This book focuses on one part of the judicial system: the criminal justice chain. This involves all the activities and actors dealing with policing, prosecution, judgment, and sanctioning of crimes. In the last decades, reforms have been implemented in several European countries. In Belgium, for example, there was the so-called Octopus reform in 1998. The police was restructured, leading to an integration of the police forces on a national and local level. New steering instruments were introduced, such as regional security plans. With regard to the sanctioning of crimes, a new institution was installed, called the sentence implementation court. This book evaluates these reforms and discusses the current reform on the reorganization of the judicial landscape. In addition, it examines the relation between trust and distrust and the application to the judicial system. It discusses the human capital aspect of the system, by means of a study on the prosopography of the Belgian magistrates that analyses the Magistracy as socio-professional group, and focuses on situations of system building, transformations under constraint (occupations), and transfers (colonial experience). Lastly, the book presents a comparative study of Belgium and France regarding the new techniques and instruments that are needed to accelerate the judicial response time and to ensure that the judicial system delivers its services on time.

This book tackles the growing issues concerning the managerialism and bureacratisation of criminal justice systems across a number of jurisdictions. Here, managerialism means the move towards more standardised, bureaucratic and efficiency-driven systems, influenced by a desire to ensure predictability, control risks and, ultimately, economic savings via a more efficient process. The volume explores the phenomenon of managerialism in selected national criminal legal systems, covering all stages of criminal case processing from arrest to the imposition of sanction. The selected countries represent diverse socio-economic, political, cultural and legal traditions including common law, civil law, mixed common and civil law and post-Soviet tradition. The book engages with a variety of relevant theoretical concepts, such as fairness, rationality, efficiency and legitimacy. The authors critically examine whether and to what extent the trend towards managerialism is indeed discernible, and what are its likely effects in the given national criminal legal systems. The book will be of interest to students, researchers and practitioners working in the areas of comparative criminal justice and procedure.

How do judges sentence? In particular, how important is judicial discretion in sentencing? Sentencing guidelines are often said to promote consistency, but is consistency in sentencing achievable or even desirable? Whilst the passing of a sentence is arguably the most public stage of the criminal justice process, there have been few attempts to examine judicial perceptions of, and attitudes towards, the sentencing process. Through interviews with Scottish judges and by presenting a comprehensive review and analysis of recent scholarship on sentencing – including a comparative study of UK, Irish and Commonwealth sentencing jurisprudence – this book explores these issues to present a systematic theory of sentencing. Through an integration of the concept of equity as particularised justice, the Aristotelian concept of phronesis (or 'practical wisdom'), the concept of value pluralism, and the focus of appellate courts throughout the Commonwealth on sentencing by way of 'instinctive synthesis', it is argued that judicial sentencing methodology is best viewed in terms of a phronetic synthesis of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case. The author concludes that sentencing is best conceptualised as a form of case-orientated, concrete and intuitive decision making; one that seeks individualisation through judicial recognition of the profoundly contextualised nature of the process.

This book provides a comparative analysis of the process of breach across ten different European jurisdictions by identifying and elaborating a number of key analytical themes through which the different systems can be compared and evaluated. It is informed by and hopes to advance the research activities of the COST Action IS1106 on Offender Supervision in Europe, particularly the Action’s work on developing new comparative methodologies to examine the process of decision-making involved in the breaching of offenders for non-compliance. This volume consists of country chapters and thematic chapters. Analyses are based on exhaustive reviews of the literature available in each jurisdiction as well as the results of an empirical pilot study to provide a unique and valuable insight into current practice as well as enhancing our understanding of the contingencies and vagaries of the processes of breach as they exist in both civil and common law European jurisdictions. The key themes and emerging concerns that are explored include: the roles and responsibilities of the different actors involved in the breach process; the degree and nature of discretion exercised by decision-makers; and legitimacy, due process and procedural requirements of breach processes both from a pan-European and from a comparative perspective. This book will be of interest to criminal lawyers and criminologists, policy makers, criminal justice practitioners, probation workers and students of criminal justice studies across Europe. Comparative insight into the decision-making processes of breach across Europe will also be of interest to American, Canadian and Australian audiences seeking comparisons with their own systems.

This book investigates the penal culture in France and Germany – how it is shaped in politics, media, and public opinion. Although compared with the US or the UK, France and Germany seem to place a strong emphasis on the ideal of rehabilitation that would block excessive punishment and other outcomes of punitive developments in society, there is a steady increase in punitiveness over time for which the term “strained restraint” is proposed. The book shows that the idea of penal moderation is deeply rooted in public opinion, politics, and the media and that it is renegotiated every day in a dynamic interplay between these spheres. Punishment and society research has traditionally focused on the US and the UK. In comparative research, both are considered extreme in punitive developments with high rates of imprisonment and large groups of the population under penal control. The other extreme in comparative research would be Scandinavia with the famous Nordic Exceptionalism marked by low prison population rates. Germany and France are often considered to be “the same” when compared with each other, and “the other” with reference to both of these extremes. However, this book shows that France and Germany are far from being the same when it comes to state organization (centralistic vs. federal), criminal justice and the criminal law, political traditions, and the media. Also, research from both countries has looked at whether developments such as the “punitive turn” have occurred in Germany and France. Research focused on the domestic situation concludes that punitiveness is on the rise, and that both countries are indeed experiencing their own punitive turn. How do we reconcile these contradictory findings? Why do these two seem to follow the path of penal moderation in the overall outcome of punishment in society when we look at comparative research? And how is it that from a domestic perspective, punitive attitudes and desires are leading to more punitiveness? By focusing on the meso level, with a comparative perspective on the two countries and a dynamic analytical approach, this book reconciles the fluidity of individual attitudes and opinions with the relative stability of societal discourse. The authors posit that penal moderation comes at a price: overall and in an internationally comparative perspective, there is penal moderation, but a closer look at the domestic situation and development reveals that it is nonetheless challenged by a slowly rising tide of punitiveness. Going beyond the main tenets of punishment and society research with a dynamic analysis of two large societies in Europe, this book is ideal reading for scholars and students of penology, criminal justice, and European studies.

The contributions to this volume were written by historians, legal historians and art historians, each using his or her own methods and sources, but all concentrating on topics from the broad subject of historical legal iconography. How have the concepts of law and justice been represented in (public) art from the Late Middle Ages onwards? Justices and rulers had their courtrooms, but also churches, decorated with inspiring images. At first, the religious influence was enormous, but starting with the Early Modern Era, new symbols and allegories began appearing. Throughout history, art has been used to legitimise the act of judging, but artists have also satirised the law and the lawyers; architects and artisans have engaged in juridical and judicial projects and, in some criminal cases, convicts have even been sentenced to produce works of art. The book illustrates and contextualises the various interactions between law and justice on the one hand, and their artistic representations in paintings, statues, drawings, tapestries, prints and books on the other.

This book asks how we should make sense of sentencing when, despite huge efforts world-wide to analyse, critique and reform it, it remains an enigma.Sentencing: A Social Process reveals how both research and policy-thinking about sentencing are confined by a paradigm that presumes autonomous individualism, projecting an artificial image of sentencing practices and policy potential. By conceiving of sentencing instead as a social process, the book advances new policy and research agendas. Sentencing: A Social Process proposes innovative solutions to classic conundrums, including: rules versus discretion; aggravating versus mitigating factors; individualisation versus consistency; punishment versus rehabilitation; efficient technologies versus the quality of justice; and ways of reducing imprisonment.

The Sentencing Council of England and Wales has as its core aim to promote consistency in sentencing, with a developed system of appellate guidance at sentencing in addition to a narrative guidelines system which is now two decades old. As such, there is much to analyse and many lessons to be learned - for England and Wales and other jurisdictions. Consistency in sentencing is widely regarded to be an essential component of a fair sentencing system; but what does consistency mean exactly? In Achieving Consistency in Sentencing , the author maintains that consistency incorporates both substantive and procedural elements, focussing upon the proper application of principle. The notion of comparing 'like' cases is rejected as simplistic, impractical, and unprincipled. Lyndon Harris argues that a more principled approach reconciles the tension between consistency and individualised justice which has been suggested to exist. The author uses clear empirical evidence of inconsistency in sentencing to emphasize the crucial need for discretion during the sentencing exercise which, he argues, should be structured in a way that encourages sentences to be imposed in accordance with the principles underpinning the scheme while maintaining the ability to individualise sentences. Using England and Wales as a case study, this work analyses various methods of structuring discretion. The latter part of the book examines the interplay between the primary givers of guidance: Parliament, the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), and the Sentencing Council and draws conclusions (good and bad) as to ways in which consistency can be achieved. Lyndon Harris identifies lessons to be learned while pointing out the strengths and deficiencies in the various devices used to guide sentencing judges when they are required to exercise their discretion. The book draws attention to the need for greater flexibility and structure while emphasising the work that needs to be done to address racial and gender inconsistencies in sentencing. Thus, while providing a theoretically sound critique of the concept, this monograph is of direct practical relevance to those studying or practising in sentencing systems worldwide.

Debates about the regulation of drugs are inseparable from talk of children and the young. Yet how has this association come to be so strong, and why does it have so much explanatory, rhetorical and political force? The premise for this book is that the relationship between drugs and childhood merits more exploration beyond simply pointing out that children and drugs are both ‘things we tend to get worried about’. It asks what is at stake when legislators, lobbyists and decision-makers revert to claims about children in order to sustain a given legal or policy position. Beginning with a genealogy of the relationship between the discursive artefacts of ‘drugs’ and ‘childhood’, the book draws on Foucauldian methodologies to explore how childhood functions as a device in the biopolitical management of drug use(rs) and supply. In addition to analysing decriminalisation initiatives and sentencing measures, it (unusually) reaches beyond the criminal context to consider the significance of the ‘politics of childhood’ for law- and policymaking in the fields of family justice and education. It concludes by arguing that the currency of childhood and ‘youth’ is not reducible to rhetoric; it shapes the discursive entities of drugs and addiction and is one of the ways in which particular substances become socially, culturally and politically intelligible. At the same time, ‘drugs’ serve as a technology of child normalisation. The book will be essential reading for policymakers as well as researchers and students working in the areas of Criminal Justice, Law, Psychology and Sociology.

Written for students of criminal justice, Comparative Criminal Justice Systems: Global and Local Perspectives examines the nature of crime and justice in varying countries and cultures in North America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Using a topical approach, it compares different systems of crime and justice in terms of their differences from, and similarities to, the laws and institutions of modern criminal justice, focusing on the United States as a standard of comparison. By examining different criminal justice systems in terms of their local peculiarities and understanding their change and continuity, readers will gain a well-rounded international perspective of the world's varying systems of criminal justice. Key Features: -Explores the rise of modern criminology and the criminal justice system in the nineteenth century. It is critical for students to understand the history of modern systems to fully comprehend the varying nature of today's main legal systems, focusing on the United States as a standard of comparison. -Employs a topical approach to examine the criminal justice systems in varying countries in Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America, including comparative views on law enforcement, judicial systems, corrections, due process of law, and search and seizures. -Includes discussions on comparative processes of criminalization and decriminalization on such issues as domestic violence, child abuse, homosexuality, and sexual harassment. -Discusses new global crimes and their impact on modern and traditional criminal justice systems, including human smuggling, global sex trade, global illegal drug trade, illegal trafficking of conventional military weapons, money laundering, cybercrime, and global terrorism. -Discussion questions ensure that student's grasp the core theoretical concepts.