Notes from Some Small Countries: A Study of the 'New Punitiveness' in Ireland, Scotland and New Zealand

In recent years there has been a remarkable surge of interest in the concept of punitiveness in theoretical criminology. Accounts serve to emphasise rupture over continuity, drawing attention to the increased focus on managerialism, risk and expressive penal policies in countries such as England and the US. Criticisms of these accounts have drawn attention to the weak empirical base for such assertions and the continued relevance of local cultural, historical and political conditions in mediating the effect of more punitive trends. In light of the relative neglect of smaller jurisdictions in this literature it was decided to locate these debates in three small common law jurisdictions, namely, Ireland, Scotland and New Zealand over the period 1976-2006 with a view to assessing the empirical evidence for penal change. This was done using a broader definition of punitiveness than normally employed incorporating indices relating to the ‘front end’ (eg police powers) as well as the ‘back end’ (eg prison and probation) of the criminal justice system. Data were collected on the three case studies using a multi-method approach involving examination of extensive quantitative data, interviews with key criminal justice stakeholders and documentary analysis. The data provide some support for the ‘new punitiveness’ thesis in these countries through a pattern of increased legislative activity aimed at controlling violent and sexual offenders and significant increases in the lengths of sentences imposed. However, analysis of qualitative data and a larger number of variables reveals distinctly different patterns of punitiveness over the thirty year period in the three countries. It is argued that the study holds important lessons for comparative criminology into the ‘new punitiveness’. There is a need for qualitative as well as quantitative data; for multiple rather than singular indices across a wide range of areas (juvenile justice, prison conditions, etc); and for ‘front end’ as well as ‘back end’ indices.

Reconceptualising Penality: A comparative perspective on punitiveness in Ireland, Scotland and New Zealand

Drastic increases in the use of imprisonment; the introduction of ‘three strikes’ laws and mandatory sentences; restrictions on parole - all of these developments appear to signify a new, harsher era or ‘punitive turn’. Yet these features of criminal justice are not universally present in all Western countries. Drawing on empirical data, Hamilton examines the prevalence of harsher penal policies in Ireland, Scotland and New Zealand, thereby demonstrating the utility of viewing criminal justice from the perspective of smaller jurisdictions.

This highly innovative book is thoroughly critical of the way in which punitiveness is currently measured by leading criminologists. It is essential reading for students and scholars of criminology, penology, criminal justice and socio-legal studies, as well as criminal lawyers and practitioners.

Changing shape and shifting boundaries - the media portrayal of probation in Ireland

Literature on the media representation of probation highlights that probation as a ‘brand’ and concept is poorly understood and lacks public visibility. This has implications for its legitimacy and credibility. In this article we explore probation’s visibility in one country, the Republic of Ireland, through a critical analysis of print media representations of probationover a 12-year period (2001 to 2012). While our study finds that the majority of the coverage of probation was either positive or neutral in tone, we note a recent shift towards a more negative tone that we argue is reflective of the changing shape of the penal-probation boundaries. These changes are linked to resourcing of the criminal justice system and have implications for the public perception of probation.

Personalising Crime and Crime-fighting in Factual Television:an Analysis of Social Actors and Transitivity in Language and Images

This article addresses the lack of work on media and crime in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), using an example of a factual television crime report. The existing research in media studies and criminology points to the way that the media misrepresents crime by distorting public understandings and backgrounding structural issues, such as poverty, which are related to crime thereby legitimising a criminal justice system that serves the interests of the powerful in society. Using social actor and transitivity analysis, this article shows how multimodal CDA can make an important contribution as it reveals the more subtle linguistic strategies and visual representations by which this process is accomplished, showing how each plays a part in the recontextualisation of social practice. This programme backgrounds which crimes are committed but foregrounds mental states and the neutrality of policing.

Oltre il "Momento dell'Abolizione":Saggio in memoria di Louk Hulsman

This article is written to celebrate the fine contribution and constant optimism of Louk Hulsman to the debate about penal abolition, the rethinking of popular and political discourses on ‘crime’, and the institutionalised responses of the ‘criminal justice system’. Reflecting on his experiences of incarceration and on his critical analysis of the political economic relations of power, Louk Hulsman talked of the defining ‘moment of abolition’ – his reading of Thomas Mathiesen’s ground-breaking text, The Politics of Abolition. Having considered the key elements of Louk Hulsman’s work and its critical challenge to the criminological enterprise, the article explores the apparent political contradiction in campaigning for humane conditions while seeking abolition within the context of an ever-expanding, global prison-industrial complex.

Meaningful and Effective? Considering Victims’ Interests Through Participation at the International Criminal Court

This article explores the role of victims in the criminal proceedings of the International Criminal Court and the extent to which their interests have impacted upon the ICC judges’ decision making in light of human rights law and victimological theorisation. The article begins by first outlining how victims’ interests can be considered in international criminal proceedings, before contrasting this role with the purpose of international criminal justice. The second part of the article examines victim participation within the ICC and how this has affected judicial decision making to assess its effectiveness. The contest between the rights of victims and the role of Prosecutor in determining the selection of charges and perpetrators is also examined in an effort to add to the current debate on victim participation at the ICC. The author finds that at the ICC, despite innovative victim provisions, victims’ interests have little impact on outcomes of the Court. The author argues that in order to ensure the Court is more responsive to victims understanding of justice it should give greater weight to their interests, which in turn is likely to improve their satisfaction with the ICC, as well as public confidence and legitimacy of the work of the Court.

Finding Merit in Judicial Appointments: NIJAC and the Search for a New Judiciary in Northern Ireland

The post-Agreement constitutional architecture has produced a new legal space in Northern Ireland. While the court structure has largely endured in a recognisable format there are perhaps now new expectations of how it will function in the next stage of Northern Ireland’s transition from a society in conflict. These expectations come into focus around the nature and role of the judiciary that is to oversee this new legal space. At the same time there are other, wider forces pressing upon the judiciary across the United Kingdom and these are being acted out in the various appointment commissions and regimes that have been created to modernise the judiciary. This all contributes to establishing a dynamic context for considering whether and/or how the judiciary in Northern Ireland is changing, and the forces that may be conditioning any change. This chapter looks at some of the expectations that might arise for the judiciary. It focuses both on some ideas about what might be the role of a judge in a transitional context, and the debate about how judges generally should be appointed across the United Kingdom where the idea of “merit” emerges as governing concept. Next consideration is given to how this idea of merit plays out in the Northern Ireland context and, in particular, how it impacts on the appointment of women to senior judicial roles which has emerged as the central concern in the new dispensation. Here the chapter draws on two pieces of research: the first looking at the issues surrounding judicial appointments and attitudes towards seeking such posts in the Northern Ireland context, and a second project where the idea of “merit” as a governing factor in judicial appointment was further explored in focus groups and interviews. Finally the chapter looks ahead at the challenges around judicial appointment that remain and suggests that notion of ‘merit’ has not provided the robust foundation which its proponents imagined it would.