Make a Submission
No. XLV/2 (2023)
Articles

A penology for Europe

Penologia dla Europy

PDF
  • Tom Daems
Tom Daems
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7420/AK2023.13

Published 2023-12-31

Keywords

  • acts of terror,
  • punishment,
  • penal law,
  • European penal identity,
  • penology

How to Cite

Daems, T. (2023). A penology for Europe: Penologia dla Europy. Archives of Criminology, (XLV/2), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.7420/AK2023.13
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

On 22 March 2016 Belgium suffered a severe terrorist attack on its national airport, in Zaventem, close to Brussels, and the Maelbeek metro station. Thirty-two people were killed that day. Another 340 victims, some of whom suffered particularly serious injuries, will carry the scars for the rest of their lives. Such terrorist attacks, in the heart of Europe, pose an enormous challenge, one that goes beyond the role of the police and the judiciary or questions about the design and security of open or semi-open spaces, such as markets, metro stations, concert halls, nightclubs or airports. In addition to prevention and criminal investigation, there is also the question of the appropriate response when the perpetrators or their accomplices are caught. What is an appropriate punishment in such a context, for such awful offences? How long do we need to punish? And for what purpose do we punish? In this article we offer some reflections on these questions. We argue that the question of how to respond to crime – crimes of all kinds – should not be narrowed down to how we can impose “deserved” pain or how we can reach the goals of punishment more effectively; no, we should rather broaden it to the question of how we can strengthen and affirm our values and ideals through our response. “In figuring the equations of punishment … we cannot hold the punisher constant”, as James Whitman (2003) wrote in “Harsh Justice”. Punishment is not just about the defendants in the dock: it concerns us all, it affects us all.

PDF

References

  1. Anagnostou D. and Skleparis D. (2017). ʻHuman rights in European prisons: Can the implementation of Strasbourg Court judgments influence penitentiary reform domestically?.ʼ In T. Daems and L. Robert (eds.) Europe in Prisons: Assessing the Impact of European Institutions on National Prison Systems. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 37–77.
  2. Baker E. (2013). ʻThe emerging role of the EU as a penal actor.ʼ In T. Daems, D. van Zyl Smit, and S. Snacken (eds.) European Penology?. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 77–111.
  3. Bauman Z. (2004). Europe: An Unfinished Adventure. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  4. Beck U. and Grande E. (2007). Cosmopolitan Europe. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  5. Bentham J. (1780). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. London: T. Payne and Son.
  6. Bergmans E. (2016). ʻWie de samenleving definitief kapot wil, verdient de doodstrafʼ [Those who want to destroy society deserve the death penalty]. De Standaard, 1 August. https://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20160731_02406470
  7. Bicknell C. and Evans M. (2017). ʻMonitoring prisons: The increasingly complex relationship between international and domestic frameworks.ʼ In T. Daems and L. Robert (eds.) Europe in Prisons: Assessing the Impact of European Institutions on National Prison Systems. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 11–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62250-7_2
  8. Cassese A. (1996). Inhuman States. Imprisonment, Detention and Torture in Europe Today. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  9. Cassin R. (1968). Nobel Lecture: The Charter of Human Rights, Nobelprize.org. Available online: https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1968/cassin-lecture.html [22.11.2023].
  10. Cohen S. (1995). Denial and Acknowledgement: The Impact of Information About Human Rights Violations. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Center for Human Rights.
  11. Cohen S. (2001). States of Denial. Knowing about Atrocities and Suffering. Cambridge: Polity.
  12. Cohen S. and Taylor L. (1978). Prison Secrets‎. Buckinghamshire: National Council for Civil Liberties, Radical Alternatives to Prison.
  13. CPT (2008). 18th General Report on the CPT’s Activities Covering the Period 1 August 2007 to 31 July 2008. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
  14. Daems T. (2008). Making Sense of Penal Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  15. Daems T. (2013). ʻPunishment and the question of Europe.ʼ In T. Daems, D. van Zyl Smit, and S. Snacken (eds.) European Penology? Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 27–52.
  16. Daems T. (2016). ʻWederzijds vertrouwen is geen blind vertrouwen: het Europees aanhoudingsbevel en detentiecondities binnen de Europese Unieʼ [Mutual trust is not the same as blind trust: The European arrest warrant and prison conditions in the EU]. Panopticon 37(6), pp. 530–539.
  17. Daems T. (2017a). Straffen, slaven en standbeelden: een penologie voor het Europa van nu (Reeks: Acta Falconis, nr. XVII) [Punishment, slaves and statues: A penology for contemporary Europe]. Antwerp: Intersentia.
  18. Daems T. (2017b). ʻSlaves and statues: Torture prevention in contemporary Europe.ʼ British Journal of Criminology 57(3), pp. 627–643. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azv133
  19. Daems T. (2019). ʻRestorative justice, victims and the hermeneutics of suspicion.ʼ The International Journal of Restorative Justice 2(3), pp. 478–486. https://doi.org/10.5553/IJRJ.000009
  20. Daems T. (2021a). ʻDefamiliarizing punishment.ʼ In F. Focquaert, E. Shaw, and B. Waller (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy and Science of Punishment. London: Routledge, pp. 89–100.
  21. Daems T. (2021b). ʻPunishment and epistemological politics in Europe.ʼ In T. Daems and S. Pleysier (eds.) Criminology and Democratic Politics. London: Routledge, pp. 121–140.
  22. Daems T. (2021c). ¿Cómo engañar a Europa? Algunas reflexiones sobre los éxitos y fracasos de la supervisión de las prisiones [How to fool Europe? Some reflections on the successes and failures of monitoring prisons], Tomdaems.com. Available online : https://tomdaems.com/2021/07/06/como-enganar-a-europa-algunas-reflexiones-sobre-los-exitos-y-fracasos-de-la-supervision-de-las-prisiones/ [22.11.2023].
  23. Damen W. (2021). ʻEichmann en Abdeslam: publiek proces onwaardigʼ [Eichmann and Abdeslam: A public process unworthy]. De Standaard, 13 September, https://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20210912_97657176
  24. Durkheim E. (1893). De la division du travail social [The division of labour in society]. Paris: Félix Alcan.
  25. Elias N. (2000). The Civilizing Process: Sociogenetic and Psychogenetic Investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.
  26. Foucault M. (1975). Surveiller et punir [Discipline and punish]. Paris: Gallimard.
  27. Garland D. (1986). ʻThe punitive mentality: Its socio-historic development and decline.ʼ Contemporary Crises 10, pp. 305–320.
  28. Garland D. (1990). Punishment and Modern Society: A Study in Social Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  29. Geltner G. (2014). Flogging Others. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
  30. Goffman E. (1961). Asylums. Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates. New York: Anchor Books.
  31. Goffman E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Englewood Cliffs: New Jersey.
  32. Gómez-Jara Díez C. (2008). ʻEnemy combatants versus enemy criminal law: An introduction to the European debate regarding enemy criminal law and its relevance to the Anglo-American discussion on the legal status of unlawful enemy combatants.ʼ New Criminal Law Review 11(4), pp. 529–562. https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2008.11.4.529
  33. Hulsman L. (2011). ʻEen abolitionistisch (afschaffend) perspectief op het strafrechtelijk systeem (1979)ʼ [An abolitionist perspective on the criminal justice system]. In R. van Swaaningen and J.R. Blad (eds.) De ontmaskering van het strafrechtelijk discours. Een bloemlezing uit het werk van Louk Hulsman [Unmasking the criminal law discourse: A collection from the work of Louk Hulsman]. The Hague: Boom Lemma, pp. 113–131.
  34. Jagland T. (2016). ʻDon’t caricature Europe’s Court.ʼ The New York Times 12 December, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/12/opinion/dont-caricature-europes-court.html
  35. Jakobs G. (2004). ʻBürgerstrafrecht und Feindstrafrechtʼ [Civilian criminal law and enemy criminal law]. HRRS: Onlinezeitschrift für Höchstrichterliche Rechtsprechung zum Strafrecht 3, pp. 88–102.
  36. Lewis C.S. (1953). ʻThe humanitarian theory of punishment.ʼ Res Judicatae 6(2), pp. 224–230.
  37. Muižnieks N. (2016). Non-Implementation of the Court’s Judgments: Our Shared Responsibility, Coe.int. Available online: www.coe.int/et/web/commissioner/-/non-implementation-of-the-court-s-judgments-our-shared-responsibility [22.11.2023].
  38. Ohana D. (2014). ʻGünther Jakobs’s Feindstrafrecht: A dispassionate account.ʼ In M.D. Dubber (ed.) Foundational Texts in Modern Criminal Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 353–372.
  39. Rusche G. and Kirchheimer O. (1968). Punishment and Social Structure. New York: Russell and Russell.
  40. Simon J. and Sparks R. (eds.) (2013). The SAGE Handbook of Punishment and Society. London: Sage.
  41. Smaers G. (1994). Gedetineerden en mensenrechten: de toepassing van het EVRM in penitentiaire detentiesituaties door de Europese jurisdicties en haar gevolgen voor de rechtspositie van veroordeelde gedetineerden in België [Prisoners and human rights: The application of the ECHR in penitentiary detention situations by European jurisdictions and its consequences for the legal position of convicted prisoners in Belgium]. Antwerp: Maklu.
  42. Spierenburg P. (2004). ʻPunishment, power, and history: Foucault and Elias.ʼ Social Science History 28(4), pp. 607–636. https://doi.org/10.1215/01455532-28-4-607
  43. Tulkens F. (2014). ʻLes prisons en Europe: les développements récents de la jurisprudence de la Cour européenne des droits de l'hommeʼ [Prisons in Europe: Recent developments in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights]. Déviance et Société 38(4), pp. 425–448. https://doi.org/10.3917/ds.384.0425
  44. Van Zyl Smit D. and Snacken S. (2009). Principles of European Prison Law and Policy: Penology and Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  45. Van Zyl Smit D. and Snacken S. (2013). ʻDistinctive features of European penology and penal policy-making.ʼ In T. Daems, D. van Zyl Smit, and S. Snacken (eds.) European Penology?. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 3–26.
  46. Whitman J.Q. (2003). Harsh Justice. New York: Oxford University Press.

Most read articles by the same author(s)