Search

Objective: Spiteful behaviors are those aimed at inflicting harm on another person while also incurring a cost to the self. Although spite sometimes reflects destructive and socially undesirable behaviors including aggression, the current work sought to examine a potentially socially beneficial aspect of spite: engagement in costly punishment for selfish behavior. Method: Four studies used a costly third‐party punishment task and measured individual differences in spite, narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and motivations for engaging in punishment. Results: Trait spite was positively associated with costly punishment of selfish behavior. That association was independent of other dark personality traits (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy) and was statistically mediated by a desire for retribution. One of the studies also provided evidence that trait spite was associated with costly punishment of even generous behavior; however, rather than a desire for retribution, that association was mediated by a desire to threaten the person being punished. Conclusion: Punishing selfishness and other forms of wrongdoing plays an essential role in cooperative group living. The current work provides new insight into the role spiteful motivations might play in this crucial social behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Danaher (2016) has argued that increasing robotization can lead to retribution gaps: Situations in which the normative fact that nobody can be justly held responsible for a harmful outcome stands in conflict with our retributivist moral dispositions. In this paper, we report a cross-cultural empirical study based on Sparrow’s (2007) famous example of an autonomous weapon system committing a war crime, which was conducted with participants from the US, Japan and Germany. We find that (1) people manifest a considerable willingness to hold autonomous systems morally responsible, (2) partially exculpate human agents when interacting with such systems, and that more generally (3) the possibility of normative responsibility gaps is indeed at odds with people’s pronounced retributivist inclinations. We discuss what these results mean for potential implications of the retribution gap and other positions in the responsibility gap literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ghana's National Reconciliation Commission (NRC) was established under the administration of President John Agyekum Kufuor (2000–2008) to provide a forum for victims and perpetrators of past human rights violations to testify about their experiences. Despite increasing scholarly interest in the Commission's work, a set of reparations that the government implemented as a preamble to the hearings remains understudied. Drawing on multi-archival sources, this article examines them, teasing out their social and cultural significance. Further, this article examines a set of witness protection provisions that the government carved out to encourage witnesses to testify, showing their impact on witnesses. This article concludes with an analysis of some coup perpetrators' perceptions of their own blamelessness, arguing that such sentiments tend to provide the moorings for their proclivity to contest impunity, which is a challenge that truth commissions tend to face, requiring innovative approaches to public truth-telling exercises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aims to analyze how two different types of investments (local domestic and foreign direct investments at the provincial level) and revenues (booked by the provincial governments, general allocation funds, special allocation funds, local taxes, and retribution) affect investment loan decisions by local government banks in Indonesia. The study uses panel data applying ordinary least squares and multiple linear regression. Thus, 144 data were sampled from 2013 to 2021 from 16 local government banks out of Java Island in 21 provinces in Indonesia. The study found that local domestic investment at the provincial level affects investment loan decisions by local government banks. In contrast, foreign direct investment did not affect lending decisions, indicating that local domestic investment contributes to the real local economy at the provincial level. Different results were found in provincial revenues in the form of general and special allocation funds, which negatively affected loan investment decisions, possibly due to provincial revenues utilized to cover the financial deficit and capital expenditure spent chiefly on imported goods. Additionally, local taxes at the provincial level also negatively affect investment loan decisions, possibly due to fluctuations in local tax collection during COVID-19. However, the study found that local retribution contributes to predicting loan investment decisions, suggesting revenue collection by the governments considering local economic conditions. The study findings suggest that provincial governments should direct investments that can impact the local economy and spend their revenues on goods and services that can drive local economic growth. AcknowledgmentThe investment loan made by local government banks, which is associated with local investment and revenue, is part of a research grant project from the Economics and Business Faculty of Hasanuddin University. This project is a result of collaboration with national and international researchers. In carrying out this research, some inputs from people working in local government banks, financial service authorities, and provincial and regency governments are addressed.Thanks to Ahmadi Usman for secondary data and Syahidah Ulhaq for some application programs enabling mapping literature, as well as Israa Natiq Jabar for supervising the result and applied some inputs in the section of research method.

The solution of a crime is still oriented towards retribution, where revenge on the perpetrator is the ultimate goal for his actions. There is no doubt in the course of time that renewables, such as restorative justice and inequality. Criminal justice systems in Britain and other countries that practice the common law model USES the "ensure system." Consistent with the characteristics of the imperfect system, the prosecuting system model in the United States was essentially a negotiation between the prosecutor and the accused or defenders. "Negotiation of the least resistance" is essentially a negotiation between the prosecutor and his accused or defender. The primary purpose of this negotiation is to accelerate the penal proceedings, and it must be based on "habitual" for the accused to acknowledge his guilt and the willingness of the public prosecutor to make the threat of the desired punishment for him or his defences, as well as on the involvement of the judge as a lawyer.

Catherine Chanter’s The Well depicts a water-scarce Britain where the fertile farm of the Ardingly couple becomes a site of exploitation by a spiritual community called the Sisters of the Rose. By setting her novel on a farm named The Well, Chanter constructs a spatial map that not only exposes the cult’s manipulative power but also serves as a symbolic microcosm of their capitalist exploitation, highlighting the rise of a phenomenon I term “neo-spiritual consumerism.” Drawing on Fredric Jameson’s concept of “late capitalism” (1991) and his theory of “cognitive mapping” (1992), this study examines how Chanter uses The Well as a spatial narrative instrument to re-mythologize religious narratives as a form of cultural consumption. Through a literary analysis of Chanter’s novel, the study examines her ironic use of religious symbols to delve into the social, psychological, and political implications of associating environmental crises with divine retribution, deflecting attention from the socio-economic systems perpetuating environmental degradation. Chanter’s subversive use of religious symbolism highlights how capitalist frameworks exacerbate ecological vulnerabilities. This research prompts critical assessment of modern spiritual movements and emphasizes capitalism’s pervasive influence in sacred domains, compelling readers to consider alternative worldviews and ethical frameworks for navigating a changing world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Note explores the impact of lengthy prison sentences on rehabilitation and the need for second chances. While incarceration serves purposes such as retribution and incapacitation, it fails to promote rehabilitation and deterrence. Oregon should do more in providing opportunities for early release and rehabilitation for individuals serving lengthy sentences. The Note features interviews with incarcerated individuals who share their thoughts and experiences. Overall, this Note sheds light on the importance of second chances and on the need for reform in the criminal justice system to ensure that prisoners are not denied the chance to lead productive and fulfilling lives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Unique among marginalized groups, American Indians are both citizens of the United States and citizens of sovereign tribal nations, as recognized (but not granted) by federal Indian law. However, even as tribal nations exert increasing economic and political power, criminal legal outcomes for tribal members—who interface with an array of tribal, local, state, and federal law enforcement and justice systems—remain detrimental or are worsened. These outcomes also include increased contact with state courts and the delegitimization of tribal courts, which uniquely implicate the civil justice context. We use the settler colonial framework to investigate how tools of state criminal law, such as heavy policing and disparate punishment, may impact the civil justice needs of Indigenous people, and more broadly, the very sovereignty these policies aim to protect. Drawing on interviews and observations in tribal and county-level courts, we examine the experiences of American Indians and other stakeholders in Indian country. We identify how enforcement practices, surveillance of space, and the complexities of layered policing within a "jurisdictional maze" contribute to the deterioration of tribal sovereignty. We contextualize our findings by considering the historical, cultural, and socio-economic factors that influence the experiences of American Indians in the criminal justice system, and by examining the civil justice implications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How to conceptualize judicial corruption? and which are the actors, dynamics, and exchanges under which this phenomenon operates? are the two research questions this article answers. Based on an interdisciplinary discussion, I define judicial corruption as any act from judges, prosecutors, or officials who, by action or omission, alter the impartial direction or content of a judicial decision in exchange for money, goods, or any other type of benefit. Although the fundamental features of the concept are maintained in any event of judicial corruption, I propose the number of actors, the nature of the interactions and the intensity of the retributions vary depending on the place that the court occupies within the pyramid of the Judiciary Branch. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines how retributive motives—the desire to punish for the purpose of inflicting harm in the absence of future benefits—shape third‐party punishment behavior across intergroup contexts. Six‐ to nine‐year‐olds (N = 151, Mage = 8.00, SDage = 1.15; 54% White, 18% mixed ethnicities, 17% Asian American; 46% female; from the USA) could punish ingroup, outgroup, or non‐group transgressors by removing positive resources and allocating negative ones. Both punishments were described as retributive, yet allocating negative resources was perceived as more retributive than removing positive ones. We predicted that children would punish outgroups more so than ingroups and that this effect would be especially pronounced when punishment is perceived as particularly retributive. The results did not align with this prediction; instead, children similarly punished all agents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prison sentences that exceed the natural lifespan present a puzzle because they have no more power to deter or incapacitate than a single life sentence. In three survey experiments, we tested the extent to which participants support these longer-than-life sentences under different decision contexts. In Experiment 1, 130 undergraduates made hypothetical prison sentence-length recommendations for a serious criminal offender, warranting two sentences to be served either concurrently or consecutively. Using a nationally representative sample (N = 182) and an undergraduate pilot sample (N = 260), participants in Experiments 2 and 3 voted on a hypothetical ballot measure to either allow or prohibit the use of consecutive life sentences. Results from all experiments revealed that, compared to concurrent life sentences participants supported the use of consecutive life sentences for serious offenders. In addition, they adjusted these posthumous years in response to mitigating factors in a manner that was indistinguishable from ordinary sentences (Experiment 1), and their support for consecutive life sentencing policies persisted, regardless of the default choice and whether the policy was costly to implement (Experiments 2 and 3). These judgment patterns were most consistent with retributive punishment heuristics and have implications for sentencing policy and for theories of punishment behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For the last half-century, law students have been required to take a criminal law course that ostensibly trains them to think critically about the justifications for criminal punishment. The same students have then gone on to serve as central actors in a system of mass incarceration that millions of Americans today view as How did this happen ? A number of legal scholars, notably including Alice Ristroph in her 2020 Article "The Curriculum of the Carceral State," have argued that the traditional criminal law curriculum has played a role in creating and reproducing the practices of mass incarceration. This Article agrees, and focuses on two concrete critiques, alongside two corresponding curricular reforms. First, criminal law courses routinely introduce the field in part by discussing a series of theoretical "justifications of punishment" such as retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation. These discussions often provide students with tools for arguing in favor of punishment, and in particular incarceration, without providing relevant empirical evidence that shows the limits of the theoretical justifications. Students are invited to focus on the theoretical benefits of incarceration without being adequately exposed to the negative effects of incarceration as it is actually practiced in the United States today. The tradition of introducing criminal law through the discussion of theoretical justifications for punishment should be abandoned. Instead, this Article proposes beginning the criminal law course with an empirically informed discussion that frames criminal law as one response among many to the social problem of public Second, the bulk of most criminal law casebooks consists of excerpts from judicial opinions. These excerpts tend to describe harmful acts carried out by defendants without providing adequate context for thinking seriously about justice. The excerpts send the message that criminal harms result from isolated, individual choices by bad people, rather than being conditioned by situational and other factors, including policy choices by the state. This Article proposes replacing criminal law case excerpts with a method of instruction based on case studies, similar to the case study method used in many professional schools. Case studies could provide students with more context for understanding criminal harms, and in particular could better equip future prosecutors to serve as "problem-solver[s] responsible for considering [the] broad goals of the criminal justice system, " as the ABA Criminal Justice Standards demand. In the coming years, the arrival of the NextGen bar exam will offer an occasion to reconsider how criminal law is taught in the United States. Rather than continuing to train students in ways of thinking that facilitate mass incarceration, the curriculum should be changed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I assess a justification for the granting of transitional amnesties conditional, at the minimum, upon full disclosure of wrongdoing by perpetrators. According to this rationale, such amnesties are morally legitimate because they foster restorative justice. I distinguish between two conceptions of restorative justice that I call the punishment-deprioritizing and punishment-prescribing conceptions. I argue that while conditional amnesties granted to perpetrators of minor offences conditional upon full disclosure, verbal apology and reparations could promote restorative justice well enough to justify them in the eyes of adherents of the punishment-deprioritizing conception, conditional amnesties in favour of perpetrators of serious human rights abuses, because they are unlikely ever to be conditional upon perpetrators' carrying out burdensome reparations, are likely to promote restorative justice on the punishment-deprioritizing conception only to a limited extent and not enough to justify them from the standpoint of adherents to this conception. Conditional amnesties, I contend, cannot ever promote restorative justice on the punishment-prescribing conception because it holds that punishment is indispensable for the achievement of the aims of restorative justice and amnesties exempt perpetrators from criminal punishment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The book of Job can only be understood against the background of the so-called doctrine of retribution: “he who does good, meets good”, and “evil harms”. This doctrine sought not only to encourage doing good and leaving evil, but also served as an explanatory mechanism: good things are due to good actions, while bad consequences must have been caused by bad actions. Old Testament authors often invoked this doctrine in an attempt to explain the dire situations Israel found itself in throughout history. Even if, in many cases, the notion of retri- bution seems to be a useful concept to explain calamity and suffering, when evil strikes good people, one hits its limit. Not surprisingly, several Bible texts are critical of the doctrine of retribution and the supposed idea of justice on which it is based. The book of Job is perhaps the best example of this.

Background. The phenomenon of revenge has been widely studied in psychology since the beginning of the 20th century. Acts of revenge are considered in psychoanalysis, social, family, criminal, legal and other areas of psychology. Nowadays behaviour based on the motive of revenge is found in virtual environment. There is an ambivalent attitude towards revenge. On the one hand, a person who does not get revenge seems weak. On the other hand, seeking for revenge can be perceived as an unconstructive way of behaving. Despite the prevalence of revenge, there is no generally accepted opinion in psychological science regarding the definition of revenge. Objectives. The aim of this work is to analyze various ideas about revenge and to highlight the components of vengeful behaviour, based on which the form of reciprocal aggression can be classified as revenge. The problem of distinguishing between the concepts of “revenge”, “retribution”, “resentment” and “punishment” is considered. Results. Revenge has a significant difference from other forms of aggressive behaviour. Revenge is always a reaction to previous aggression. The motivational component includes two aspects: the desire to take revenge (revenge seeking) and the desire to maintain a comfortable level of self-esteem. Society has a dual function in relation to revenge: as an initial motive influencing the choice of response to resentment, and as a deterrent factor. The willingness to forgive is determined by moral development, a number of personal characteristics and changes in the motivational sphere. Conclusions. In psychological science, the phenomenon of revenge is subjected to a thorough theoretical analysis. Due to the fact that revenge is an intrapersonal phenomenon, the development of methodological tools, including psychodiagnostic techniques, is necessary for the development of revenge research.

The psychological literature indicates that the public may expect child protection practitioners to respond punitively toward parents who maltreat children. This conflicts with the intention of child protection, who are not responsible for punishing those who have harmed children. Instead, many systems aim to practice under restorative principles, which are collaborative and inclusive of children and families. In this review, we consider the theoretical and practical implications of a tension between a public expectation of retribution and the non-retributive foundation of child protection, including the potential impact on practitioners’ wellbeing and their ability to implement non-retributive practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The essay focuses on the analysis of the philosophy of criminal law according to Francesco D'Agostino, with special attention to the argumentative system and the reflections offered by the book La sanzione nell'esperienza giuridica. After the introduction, the first paragraph is dedicated to discussing the retributive purpose of punishment, distinguishing compensation from revenge; the next section deals with detention and alternative penalties to imprisonment, reviewing their historical evolution and mentioning the most recent advances in the field; the following paragraph refers to the link between guilt, responsibility, and freedom, while the last one addresses the topic of the death penalty, approached through the analysis of a notable text by Leonardo Sciascia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I argue that to remove all backward-looking grounds and justification from the practice, as some theorists recommend, is to remove (not revise) moral responsibility. The most paradigmatic cases of moral responsibility must feature desert and retributive elements. So, moral responsibility must be (at least partially) backward-looking. When we hold people responsible, one reason we do so is that we believe that they deserve punishment or reward simply in virtue of the action for which we hold them responsible. None of this rebuts responsibility skepticism. For instance, forward-looking theories might adopt Myisha Cherry's proposal: anger as love without blameworthiness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Cuestiones Teológicas is the property of Cuestiones Teologicas and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Al-Tamaddun is the property of University of Malaya, Department of Islamic History & Civilization and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The fact that most societies across the globe agree that breaking the law will have repercussions is an indisputable fact. However, opinions diverge when it comes to determining the proper punishment, particularly for heinous crimes like murder. The capital punishment, also referred to as capital punishment or execution, is one of these variations that have frequently spurred debates and arguments among its supporters and opponents. For heinous crimes, many countries are presently searching for alternatives to the death penalty, like life in prison. The paper makes an effort to analyze the idea of the capital punishment from Kant's perspective. The paper uses a analytical method to look at Kant's ideas about retribution and his opinions on the death penalty, both of which are acknowledged ethical schools. Given that Kant had a significant influence on Western philosophy, discussed the death penalty extensively, and his theories form the basis of most modern arguments, the researcher focused on his thoughts. We also explore the relevance of Kant's philosophy of the capital punishment penalty in contemporary Nigeria. In conclusion, it will provide an individual's viewpoint on the subject and go over how to draw conclusions that will help us make better decisions about the use of the capital punishment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What allows autocratic political elites to coordinate with each other and check dictators? Earlier work assumes that elite coordination becomes easier as dictators share more power. I argue that, even when power-sharing is pervasive, a lack of cohesiveness can rob regime members of their influence over dictators. Conflicting interests can leave seemingly powerful elites unable to agree on when or how to challenge the dictator. I develop a measure of elite collective action based on this framework. It documents not only how much power elites have, but also the obstacles they would need to resolve to work together. In doing so, it better describes the relationship between autocrats and their ruling coalition, and its added nuance allows it to recover findings that current measures miss. By paying closer attention to the cohesion of autocratic elites, this paper explains why some dictators can rule tyrannically without retribution, and why weaker elites can still constrain powerful autocrats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research dealt with the investigation of a manuscript written by Sheikh Yassin Al-Biqaa’i regarding whether the son had inherited the right of retaliation from his father, or was he one of his heirs, so was his responsibility proven? So? In the introduction to the re-search, I showed that the opinions of the majority of jurists are that the father does not suffice his son, and that the right of the son in retaliation is not established on his father if he inherited from him or was from his family. I inherited it, which is what the author concluded in his letter. This thesis was investigated in two copies, and the research is divided into two parts, the first part is an introduction to the author and a study of the manuscript, a jurisprudential study of the research topic, and the second part is an investigation of the research topic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Professional athletes often change teams throughout the course of their careers. A common belief in sport is that players desire to have exceptionally better performances against teams that they have previously played for. The purpose of the current study was to investigate if there is support for the belief that athletes compete better against teams they have previously played for. We compared 229 major league baseball pitchers' career performance statistics to performance statistics against teams they have previously played for using paired sample t-tests. Our analysis of major league baseball pitchers indicated that they played significantly better against former teams as indicated by nine common pitcher performance metrics: Earned run average, opponents' batting average, walks plus hits per inning, opponents' on-base percentage, opponents' slugging average, opponents' on-base percentage plus slugging, strike-outs per nine innings pitched, walks per nine innings pitched, and hits per nine innings pitched. Evidence suggests that baseball pitchers perform better against teams they have previously played for compared against teams with no prior affiliation. Advanced sports analytics could help demonstrate psychological effects in sport. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper attempts to establish that capital punishment is not rational and cannot be rationalized without suicidally destroying the very ground on which lawful and rational punishment bases itself. It argues that in capital punishment, just as in any lawful punishment, the criminal is both held (humanly) rational and therefore culpable. But, unlike other forms of punishment, in capital punishment, the condemned is at the same time, held as irrational and irredeemable, beyond reform, and therein outside the ambit of rationality and humanity. In this sense a fundamental aporia is reached in rationalizing capital punishment because of the contradiction between the basis of punishment (the human as rational) and its operational logic (the condemned person as beyond reform therein irrational). Expressed another way, the judge proclaims a form of infallibility in their reasoning where the incorrigibility of the judgment is horrifically demonstrated and ironically reflected (and projected) in the incorrigibility of the condemned. This broad argument is pursued in two parts; one part interprets canonical texts such as Hobbes, Hegel and Foucault, while the second part interprets the Supreme Court of India's jurisprudence around the death penalty. While these are very different discourses it will be shown that they share much common ground in their expressing—and negotiating—the fundamental problem as described above. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Turkey, in direct lineage of the Ottoman Empire, experimented a particularly violent nation-building out of the imperial ashes. Non-Muslims corresponding to one fifth of its population have been annihilated for the creation of a homogeneous nation State. These crimes have never been accounted for, giving way to a culture of impunity, self-righteousness, contempt for the rule of law and justice which, over years, pushed the polity towards an illiberal if not totalitarian essence and praxis, domestically against its own constituency and externally against neighbours through an extensive neo-imperial drive. Paradoxically, such an outcome seems to constitute a belated retribution for the unaccounted crimes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The state and federal criminal justice systems in the United States aim to achieve two main goals: retribution and deterrence. However, neither of those goals are being effectively achieved. Retribution is lacking as victims are not able to seek justice on their own terms, offenders are never forced to take accountability for their actions, and society continues to pay the price for the harm done. Criminals are also not being effectively deterred, as recidivism rates are high, and incarceration is not an effective punishment. Three non-traditional justice systems: tribal courts, the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and Rwandan Gacaca courts, have been practicing principles of restorative justice that would be more successful in providing retribution and deterrence than the current United States systems. This paper examines the infrastructure and principles behind the three systems and creates a modified restorative justice system to replace the current retributive system in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lycophron’s extensive debt to Aeschylus is exemplified by his engagement with the Agamemnon and the Choephori in Cassandra’s prediction of her own death and that of Agamemnon and in the brief ensuing synopsis of Orestes’ vengeance on Clytemnestra. This paper argues that the next stage of Cassandra’s prophecy, in which she discusses two rites instituted in the aftermath of her death, continues the reworking of the Oresteia by exploiting themes prominent in the Eumenides, including supplication, retributive violence, the enactment of democratic law. The paired accounts of Daunian and Locrian cults are examples of the poet’s use of mythological substitution, by which avoids explicit reference to an event where it would naturally occur in the chronology of Cassandra’s prophecy and replaces it with a different, thematically connected narrative. Lycophron’s engagement with the Eumenides is triggered by a reference to the Erinyes in the story of the Daunian maidens and is more extensively exploited in the story of the Locrian maidens, in which Lycophron represents a melding of personal vengeance and the democratic legal system. The fusion of personal vengeance and the law resonates meaningfully against the new civic legal system described in the Eumenides, where the new homicide courts at Athens are meant to replace the process of retribution that plays out earlier in the trilogy.

The legislator's approach in all regulations related to intentional murder in the Islamic Penal Code has been that the right of retaliation for the heirs of the victim is a definitive right, and receiving Diyya (blood money) is only possible with the consent of the killer. Although the choice and acceptance of the definitive view was due to its popularity, its acceptance led to the abuse of some murderers in some cases of murder, such as the execution of retribution in cases of paying excess Diyya, and the waste of the victim's blood. These reasons led to a change in the position of the legislator in the 1392 Penal Code. In this change of approach, the definitive theory was accepted as a principle in intentional murder, and to solve practical problems in cases where the retributionof the killer was conditional on the payment of excess Diyya by the heirs, the optional theory was accepted. This is because sometimes the heirs were not able to pay the excess Diyya, and the killer was not willing to compromise. Since according to the definitive view, it is not possible to receive Diyya without the consent of the killer, the blood of the victim was at risk of being wasted. Now, the legislator has been criticized for accepting the optional view and following the less well-known opinion and basing it on it. This research has concluded that adopting a dual view based on the narrations and the rule of "La Yabtol" is free from any difficulty in order to prevent the waste of Muslim blood.

The sentencing stage of the federal legal system provides defendants with an opportunity to articulate why the sentencing judge is justified in imposing less severe sentences. Yet, under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, sentencing judges have been restricted in the characteristics and background information that can be utilized when imposing a downward departure from the recommended Guidelines sentence. More specifically, there is great variability regarding the extent to which family-related circumstances can be utilized as justification for a downward departure due to the Sentencing Commission's ambiguous language. Considering the damaging effects of incarceration on children when a caretaker is physically removed from society, it is crucial that sentencing judges are empowered to consider caretakers when determining what punishment fits the crime while also promoting the betterment of society. Legal scholars have recognized that the Guidelines do not allow a downward departure from recommended sentences to be justified by responsibilities to a third party (e.g., children). Therefore, sentencing judges must be presented with an articulated justification for a downward departure utilizing a defendant-centered lens. For a defendant to successfully argue for a downward departure, a defense attorney's sentencing mitigation must include an explicit and principled rationale. Therefore, in the context of caretaker incarceration, it likely would not be sufficient for a defense attorney to argue that their client deserves a downward departure because incarceration is deleterious for the family, in a general sense. This Note proposes an explicit and principled argument that can be made for a downward departure based on a defendant's identity as a caretaker. Because the overall goal of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines is to impose sentences that promote retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation, these four goals of sentencing can serve as useful guideposts for the sentencing mitigation argument. In effect, the argument for a downward departure will explicitly enumerate the impact of incarceration on all caretakers while promoting the objectives behind the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

»He punishes us; then he shows us mercy. He sends us down to the world of the dead (Sheol), then brings us up from the grave« (Tob 13:2). The Old and New Testament theology of Sheol (hereinafter: Šəʾōl) follows the logical sequence of human living and dying. A person enters Šəʾōl the way he built himself during his lifetime, meaning, in Šəʾōl, the fundamental human determination and nature do not change. In Šəʾōl, it cannot happen that a righteous person turns into a wicked person, and a wicked person becomes a righteous person. However, the key characteristic of Šəʾōl is not the immutability of the set position but the impossibility of expressing praise to God. This virtue characterises the life of a righteous person who glorifies God with his righteousness. Therefore, the righteous man, by his nature, does not belong to that place because the one who praised and blessed God during his life cannot stop glorifying him even in Šəʾōl. The wicked, however, who does not glorify God during his lifetime is suited to the postmortem environment of Šəʾōl, in which God's name is not invoked. Thus, we conclude that Šəʾōl belongs exclusively to sinners or to those who do not praise God. The theology of Šəʾōl reached its peak in the teaching that Šəʾōl is not the eternal abode of the righteous. The righteous indeed descends to Šəʾōl, but his soul does not rot there, nor does he become part of the impersonal substance of Šəʾōl. Since it cannot remain in Šəʾōl, the justified soul, after freeing itself from its habits that led it to sin during its lifetime and having been set in holiness, rises to heaven, and God himself delivers it and rewards it with a happy eternity. Therefore, for the dominant biblical theology, it is not questionable that the righteous will see the face of God, but what privileges one over the other is the time of stay in the place of the dead, i.e. Šəʾōl. The elaborate Christian theology calls that time of souls' stay in the place of the dead the purgatory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Strawson's view on punishment has been either neglected or recoiled from in contemporary scholarship on 'Freedom and Resentment' (FR). Strawson's alleged retributivism has made his view suspect and troublesome. In this article, we first argue, against the mainstream, that the punishment passage is an indispensable part of the main argument in FR (section 1) and elucidate in what sense Strawson can be called 'a retributivist' (section 2). We then elaborate our own hypothesis of symbolic retribution to explain the continuum between moral reactive attitudes and punishment that Strawson only adumbrates (section 3). After this justification of the punitive response to wrongdoing, we compare and contrast our specific kind of retributivist hypothesis with other positions in the so-called 'new retributivism' (section 4). Our hypothesis differs from other subvarieties of expressive retributivism in putting centre stage the idea of punishment as taking up a reverential stance towards the victim. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For persons serving life-without-parole (LWOP) sentences in California, a commutation usually offers them the sole glimpse of hope for release from prison. While governors were reluctant to consider any sentence reductions from 1975 to 2016, commutations—including those for LWOP—have become a more frequent occurrence since. Yet, little is still known about how governors have justified reducing a sentence that initially offered no prospect of release from prison. Given the apparent change in practice, themes emerging from the content of 177 gubernatorial commutation summaries granted to persons serving LWOP sentences between 2017 and 2021 are analyzed in this paper. Through open coding, rehabilitative indicators (programming and institutional conduct) emerged as necessary preconditions for a commutation, while retributive factors (a reassessment of the nature of the crime and the prerogative to adjust excessive prison sentences or to correct sentencing errors) complemented sentence reductions. The findings expose the ethical issues that arise from an LWOP sentence and the subsequent commutation. More specifically, they shed light on the commitment offenses underlying commuted LWOP sentences and raise questions regarding the penal objectives that are supposed to be accomplished with permanent imprisonment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rapid increase in crime rates in many countries is evidence of the ineffectiveness of the current punishment system and the need to rethink the existing approach to applying punitive sanctions to criminals, taking into account the threat they pose to others. This study aims to build an analytical model for an objective assessment of the level of danger posed by suspects (convicts/prisoners) to society, based on their socio-demographic characteristics and data on previous criminal activity. To achieve this goal, discriminant canonical analysis is used as a multivariate statistical method for classifying objects. The empirical base consisted of data on 13,010 convicts serving sentences in penitentiary institutions in Ukraine. Key factors that have a significant impact on the distribution of criminals into groups (high, moderate, low) according to the level of danger they pose to society have been identified: the age at which a person was first sentenced, early dismissals, suspended convictions, education level, type of employment, the motivation for dismissal. An optimal canonical discriminant model has been constructed that allows for the accurate classification of new cases into the identified groups. The results obtained can be used in the judicial system, probation services, and law enforcement agencies to make informed decisions regarding the measure of punishment, parole, level of supervision, and ensuring public safety. The proposed applied solution can be integrated into an automated analytical system to increase the efficiency of the judicial system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Jurisprudence Faculty Journal / Magallaẗ Kulliyyaẗ Al-fiqh is the property of Republic of Iraq Ministry of Higher Education & Scientific Research (MOHESR) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Community Service & Empowerment is the property of Journal of Community Service & Empowerment and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Kriminologisches Journal is the property of Julius Beltz GmbH & Co. KG Beltz Juventa and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

One of the important issues regarding retribution, which is less discussed in the words of jurists and needs analysis, is the examination and consequently the validity of permissibility or impermissibility of conditional pardon. Accepting conditional pardon in retribution means that if the heirs' consent to refrain from retribution is conditioned by the amputation of a body part of the murderer, this is considered valid according to Islamic law. This study aimed at achieving a valid evidence for accepting conditional pardon. Based on the examination of evidence, it has been concluded that conditional pardon, which in contemporary society may prevent the implementation of many cases of retribution, is permissible. However, it should be done in such a way that the murderer or a third party is tasked with amputating a body part, and then the heirs pardon the murderer. The heirs themselves cannot be responsible for carrying out this act. Since the focus of the present study has been on Quranic and narrative evidence, and the issue has been discussed through this approach, the verbal problem-solving method has been used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Man was created for the sake of survival, and therefore he attains advancement and a high level, as God Almighty made him a caliph (I will make you a caliph on earth), the caliph due to the capabilities he possesses that qualifies him over the rest of creation, as God said (and We honored the children of Adam), that honor due to the qualities and virtues bestowed upon him, and he deserves to be with them. A caliph is respected and honored because through him the lineage is preserved and honor is preserved. Therefore, God granted him the right to live life with dignity and freedom, and no one has the right to rob this creature dear to God of his dignity and freedom in life. Therefore, it is considered that taking any soul is the death of all human beings, and that keeping this soul alive is a life for all mankind (and whoever kills a soul for other than a soul, it is as if he had killed all mankind, and whoever saves a life, it is as if he had saved all mankind). Therefore, killing a human being is considered one of the most heinous crimes punishable by law, whether intentionally or accidentally. Accordingly, the taking of a human life falls under the afterlife punishment that God has warned against and promised its perpetrator hell. For this reason, the Holy Qur’an and Sunnah have warned in verses and hadiths against this criminal act, and this phenomenon is undesirable because it involves the dispersal of human society and the spread of chaos and revenge that lead to the spread of transgression and dissolution in society. In this research, we discuss killing in the Qur’an and Sunnah, a study of the causes and effects, where we review the most important reasons that lead to killing, including religious weakness, faith, temptation, envy, mental and nervous influences, and anger.... We also review the most important effects resulting from killing, including the wrath of God Almighty and the Messengers, the disappearance of life, and the annihilation of creation and offspring. And sins and eternity in hellfire... in addition to discussing the most important ways to prevent murder by following legitimate and legal methods such as retribution for the perpetrator and precaution in sparing blood, which contributes to reducing chaos and spreading societal security. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I defend a deontological social contract justification of punishment for philosophers who deny free will and moral responsibility (FW/MR). Even if nobody has FW/MR, a criminal justice system is fair to the people it targets if we would consent to it in a version of original position deliberation where we assumed that we would be targeted by the justice system when the veil is raised. Even if we assumed we would be convicted of a crime, we would consent to the imprisonment of violent criminals if prison conditions were better than the state of nature but deterring enough to prevent the state of nature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses a non-state justice system (Sistema Comunitario de Seguridad, Justicia y Reeducación, hereafter: SCSJR) applied by some of the Afromexican and Indigenous communities of the Guerrero state in Mexico as an example of a maximalist restorative justice system. Restorative justice is presented here as an alternative to criminal justice. While it responds to similar moral concerns as retributive justifications do, it offers more adequate mechanisms of dealing with certain crimes and aims to reduce coerciveness of justice when dealing with lawbreaking. Restorative justice is also an approach that should be perceived as more legitimate when handling cases where the state lacks the moral standing to prosecute offenders. The SCSJR is used as an example to demonstrate the possibility of a justice system based on restorative principles to be effective in handling the entirety of lawbreaking in a community. In the case of the SCSJR this approach to justice has been proved to be effective even in the wake of high levels of criminal activity in the region. This paper discusses the SCSJR’s institutions and attitude toward lawbreaking and argues that they demonstrate an example of a justice system based on restorative justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A growing number of theorists have launched an epistemic challenge against retributive punishment. This challenge involves the core claim that it is wrong (intentionally) to inflict serious harm on someone unless the moral argument for doing so has been established to a high standard of credibility. Proponents of this challenge typically argue that retributivism fails to meet the required epistemic standard, because retributivism relies on a contentious conception of free will, about whose existence we cannot be sufficiently certain. However, the scope of the epistemic challenge should not be limited to doubts about free will or retributivism. In this article, I argue that the epistemic challenge should be expanded beyond the original focus on justifications of punishment. By “expanding the epistemic challenge” I mean demanding that other purported justifications for serious (intentional) harm be held to a high standard of credibility. To provide a focus for the argument, I will concentrate on the “Public Health Quarantine Model” defended by Gregg Caruso, but my arguments have wider implications beyond this model. A growing number of “abolitionist” theorists believe that punishment is wrong in principle. If retributive punishment, or punishment in general, were abandoned, we would need to ask, “how else should we respond to crime?”. My arguments suggest that all such abolitionists will have to face the same epistemic standard as penal theorists if they wish to replace punishment with the intentional imposition of non-punitive severe coercive measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]