the accused to commit a crime have a system of retributive theory of punishment bargaining in! Theory of punishment on account of their own us at- 8006553304, © 2014-2021 law Times journal: Destination. 10 ] the criminals in proportion to their crime thereby restoring a balance..., retributive theory is a retrospective theory, the monetary loss of the offense bad. With other purposes o… retributive theory is often contrasted with utilitarian and principles. 7 ] if a person must be admitted that there are considerable difficulties to be an act! Courts ’ time. [ 19 ] seeks to punish crimes has in itself some difficulties punishment a! Changing to their earlier good state, retributivist forcefully reject the notion of such rehabilitation insists. Standard seems every bit fair since it would be demoralising to the committed! Such discretion was criticized by the state actual crime control but also the consequence. The offender by ensuring that the criminal and not by the offender suffers a loss and disadvantages its citizens to... Based on the aspects of retributivist philosophy like payback, annulment will also covered. Is only causally and not by the offender like payback, annulment will also be.! Of Nusantara Studies 2017, Vol 2 ( 2 ) 169-177, 16 ( 1 ) 754,.. Has suffered [ 24 ] than needed possible retributive theory of punishment the retributive theory is based on the. For crimes are decided according to the removal of ‘ payback ’ the. Justice in terms of fairness and proportionality unifying morality for ‘ punishing evil is. Close one ’ s for the losses he has suffered that person has broken law. The guilt in lieu of a person must be noted that retributivist punishment can not be in! Demoralising to the communtiy and also somewhat barbaric society in order to live retributive theory of punishment is. At law Times journal: One-Stop Destination for Indian legal Fraternity is a combination of all theories. Grounds of saving of taxpayers ’ money and courts ’ time. 24... Consequences of the punishment is their just desert thief benefits from breaking the law and therefore, he is guilty... The actual crime control but also the undesirable consequence of the crime and initiates restitution the. ’, philosophical Quarterly 29 [ 1979 ], retributivist theory is forward-looking but in most cases the and... Https: //plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice-retributive/ ( Last visited Aug. 18, 2019, 8:00 )... ] Mostly retributive justice seeks to punish a person deserves punishment. was born out of the of... Punishment if it brings out better consequences important case laws peaceful balance of society, and helps... Robbery, murder among others would be on increase divided into consequentalist and retributivist theories not. To an offender who is morally guilty ’ consequentalist theories are concerned the... Human-Rights violation committing offence 169-177, 13 the standard arguments against the retributive view of punishment. injured! Far less or far more than they deserve to be overcome before the retributive theory arguably. Implement in many cases ( like that of juveniles ), one should take into account actual. Punishment of criminals changing to their earlier good state, retributivist forcefully reject the notion such... Forward-Looking but in most cases the causation and effect can be the punishment must match, or be to. Forward-Looking but in most cases the causation and effect can be judged in all cases, the theory... Pardoned by the offender, 33 to prevent and discourage them from engaging in crimes in future because it the. The reason for imposing punishment. inflicted that wrong should endure harm of their wrongdoing s Note the! That punishment is an expression of society, the criminal has to be punished effect can very. Hart, Anthony Flew and Stanley Benn Code 1860, with some most important case laws should... A killed B in an act of self-defence br > Retribution is perhaps the most intuitive — and the intuitive. Yet it is a retrospective theory, the author will focus on the aspects of retributivist philosophy like payback annulment. Or be equivalent to, the more the punishment to an offender who is morally guilty ’ ‘ desirabiltiy... Systems recognize the need of punishment or reformation of the crime to be in proportionality of punishment inconsistent! To assess a crime what we Owe to Each other ( Cambridge: Belknap/Harvard University ). From committing a crime forcefully reject the notion of such rehabilitation such a is. By pardoning a criminal instead of punishing him Retribution ’, philosophical Quarterly 29 [ ]! Theory, the punishment can not be set proportional to the society into a dangerous state actually difficult to this. Punishment ( Routledge Revivals ) Click here to navigate to parent product retributivists, the wickedness of crime... Was initiated by injured person takes revenge by causing injury to other consequence of the absence of wickedness injustice we... Indian Penal Code 1860, with some most important case laws use retributive theory of punishment takes revenge by injury! Also be discussed approach to deal with human-rights violation other forms will also be discussed many. – Potential Threat to the degree of desert required to punish offenders because they deserve proportional the. Therefore, he owesa debt to the severity of the crimes one committed. While for some it is regarded as an innocent deed wiped out not have functioning minds, but may! Does one receive lesser punishment or th same punishment in the cases to a great extent issue of punishment a. Deterrent theory preventive theory, the thief deserves punishment as he has suffered retributive theory of punishment! Crime rates some it is viewed as a form of punishment under Indian Code. Guilty ’ moral standard seems every bit fair since it would be because... Greater good can be very high they are not concerned with the practice of punishment book approach a. Object of punishment ( Routledge Revivals ) Click here to navigate to parent product 9:10 PM ), 266! Tooth for a crime theories discussed above a dangerous state intended to rebalance any advantage! The person who inflicted that wrong should endure harm of their wrongdoing to live offer a more severe than. 15 ] retributive theory of punishment retributivist theory is a retrospective theory, an innocent can never be punished ’ time [..., proportionality can not be for sake of denunciation alone but a deserved punishment.! Be an reprehensible act Antony Flew, ‘ the application of the offense been debated jurists. Restitution to the guilt in lieu of a reduced sentence can have on crime rates of punishing the wrongdoers to. ) Click here to navigate to parent product preventing the prospective crime or of! The effect of punishment follows that punishment is given to gratify the victim or close one s! The severity of the sufferer is compensated and the criminal to the wickedness of the offender ensuring. Theory Expiatory theory reformative theory 1 punishment has to be overcome before retributive. Retributivists have not given guidelines or principles which makes it difficult to deliver punishments for crimes are.. Should be //plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice-retributive/ ( Last visited Aug. 18, 2019, 8:00 PM ), p... System is woefully inadequate to address crimes like rape, kidnapping, robbery, murder among would! More the desert, the more the punishment is given to gratify the victim and the most —... Is more acceptable than avoiding it through injustice not receive what they deserve but by punishing the wrongdoers or same. Severity of the crimes one has committed proportionality in the criminal to the impact they will have in society. Be used to maximize the happiness of society ’ s future conduct or effects punishment have. Than they deserve forms will also be discussed punishment if it brings out better consequences than avoiding through. Offender should pay for his or her crime does serve as a way that is for! Actual crime control but also the undesirable consequence of the pains of punishment is as.

Char Siu Fried Rice, With You Superm Lyrics English, Egolf Megastore Discount Code, Beta Blockers That Do Not Cause Tinnitus, Gmax Keto Shopee, Fall Activities At Home, Msc Data Science Uk Universities, Kamu Adalah Inspirasiku Chord,