The use of 'queer' in criminal justice discourses

Within criminological literature, there are growing references to a 'queer/ed criminology'. To date, ‘queer criminology’ remains a loose collection of studies and criminal-justice related commentary that uses the term 'queer'. Amid the growing calls for the more substantial development of these criminological studies, it is timely to reflect on the ways that the term ‘queer’ has been used in these discourses, to what ends, and with what effects. This paper considers the manner in which the term 'queer' has been used in these criminological and criminal justice discourses. It suggests that ‘queer’ has been used in two dominant ways: as an 'umbrella' term for lesbian, gay, bisexual, intersex, and queer-identified people; and to signify the use of theoretical tools with which to represent sexuality- and gender-diverse people more effectively within criminological research. The paper will argue that these ways of using ‘queer’ have a variety of implications and effects. Specifically, using ‘queer’ as an umbrella term has the potential to reinforce identity categories and the politics that surround identities (a critique that has often appeared in queer contexts), while using it as a theoretical tool potentially reproduces various investments in criminology and criminal justice institutions. Both uses may preclude other productive avenues for critique opened up by the term ‘queer’. The paper will conclude by suggesting that using ‘queer’ as a verb to signify a more deconstructive project directed towards criminology is a possible direction for these discussions. While this approach has its own effects, and articulates with existing deconstructive approaches in criminology, it is important to explore these possibilities at this point in the development of a ‘queer/ed criminology’ for two reasons: it highlights that multiple, and often competing, ‘queer/ed criminologies’ exist; and it expands the diverse possibilities heralded by the notion of ‘queer’.

V: Rewriting and reclaiming history : an analysis of the emergence of restorative justice in western criminal justice systems

During the last three decades, restorative justice has emerged in numerous localities around the world as an accepted approach to responding to crime. This article, which stems from a doctoral study on the history of restorative justice, provides a critical analysis of accepted histories of restorative practices. It revisits the celebrated historical texts of the restorative justice movement, and re-evaluates their contribution to the emergence of restorative justice measures. It traces the emergence of the term 'restorative justice', and reveals that it emerged in much earlier writings than is commonly thought to be the case by scholars in the restorative justice field. It also briefly considers some 'power struggles' in relation to producing an accepted version of the history of restorative justice, and scholars' attempts to 'rewrite history' to align with current views on restorative justice. Finally, this article argues that some histories of restorative justice selectively and inaccurately portray key figures from the history of criminology as restorative justice supporters. This, it is argued, gives restorative justice a false lineage and operates to legitimise the widespread adoption of restorative justice around the globe.

Submission to the inquiry into the high level of involvement of Indigenous juveniles and young adults in the criminal justice system

Introduction • The Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) is Australia's national research and knowledge centre on crime and justice. • The Institute seeks to promote justice and reduce crime by undertaking and communicating evidence-based research to inform policy and practice. • The AIC is governed by the Criminology Research Act and has been in operation since 1973. • The AIC is pleased to have the opportunity to contribute to the Committee's Inquiry into the high level of involvement of Indigenous juveniles and young adults in the criminal justice system. • There is a great deal of evidence to demonstrate that Indigenous young people are significantly over-represented at every stage of the criminal justice system in Australia.

A promise and a possibility : the limitations of the traditional criminal justice system as an explanation for the emergence of restorative justice

The claim that restorative justice emerged in response to the failings of the traditional criminal justice system is frequently made and rarely challenged in the restorative justice literature. It is stated unproblematically, as though it is an unassailable fact rather than a powerful truth claim, thereby positioning restorative justice as a natural, progressive and superior model of justice in comparison with the traditional criminal justice system. This truth claim therefore bestows restorative justice with a legitimacy that is difficult to challenge or refute. Drawing on a Foucaultian genealogy of restorative justice, this article seeks to destabilise the truth claim that restorative justice emerged in response to the failings of the criminal justice system. While the shortcomings of the traditional criminal justice system may provide a backdrop to the emergence of restorative justice, this article argues that such a possibility makes restorative justice a possibility rather than an inevitability.

Duty to the court and the administration of justice : some examples, implications and clarifications

No liberal democracy can survive without popular trust in its judicial system. The legal profession and the judiciary enjoy a level of independence and autonomy from the executive that makes them both powerful and privileged. A UNIQUE AND ORGANIC DUTY: So long as the courts are seen to fulfil their duty to guard against encroachments by the executive on the freedoms and rights of individual citizens with integrity and credibility, they maintain enough public support to retain their normative authority. But support for those with power and privilege is easily undermined. It is contingent upon trust. Lawyers who breach that trust in ways that go to the heart of the legal system ought to expect to be made examples of and to suffer severe penalties. The good news is that the sorts of breach discussed here should be neither difficult to anticipate nor to avoid – in theory. In practice, smart and honest lawyers sometimes fall foul of these duties for all sorts of understandable (if not condonable) reasons. Law does not get practised in a social or cultural vacuum. Lawyers are people, and people have weaknesses, failings and stresses...

Modes of criminal justice, indigenous youth and social democracy

The political question of how the will of a community is to be democratically formed and adhered to, the question of social democracy, is normatively tied to the mode of criminal justice employed within that democratic public sphere. Liberal, republican, procedural and communitarian forms of democratic will-formation respectively reflect retributive,restorative, procedural and co-operative modes of criminal justice. After first elaborating these links through the critical response of republican and procedural theories of democracy to the liberal practice of democratic will-formation and its retributive mode of justice, our discussion considers the recent practice of restorative and procedural justice with respect to Indigenous youth; and this in the context of a severely diminished role for Indigenous justice agencies in the public sphere. In light of certain shortcomings in both the restorative and procedural modes of justice, and so too with republican and procedural understandings of the democratic public sphere, we turn to a discussion of procedural communitarianism, anchored as it is in Dewey’s notion of social co-operation. From here we attempt a brief formulation of what a socially co-operative mode of justice might consist of; a mode of justice where historically racial and economically coercive injustices are sufficiently recognised.

Democracy, Crime and Justice. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences

As a growing number of nations embark on a path to democracy, criminologists have become increasingly interested and engaged in the challenges, concerns, and questions connecting democracy with both crime and criminal justice. Rising levels of violence and street crime, white collar crime and corruption both in countries where democracy is securely in place and where it is struggling, have fuelled a deepening skepticism as to the capacity of democracy to deliver on its promise of security and justice for all citizens. What role does crime and criminal justice play in the future of democracy and for democratic political development on a global level? The editors of this special volume of The Annals realized the importance of collecting research from a broad spectrum of countries and covering a range of problems that affect citizens, politicians, and criminal justice officials. The articles here represent a solid balance between mature democracies like the U.S. and U.K. as well as emerging democracies around the globe – specifically in Latin America, Africa and Eastern Europe. They are based on large and small cross-national samples, regional comparisons, and case studies. Each contribution addresses a seminal question for the future of democratic political development across the globe. What is the role of criminal justice in the process of building democracy and instilling confidence in its institutions? Is there a role for unions in democratizing police forces? What is the impact of widespread disenfranchisement of felons on democratic citizenship and the life of democratic institutions? Under what circumstances do mature democracies adopt punitive sentencing regimes? Addressing sensitive topics such as relations between police and the Muslim communities of Western Europe in the wake of terrorist attacks, this volume also sheds light on the effects of terrorism on mature democracies under increasing pressure to provide security for their citizens. By taking a broad vantage point, this collection of research delves into complex topics such as the relationship between the process of democratization and violent crime waves; the impact of rising crime rates on newly established as well as secure democracies; how crime may endanger the transition to democracy; and how existing practices of criminal justice in mature democracies affect their core values and institutions. The collection of these insightful articles not only begins to fill a gap in criminological research but also addresses issues of critical interest to political scientists as well as other social and behavioral scientists and scholars. Taking a fresh approach to the intersection of crime, criminal justice, and democracy, this volume of The Annals is a must-read for criminologists and political scientists and provides a solid foundation for further interdisciplinary research.

Juveniles’ contact with the criminal justice system in Australia

This report presents the first collection of data on juveniles’ contact with the criminal justice system as both alleged/convicted offenders and complainants/victims in New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and the Northern Territory. Its primary objectives are to outline data from each of these jurisdictions on juveniles’ contact with the policing, courts and correctional systems and to determine what we do and do not know about juveniles’ contact with the criminal justice system.

Women as victims and offenders : incarcerated for murder in the Australian criminal justice system

This study was undertaken in an effort to contribute to the limited knowledge of women who commit murder. Women account for approximately 10% of the total Australian homicides and according to Mouzos (2000), 20% of these female perpetrated homicides result in murder convictions. In her extensive study of female homicide offending in England, Brookman (2005) asserts that nearly two thirds of the victims of women who kill are intimates, to include violent partners and their own children. The other third of the victims consist largely of acquaintances and to lesser degree strangers (Brookman, 2005). This study strives to introduce further knowledge regarding women convicted of murder; the smaller subgroup of female homicide offenders of which less is known. It is comprised of women who killed intimates and non-intimates to include acquaintances. The study engages the narratives of seven women, all of whom were convicted of murder and serving lengthy sentences at the Dame Phyllis Frost Centre, a medium and maximum security prison that is located on the outskirts of Melbourne, Australia. The seven women fall largely outside of the characteristics of female homicide offenders as revealed in the studies from Australia’s National Homicide Monitoring Program (NHMP, 2007), from Canada by Hoffmann, Lavigne, and Dickie (1998) and research from the United States by Scott and Davies (2002). In this study there were no Indigenous women represented. Only one of the women had a previous criminal charge. The women were older on average than the prevailing demographics from western nations. Two of the women had substance abuse and co-occurring mental illness, which reflects a significant lower rate than the literature suggests. This study expands the current understanding of the phenomenon of women who murder. It communicates the narratives of seven women charged and convicted of murder as they attempt to understand their lives and identities. It moves the dialogue beyond the preponderance of feminist criminological research that examines motive and the relationship the woman has with her victim to the social discourses which dominate in her identity formation. This research found that in their attempt to create a favourable identity the women needed to engage with the master script of normative femininity through the feminisation of victimisation, motherhood and domesticity.