NCJ Number
190167
Journal
Revija za Kriminalistiko in Kriminologijo Volume: 51 Issue: 3 Dated: July-September 2000 Pages: 187-196
Date Published
2000
Length
10 pages
Annotation
This article presents the views of criminological "abolitionists" who support minimal criminal law that can be directly justified by constitutional legal norms.
Abstract
"Abolitionism" -- the most consistent derivation of "anticriminology" (Cohen) from the rebellious sixties -- is a relatively marginal orientation in contemporary criminology; however, this does not mean that the theoretical as well as practical impact of abolitionist views on criminological and criminal policy conceptions, particularly in the endlessly developing area of critical criminology, should be neglected. Abolitionism invites a substitute discourse, i.e., an alternative reflection about crime and its criminal law treatment. Abolitionism is in no way a conceptually uniform criminological orientation. It is nevertheless possible to recognize certain common emphases in various abolitionist contributions, such as a pronounced critical attitude toward criminal law that deals with interpersonal relations that are labeled as "problematic," "violent," "harmful," or "conflicting." Abolitionists, however, do not stay at the level of radical criticism, but propose several daring alternative solutions, although some of them seem utopian, but this does not minimize their value as a long-term orientation. Looking from the short-term and long-term perspectives, the abolitionists pursue the ideal of "minimal criminal law" (Baratta), i.e., criminal law that can be justified by constitutional legal norms. These include norms of a contemporary state, founded on respect for human subjectivity and basic economic, political, cultural, social, and other human rights, among which is the right of the individual to self-determination (one of the most important). 26 references