Criminal Sanction

Introduction

The high level of activity in the criminal justice system and the resultant productivity arise from a range of interconnected beliefs that the implementation of criminal sanctions to offenders is an essential and useful means of holding up the existing moral and political order. That is to say, the criminal sanction can be deemed to be a reinforcer of the moral beliefs and social order. This paper, however, will look at both sides of the application of criminal sanction. ‘Used providently and humanely it is a guarantor of human freedom; used indiscriminately and coercively, it is a threatener.’ (Packer, 1968:366)

Professor Packer uses his knowledge and understanding of the nature of criminal sanction largely to show how much it actually does threaten freedom; hence the arguments will revolve around this view. The essay aims to explain Packer’s quote and illustrate instances of criminal sanction as a ‘prime guarantor’ or ‘prime threatener’ of human freedom. The essay then goes to explain the rhetoric and the reality of justice and intends to point out the gap, which exists between the two. As Herbert Packer identified the law in books can be quite obsolete and detached from reality (Packer, 1968). His ideal models, namely due process and crime control, will be the cornerstone of the criminal justice evaluation. However, other models will be introduced and used to assess Packer’s imagery of value choices. In order to truthfully assess the character of justice alongside criminal sanction per se and be able to draw conclusions on how is justice manifested, this paper will succinctly look at several aspects of criminal justice process, including policing, prosecution and court procedures, and outside factors which sha...

... middle of paper ...

... as meaningless. Instead, this model sees crime simply as an occasion for social intervention. The offenders are not regarded as responsible for their acts, but rather as products and in some instances the victims of events beyond their control (King, 1981). According to this perspective, free will and moral responsibility are sheer illusions. Therefore, instead of punishing people for engaging in criminal activities, society should discover ways of meeting their needs by ‘providing them with the requisite human social qualities for them to control their future behaviour and so convert them into law-abiding citizens’ (King 1981:19). This model goes back to the notion of a criminal law without criminal sanctions. It argues against the utilization of criminal sanctions, and considers it not useful in curbing crime, as well as a threatener to those subjected to it.