The Philosophical Vision of Legal Punishment

The concept of punishment represents one of the most difficult legal issues that are related to the concept of human freedom and responsibility. Since Antiquity, the brilliant minds of humanity contemplated about the sense of punishment and the function of this institution. Each epoch analyses this concept from different aspects and some of them are reflected in the actual legislation. The most important principles of contemporary criminal law were expounded by the Ancient, Modern and Contemporary philosophers. The field of research of this article is the philosophy of punishment of criminal law. In this study, we have applied the method of historical research of the proposed topic, which gives us the opportunity to analyze the development of criminal punishment and its goals from a historical perspective. In this paper, we aimed to determine the philosophical base of the legal punishment that legitimizes the application of sanctions to the person who committed the crime. We established the importance of the theories developed by brilliant thinkers for the contemporary concept of penal retribution and legal regulation of this institution. This theme generates several discussions that are formed in the process of comparison and debating of the ideas of influential philosophers regarding the purpose of criminal punishment. Therefore, we consider that the analysis of the theories of great thinkers gives us the possibility to understand the complexity of the phenomenon of criminal punishment, and leads to the more effective application of state constraint towards the offender.

النظام الجنائي الإسلامي و طرق الحماية من جرائم إشانة السمعة : دراسة مقارنة بما عليه العمل من القوانين الجنائية المعاصرة

النظام الجنائي الإسلامي و طرق الحماية من جرائم إشانة السمعة : دراسة مقارنة بما عليه العمل من القوانين الجنائية المعاصرة slam aims of protecting people honour and keeping their fame and dignity and for this reasin it silences ill mannered people and those who seek shme for innocent people . It prtvents these ill mannered people from injuring people feelings and staining their honour. and it seriously prohibilty propagate indecent among the belivers so that life could be vilrluos and free of this evil for this, Islam prohibits compelty and considers it as one are of the greatest sins and indecent and the person doing this is deemed to curse . dissolute and banishment from Allah's mercy and he deserves severe pain in this world and the hereafter. The subject is tackled in to themes : 1. Definition of defaming crime and explaining its elements in Islam and its legal punishment. 2. Definition of disgrace and its punishment in the criminal legislations. It concludes with the important findings and recommendations

The Conflict Between People’s Urge to Punish AI and Legal Systems

Regulating artificial intelligence (AI) has become necessary in light of its deployment in high-risk scenarios. This paper explores the proposal to extend legal personhood to AI and robots, which had not yet been examined through the lens of the general public. We present two studies (N = 3,559) to obtain people’s views of electronic legal personhood vis-à-vis existing liability models. Our study reveals people’s desire to punish automated agents even though these entities are not recognized any mental state. Furthermore, people did not believe automated agents’ punishment would fulfill deterrence nor retribution and were unwilling to grant them legal punishment preconditions, namely physical independence and assets. Collectively, these findings suggest a conflict between the desire to punish automated agents and its perceived impracticability. We conclude by discussing how future design and legal decisions may influence how the public reacts to automated agents’ wrongdoings.

Seeing Like an Activist

There are few movements more firmly associated with civil disobedience than the civil rights movement. In the mainstream imagination, civil rights activists eschewed coercion, appealed to the majority’s principles, and submitted willingly to legal punishment in order to demand necessary legislative reforms—and facilitate the realization of core constitutional and democratic principles. Their fidelity to the spirit of the law, commitment to civility, and allegiance to American democracy provided the blueprint for activists pursuing racial justice and set the normative horizon for liberal philosophies of civil disobedience. Seeing Like an Activist charts the emergence of this influential account of civil disobedience in the civil rights movement and demonstrates its reliance on a narrative about black protest that is itself entangled with white supremacy. Liberal political theorists whose work informed decades of scholarship saw civil disobedience “like a white state”: taking for granted the legitimacy of the constitutional order, assuming as primary the ends of constitutional integrity and stability, centering the white citizen as the normative ideal, and figuring the problem of racial injustice as limited, exceptional, and all-but-already solved. In contrast, building on historical and archival evidence, this book shows how civil rights activists, in concert with anticolonial movements across the globe, turned to civil disobedience as a practice of decolonization in order to emancipate themselves and others from a racial order that needed to be fully transformed. We can recover this powerful alternative account only by adopting a different theoretical approach—one which sees activists as themselves engaged in the creative work of political theorizing.

تعزیری جرائم کےلئے سزاکا قیام: ایک شرعی جائزہ

Islam is the religion of peace. Islamic law describe a complete and comprehensive law of punishment for the eradication of crimes and maintenance of peace. According to Islamic law, the punishments can be classified under three main categories: Al-Hudud (fixed punishments), Al-qisas (Retaliation), and Al-Taazir (discretionary). Hudud means the punishment which has been specified in the Holy Quran and Sunnah and no individual or group has the right to amend or abrogate it. The second is Qisas, which means the equal retaliation of an aggression committed against the body of a person. The third Kind of Islamic legal punishment is Taazir, it means, a crime for which The Holy Quran and Sunnah have not fixed any punishment, instead, have left it to the discretion of the judges. But in the recent era, many of the Muslim countries don’t leave the punishments of the penal crimes (Taaziraat) to the discretion of the Judges, each Muslim state restrict the rights of the Judge to give punishment at his own’s discretion, and legislating for the punishments of penal crimes (Taaziraat), and make the Judges abide by a particular measure of punishment for penal crimes (Taaziraat). In this articles, we will analyze the above mentioned issue in the light of Islamic principles, that what, it is lawful for any Muslim state to legislate for the punishment of penal crimes or not?

Police violence as punishment: Does excessive use of force serve to punish those who threaten status and power hierarchies in society?

ObjectivesWhy do some people view excessive police violence as acceptable? We reason that excessive police violence not only seeks to control crime, but also to punish criminal offenders. We propose the concept of police violence for punishment and explore its associations with different forms of punishment and punishment motivations. We reason that some people support excessive police violence to reinforce status and power hierarchies with minority groups. MethodWe draw on data from a representative sample of adults living in Chile conducted in 2015 (n=1,302). We use structural equation models to predict support for police violence for punishment, legal and extra-legal violence.ResultsPolice violence for punishment was strongly related to support for extra-legal punishment. Punitive police violence and extra-legal punishment were both predicted by the motivation to restore status and power relationships, followed by deterrence. In contrast, norm restoration was the main predictor of legal punishment. Police violence for punishment was significantly less supported by ethnic minority members. ConclusionsWe conclude that police excessive use of force can usefully be understood as police violence as punishment. We discuss the extent to which police repression is perceived to restore status and power hierarchies threatened by crime. We conclude that reducing police violence requires a political and cultural process well beyond reforming police protocols and procedures. Working towards more horizontal relations between police officers, citizens and minority groups should reduce perceived needs to restore power and status relationships, hereby reducing support for police violence as punishment.

The restrictive function of legal responsibility and the limits of its action through the prism of proportionality principle

We draw attention to the problem of excessive restriction risk of human and civil rights and freedoms in the process of establishing and applying the institution of legal responsibility by the state. We consider general theoretical issues of the concept and functions of legal responsibility. We substantiate the position on the need to separate the restrictive function from legal liability. As an intersectoral institution of Russian legislation, legal re-sponsibility is characterized by the performance of the following functions: restrictive, preventive, guaranteeing, restorative and educational. We draw attention to the issues of legal liability proportionality in relation to its restric-tive function. We disclose the content of proportionality principle in relation to legal responsibility as an intersectoral institution of legislation. We imagine that the remedy actively used in the legal policy of the state in the form of legal punishment and legal responsibility in general should correspond to the maximum extent to proportionality principle in order to prevent arbitrary and excessive restriction of rights and freedoms. Various kinds of deviations, deviations from the principle of proportionality of legal responsibility are supposed to be interpreted in theory as one of the most important prerequisites for the formation of dysfunction and imbalance of the institution in question. Violation of proportionality principle of responsibility in law is proposed to be interpreted as its dysfunction.