Marxist Feminism: Implications for Criminal Justice

1981 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Hahn Rafter ◽  
Elena M. Natalizia

Whether women encounter the criminal justice system as victims, offenders, or system personnel, they frequently find themselves being denigrated on the basis of their sex. We begin by analyzing the relationship between the sexist biases of criminal justice and other institutions and the capitalist economic system. After establishing that sexism is not mere prej udice against women but rather a function of capitalism, we move on to discuss the implications of Marxist feminism for six aspects of criminal justice: females and the law, criminology of women, females as victims, processing of females by the criminal justice system, incarceration of women, and employment of women as criminal justice system personnel. In the course of the discussion we present a number of recommendations which would further the goals of not only sexual but also economic equality.

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Indah Setyowati ◽  
Ida Musofiana

The diversion provisions in the juvenile justice system law whether it has prevented children from the negative effects of the Criminal Justice System. By the way, all children who have problems with the law put the best interests of the child. The method of approach is the statutory approach and the comparative approach. Primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials obtained by the author will be analyzed using the method of systematic interpretation, namely interpretation by looking at the relationship between the rules in an interdependent law.The result, diversion is a settlement of child cases that are carried out outside formal justice with the aim of preventing children from stigmatizing children who are dealing with the law must be in accordance with the purpose of diversion in The Beijing Rules. Whereas in Indonesia, the diversion provisions in the Criminal Justice System Act of the Child are still included in the criminal justice system by giving stronger stigmatization to children who are in conflict with the law and so it is not in accordance with the purpose of diversion in The Beijing Rules. So the diversion provisions in the Child Criminal Justice System Law do not yet reflect the principle of child protection as mandated by the Child Protection Act and the Child Criminal Justice System Law. Where the diversion in the Child Criminal Justice System Law has not fully mandated the principle of the best interests of children viewed from the perspective of child protection, with a view of all issues by placing the child's position as first and foremost.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-84
Author(s):  
Akalafikta Jaya ◽  
Triono Eddy ◽  
Alpi Sahari

In the past, the punishment of children was the same as the punishment of adults. This causes the psychological condition of children ranging from investigation, investigation and trial to be disturbed because it is often intimidated by law enforcement agencies. Under these conditions, Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Justice System was born. One of the reforms in the Child Criminal Justice System Law requires the settlement of a child criminal case by diversion. Based on the results of research that the conception of criminal offenses against children in conflict with the law in Indonesia is different from criminal convictions to adults. Children are given the lightest possible punishment and half of the criminal convictions of adult criminal offenses. That criminal liability for children who are ensnared in a criminal case according to the Law on the Criminal Justice System for Children is still carried out but with different legal sanctions from adults. Criminal imprisonment against children is an ultimumremedium effort, meaning that criminal imprisonment against children is the last legal remedy after there are no other legal remedies that benefit the child. That the concept of enforcement of criminal law against children caught in criminal cases through diversion is in fact not all have applied it. Some criminal cases involving children as the culprit, in court proceedings there are still judges who impose prison sentences on children who are dealing with the law.


FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 128
Author(s):  
Rugun Romaida Hutabarat

In criminal law, a person charged with a criminal offense may be punished if it meets two matters, namely his act is unlawful, and the perpetrator of a crime may be liable for the indicated action (the offender's error) or the act may be dismissed to the perpetrator, and there is no excuse. The reasons may result in the death or the removal of the implied penalty. But it becomes a matter of how if the Letter of Statement Khilaf is the answer to solve the legal problems. The person who refuses or does not do what has been stated in the letters is often called "wanprestasi" because the statement is categorized as an agreement. The statement includes an agreement which is the domain of civil law or criminal law, so its application in the judicial system can be determined. This should be reviewed in the application of the law, are there any rules governing wrong statements in the criminal justice system. By using a declaration of khilaf as a way out of criminal matters, then the statement should be known in juridical rules. This study uses normative juridical methods, by conceptualizing the law as a norm rule which is a benchmark of human behavior, with emphasis on secondary data sources collected from the primary source of the legislation. The result of this research is that the statement of khilaf has legality, it is based on Jurisprudence No. 3901 K / Pdt / 1985 jo Article 189 Paragraph (1) of Indonesian criminal procedure law. However, this oversight letter needs to be verified in front of the court to be valid evidence, but this letter of error is not a deletion of a criminal offense, because the culpability of the defendant has justified the crime he committed. Such recognition, cannot make it free from the crime that has been committed.Keywords: Legality, Letter of Statement, Criminal Justice System


2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 24-40
Author(s):  
Ogechi Anyanwu

The reemergence of the Shari`ah in northern Nigeria in 2000 is reshaping the Muslims’ criminal justice system in unintended ways. This article accounts for and provides fresh insights on how the fate of Muslim women under the Shari`ah intertwines with the uncertain future of the law in Nigeria. Using Emile Durkheim’s theory of conscience collective as an explanatory framework of analysis, I argue that the well-placed objective of using the Shari` ah to reaffirm or create social solidarity among Muslim Nigerians has been undermined by the unequal, harsher punishments and suppression of human rights perpetrated against Muslim women since 2000. A I show, not only does such discrimination violate the principle of natural justice upheld by Islam, but it also threatens to shrink, if not wipe out, the collective conscience of Nigerian Muslims that the law originally sought to advance.


Author(s):  
Stuart P. Green

Talk of “integrity” is ubiquitous in law and legal discourse: Protecting the integrity of our political system has been cited as a basis for anti-corruption laws; preserving the integrity of the legal profession as a principle underlying the rules of lawyer ethics; ensuring integrity in policing and in the wider criminal justice system as a justification for excluding evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution; and protecting bodily integrity as a potential goal for the law of rape and sexual assault. This chapter examines what integrity means in each of these contexts, what these uses have in common, and whether thinking about these various rules and doctrines in terms of integrity rather than other moral concepts leads to any practical difference in outcome. It also asks what the examination of integrity in the law can tell us about the concept of integrity in other contexts.


2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Biber

A long-held and fundamental principle of our criminal justice system is that people accused of crimes have a right to silence, arising from the presumption of innocence. Rules of evidence try to protect this ‘right’ during trial, by ensuring that juries understand that adverse inferences cannot be drawn from the silence of the accused. Silence, in court, can mean nothing, and we are not to speculate about what might motivate an accused person to remain silent, or what they might have said had they spoken. However, an examination of the jurisprudence in this area shows that the law is often not dealing with actual silence; sometimes when the law refers to the ‘right to silence’, it seems to mean a ‘refusal to hear’. In other instances, there is actual silence, and yet the law refuses to subject that silence to any critical interpretation, insisting that we cannot infer anything from it. While we have learned, from theatre, music, linguistics, religion and psychology, to develop sophisticated means for interpreting silence, the law demands that we set aside these interpretive tools, hearing silence that isn’t there, and inferring nothing about something.


2006 ◽  
Vol 188 (6) ◽  
pp. 541-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Barrett ◽  
Sarah Byford ◽  
Prathiba Chitsabesan ◽  
Cassandra Kenning

BackgroundThe full costs of accommodating and supporting young people in the criminal justice system are unknown. There is also concern about the level of mental health needs among young offenders and the provision of appropriate mental health services.AimsTo estimate the full cost of supporting young people in the criminal justice system in England and Wales and to examine the relationship between needs, service use and cost.MethodCross-sectional survey of 301 young offenders, 151 in custody and 150 in the community, conducted in six geographically representative areas of England and Wales.ResultsMental health service use was low despite high levels of need, particularly in the community Monthly costs were significantly higher among young people interviewed in secure facilities than in the community ($4645 v. $ 1863; P < 0.001). Younger age and a depressed mood were associated with greater costs.ConclusionsYoung people in the criminal justice system are a significant financial burden not only on that system but also on social services, health and education. The relationship between cost and depressed mood indicates a role for mental health services in supporting young offenders, particularly those in the community.


2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 839-856
Author(s):  
Andrew Roesch-Knapp

From the medical field to the housing market to the criminal justice system, poor people must navigate labyrinthian organizations that often perpetuate social and economic inequality. Arguably it is through these social institutions, and through multiple processes embedded within each of these institutions, that the governance of urban poverty is effectively maintained. This essay revolves around one such process, examining how Matthew Desmondʼs Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City (2016) points to the eviction process as an important producer of urban poverty in and of itself. After delving into housing law and Desmondʼs ethnographic and quantitative research methodologies, the essay examines four sites where the law is at work in eviction: the eviction court; the “law-on-the-books” versus the “law-in-action”; practices in the shadow of the law; and the relationship between the criminal justice system and the housing market. One goal of the essay is to place eviction within the law, punishment, and social inequality literatures.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document