Lex Mitior

Author(s):  
Peter Westen

In 2009, New Mexico prospectively repealed the death penalty. Three years later in 2012, New Mexico prosecuted a defendant for a capital murder that was committed before repeal, and it sought to subject him to the death penalty. If state prosecutors had prevailed with the jury, they would have secured the very kind of sentence—death—that state officials had been lauded in Europe for outlawing three years earlier. A prosecution like New Mexico’s could never occur in Europe, and not merely because Europe has long outlawed the death penalty. It could never occur because, in contrast to the law of most American jurisdictions, European states embrace a doctrine known as “lex mitior” (“the milder law”). The latter doctrine is a counterpart to the ex post facto prohibition. Both doctrines concern retroactivity in criminal law, but they are the converse of one another. The ex post facto doctrine prohibits retroactivity by prohibiting the state from prosecuting persons under criminal statutes that either retroactively criminalize conduct that was hitherto lawful or retroactively increase penalties for conduct that, while unlawful all along, was hitherto punishable less severely. In contrast, lex mitior mandates retroactivity by mandating that criminal defendants receive the retroactive benefits of repealing statutes that either decriminalize conduct altogether or reduce punishment for it. After surveying laws in the United States regarding the retroactive effect of ameliorative repeals, the author addresses whether punishing offenders under harsher laws that obtained at the time of their conduct can serve consequentialist and/or retributive purposes of punishment. He concludes that, although doing so can be morally justified under limited circumstances, typically it is not—a conclusion that bears upon lex mitior’s proper scope, whether it consists of a binding norm (as it is among European nations), a nonconstitutional norm (as it presently is within the United States), or, when legislative intent is uncertain, a function of the rule of lenity.

Asy-Syari ah ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-198
Author(s):  
Tajul Arifin

AbstractThis research mainly uses statistical data published by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNDDC) in April 2014 to support the hypothesis of this research that “Human Rights Activists in Indonesia as in other countries have failed in comprehending the wisdom (hikmah) of the application of Capital Punishment”. This study found that: (1) the hypothesis of this research was strongly supported by the data; (2) the application of Syari`ah Criminal Law in Saudi Arabia has been an unchallenged proof for the wisdom (hikmah) behind the application of Capital Punishment by keeping the level of murder crime to a low rate which sharply contrast to many countries which apply positive laws which are based on a social contract between the ruler and the ruled, such as in The United States and Mexico; and (3) In upholding the true justice in Islamic Criminal Law, punishment can only be awarded to the criminals in a society where the Islamic ideal of social justice has been achieved. AbstrakPenelitian ini menggunakan data statistik yang diterbitkan oleh United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNDDC) pada bulan April 2014 untuk mendukung hipotesis dari penelitian ini bahwa "Aktivis HAM di Indonesia seperti di negara-negara lain telah gagal dalam memahami hikmah dari penerapan hukuman mati". Studi ini menemukan bahwa: (1) hipotesis penelitian ini sangat didukung oleh data; (2) penerapan Hukum Pidana Syari`ah di Arab Saudi telah menjadi bukti tak terbantahkan untuk menunjukkan hikmah di balik penerapan hukuman mati dengan menjaga tingkat kejahatan pembunuhan pada tingkat yang sangat rendah yang sangat berlawanan dengan yang terjadi di banyak negara yang menerapkan hukum positif yang didasarkan pada kontrak sosial antara penguasa dan rakyat, seperti di Amerika Serikat dan Meksiko; dan (3) dalam menegakkan keadilan sejati dalam Hukum Pidana Islam, hukuman hanya dapat diberikan kepada penjahat dalam masyarakat di mana keadilan sosial yang ideal menurut Islam telah dicapai.


Author(s):  
George P. Fletcher

This book is an invitation to readers interested in the future of international cooperation to master the 12 basic dichotomies of international criminal law. The book foresees a growing interest in international order and cooperation following the current preoccupation, in Europe as well as the United States, with national self-interest. By emphasizing basic dichotomies, for example, acts vs. omissions and causation vs. background conditions, the book reinforces the jurisprudential foundations of international criminal law and also provides an easy way to master the details of the field.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 833-846
Author(s):  
Tatjana Hörnle

AbstractThe article describes the #MeToo-movement in the United States and Germany and discusses the merits and problems of this social phenomenon. It highlights the fact that some features of #MeToo (blaming and sanctioning wrongdoers) resemble those of criminal punishment and thus require careful justification. In the final part, the author examines the impact of the #MeToo-movement on criminal law reform.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document