Criminal Law and Philosophy

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 187–205 | Cite as

Human Dignity of “Offenders”: A Limitation on Substantive Criminal Law

Original Paper

Abstract

The paper argues for attaching a significant role to the dignity of offenders as a limitation on the scope of substantive criminal law. Three different aspects of human dignity are discussed. Human dignity is closely connected with the principle of culpability. Respecting the dignity of offenders requires that we assign criminal liability according to the actual attitudes of the offenders towards the interests protected by the offence. The doctrine of natural and probable consequence of complicity, which allows us to assign liability for mens rea offenses to a negligent offender, violates the dignity of the offender; it treats the incautious offender as if she had willfully expressed disrespect towards the protected interest. The human dignity core of privacy is invaded by criminalizing the private possession of child pornography. By extending the prohibition of the creation, sale and distribution of child pornography to the private possession of pornography, the State attempts to control the way the individual expresses an essential part of the self—his sexual fantasies—within himself. Dignity demands that our actions convey an attitude of respect towards human beings. The expressive meaning of disrespect is culture-dependent. The historical association with totalitarian regimes explains our reluctance to impose a legal duty to report past crime: the individual who is legally required to turn a suspect into the police is viewed as an “informant.”

Keywords

Human dignity Criminal law Offenders 

References

  1. Arendt, H. (1951, 12th printing 1968). The origins of totalitarianism. Harcourt, Brace & World. Google Scholar
  2. Ashworth, A. (1991). Principles of criminal law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bedau, H. A. (1992). The Eighth Amendment, Human dignity and the Death Penalty. In M. J. Meyer & W. A. Parent (Eds.), The constitution of rights: Human dignity and American values (p. 145). Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Google Scholar
  4. Benda, E. (2000). The Protection of Human Dignity (Article 1 of the Basic Law). S.M.U. Law Review, 53, 443–454.Google Scholar
  5. Bendor, A., & Sachs, M. (2011). The constitutional status of human dignity in Germany and Israel. Israel Law Review, 44, 25–61.Google Scholar
  6. Benedet, J. (2002). Children in pornography after sharpe. Les Cahiers de droit, 43, 327–350.Google Scholar
  7. Bradley, C. (1983). The exclusionary rule in Germany. Harvard Law Review, 96, 1032–1066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burke, D. D. (1997). The criminalization of virtual child pornography: A constitutional question. Harvard Journal on Legislation, 34, 439–472.Google Scholar
  9. BVerfGE 1973 34. Google Scholar
  10. BVerfGE 1989 80, 367. Google Scholar
  11. Canadian Criminal Code (1985). Google Scholar
  12. Charter of the United Nations (1945). Google Scholar
  13. Ciociola, G. M. D. (2003). Misprision of felony and its progeny. Brandeis Law Journal, 41, 697–768.Google Scholar
  14. City of Chicago, Petitioner v. Jesus Morales, 527 U.S. 41 (1999). Google Scholar
  15. CrimA 4424/98 Silgado v. The State of Israel [2002] IsrSC 56(5) 529. Google Scholar
  16. Criminal Justice Act 1988 (England). Google Scholar
  17. Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (England). Google Scholar
  18. Criminal Law Act 1967 (England). Google Scholar
  19. Dan-Cohen, M. (2002). Harmful thoughts: Essays on law, self, and morality. Princeton: Princeton University press.Google Scholar
  20. Dan-Cohen, M. (2010). Sanctioning corporations. Journal of Law & Policy, 19, 15.Google Scholar
  21. Dan-Cohen, M. (2011). A concept of dignity. Israel Law Review, 44, 9–23.Google Scholar
  22. De Reuck v. Director of Public Prosecutions 2004 (1) SA 406 (CC). Google Scholar
  23. Dubber, M. (2004). Toward a constitutional law of crime and punishment. Hastings Law Journal, 55, 509–572.Google Scholar
  24. Eberle, E. J. (2002). Dignity and liberty: Constitutional visions in Germany and the United States. London: Praeger.Google Scholar
  25. Emergency Medical Aid act, R.S.A. 2000. Google Scholar
  26. Englard, I. (2000). Human dignity: From antiquity to modern Israel’s constitution framework. Cardozo Law Review, 21, 1903–1928.Google Scholar
  27. Arkansas Code Annoteated. Google Scholar
  28. Code of Alaska. Google Scholar
  29. Colorado Revised Statutes. Google Scholar
  30. Delaware Code. Google Scholar
  31. Enmund v. Florida 458 U. S. 782. (1982). Google Scholar
  32. European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950). Google Scholar
  33. Feinberg, J. (1987). Harm to others. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Fletcher, G. P. (1984). Human dignity as a constitutional value. University of Western Ontario Law Review, 22, 171–182.Google Scholar
  35. Fletcher, G. P. (1998). Basic concepts of criminal law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Florida Statutes. Google Scholar
  37. Fuller, E. (2010, November 17). Are TSA pat-downs and full-body scans unconstitutional? The Christian Science Monitor. Google Scholar
  38. Gardner, J. (1994). Rationality and the rule of law in offences against the person. Cambridge Law Journal, 53, 502–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Gavison, R. (1979). Privacy and the limits of law. Yale Law Journal, 89, 421–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Glazebrook, P. R. (1964). Misprision of felony—shadow or Phantom? The American Journal of Legal History, 8(3), 189–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Good Samaritan act, 2001. Google Scholar
  42. Goodman, M. D. (2006). Human dignity in supreme court constitutional jurisprudence. Nebraska Law Review, 84, 740–794.Google Scholar
  43. Gotell, L. (2001). Inverting image and reality: R. v. Sharpe and the Moral Panic around Child Pornography. Constitutional Forum, 12, 9–22.Google Scholar
  44. Green, S. (2011). Thieving and receiving: overcriminalizing the possession of stolen goods. New Criminal Law Review, 14(1), 35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Grover, S. (2003). Oppression of children intellectualized as free expression under the Canadian Charter: A reanalysis of the Sharpe possession of child pornography case. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 11, 311–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Gur-Arye, M. (2001). A failure to prevent crime—should it be criminal? Criminal Justice Ethics, 20(2), 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Gur-Arye, M., & Weigend, T. (2011). Constitutional review of criminal prohibitions affecting human dignity and liberty: German and Israeli perspectives. Israel Law Review, 44, 63–89.Google Scholar
  48. Harcourt, B. (1990). The collapse of the harm principle. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 90, 109–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Harris, D. A. (1994). Factors for reasonable suspicion: When black and poor means stopped and frisked. Indiana Law Journal, 69, 659–688.Google Scholar
  50. Hart, H. L. A. (1968). Punishment and responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Heyman, S. J. (1994). Foundation of the duty to rescue. Vanderbilt Law Review, 47, 673–755.Google Scholar
  52. Hoernle, T., & Kremnitzer, M. (2011a). Human dignity and the principle of culpability. Israel Law Review, 44, 115–141.Google Scholar
  53. Hoernle, T., & Kremnitzer, M. (2011b). Human dignity as a protected interest in the criminal law. Israel Law Review, 44, 143–167.Google Scholar
  54. Hoffman, S. J. (1983). Statutes establishing a duty to report crimes or render assistance to strangers: Making apathy criminal. Kentucky Law Journal, 72, 827–866.Google Scholar
  55. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966). Google Scholar
  56. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966). Google Scholar
  57. Israel Law Review. (2011). 44(1) (entire issue). Google Scholar
  58. Johnson, D. B. (1994). Why the possession of computer-generated child pornography can be constitutionally prohibited. Albany Law Journal of Science & Technology, 4, 311–332.Google Scholar
  59. Kadish, S. H. (1997). Reckless complicity. Journal Criminal Law & Criminology, 87, 369–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kadish, S. (1999). Fifty years of criminal law: An opinionated review. California Law Review, 87, 943–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Kant, I. (1996). Metaphysics of morals (M. J. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Kappeler, S. (1986). The pornography of representation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  63. Kelly, M. (1975). Misprision of felony not a crime in Florida. University of Miami Law Review, 30, 222–230.Google Scholar
  64. Kentucky Revised Statutes. Google Scholar
  65. Klitou, D. (2008). Backscatter body scanners—a strip search by other means. Computer Law & Security Report, 24(4), 316–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Kornblatt, S. (2007). Are emerging technologies in airport passenger screening reasonable under the fourth amendment. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 41, 385–412.Google Scholar
  67. Kreit, A. (2008). Vicarious criminal liability and the constitutional dimensions of Pinkerton. American University Law Review, 57, 585–640.Google Scholar
  68. LaFave, W., & Scott., A. W. Jr. (1986). Criminal law, 2nd ed. St. Paul: West Group. Google Scholar
  69. Lagodny, O. (1999). Human dignity and its impact on German substantive criminal law and criminal procedure. Israel Law Review, 33, 575–591.Google Scholar
  70. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). Google Scholar
  71. Lipkin, R. J. (1983). Beyond Good Samaritan and moral monster: An individualistic justification for the duty to rescue. UCLA Law Review, 31, 252–293.Google Scholar
  72. Lockwood, C. D. (2010). Defining indefiniteness: Suggested revisions to the void for vagueness doctrine. Cardozo Public Law Policy & Ethics Journal, 8, 255–339.Google Scholar
  73. Lubonja, F. (2001). Privacy in a totalitarian regime. Social Research, 68, 237.Google Scholar
  74. MacKinnon, C. A. (1985). Pornography, civil rights and speech. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 20, 1–70.Google Scholar
  75. Margalit, A. (1996). The Decent Society. Google Scholar
  76. R. v. Martineau [1990] 2 S.C.R. 633. Google Scholar
  77. Massachusetts General Laws Annotated. Google Scholar
  78. McAllister, M. C. (2003). Human dignity and individual liberty in Germany and the United States as examined through each country’s leading abortion cases. Tulsa Journal of Comparative & International Law, 11, 491–520.Google Scholar
  79. McCrudden, C. (2008). Human dignity and judicial interpretation of human rights. European Journal of International Law, 19, 655–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. McTaggart, D. T. (2001). Reciprocity on the Streets: Reflections on the fourth amendment and the duty to cooperate with the police. New York University Law Review, 76, 1233–1258.Google Scholar
  81. McTague, T. (2010, March 4). No Naked Body Scan… No Flight; Two Women Are First to Be Banned. The Mirror.Google Scholar
  82. Meale, R. E. (1975). Misprision of felony: A crime whose time has come again. University of Florida Law Review, 28, 199–213.Google Scholar
  83. Meyer, M. J., & Parent, W. A. (Eds.). (1992). The constitution of rights: Human dignity and American values. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  84. Mill, J. S. (1989). On liberty. In Stefan. Collini (Ed.), Mill, on liberty and other writings (p. 13). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Minnesota Statutes. Google Scholar
  86. Minton, T. D., Smith, S. K., Steadman, G. W., & Townsend, M., U.S. Dep’t of Justice. (1998). Criminal victimization and perceptions of community safety in 12 cities. A joint project by the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvpcs98.pdf. Accessed 27 February 2012.
  87. Moore, M. (1990). Choice, character and excuse. Social Philosophy and Policy, 7, 29–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Morgan, E. L. (1953). Misprision of felony. South Carolina Law Quarterly, 6, 87–95.Google Scholar
  89. Mullis, C. W. (1974). Misprision of felony: a reappraisal. Emory Law Journal, 23, 1095–1118.Google Scholar
  90. Murphy, M. C., & Wilds, M. R. (2001). X-rated X-ray invades privacy rights. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 12(4), 333–343.Google Scholar
  91. New-York v. Ferber, 458 US 747 (1982). Google Scholar
  92. New Jersey Statutes. Google Scholar
  93. Ohio Revised Code. Google Scholar
  94. Osborne v. Ohio, 495 U.S. 103 (1990). Google Scholar
  95. Ost, S. (2002). Children at risk: Legal and societal perceptions of the potential threat that the possession of child pornography poses to society. Journal of Law & Society, 29(3), 436–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156 (1972). Google Scholar
  97. Parent, W. A. (1992). Constitutional values and human dignity. In M. J. Meyer & W. A. Parent (Eds.), The constitution of rights: Human dignity and American values (p. 47). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  98. Peikin, S. R., Seymour, K. P., & Caffarone, A. (2008). Prosecution of process crimes: Thoughts and trends. Annual Review of Criminal Procedure, 37, III.Google Scholar
  99. Pinkerton v. United States, 328 U.S. 640 (1946). Google Scholar
  100. Protection of Children Act 1978 (England). Google Scholar
  101. Ratcliffe, J. M. (Ed.). (1966). The Good Samaritan and the law. New York: Garden City, Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  102. Reiman, J. H. (1976). Privacy, intimacy, and personhood. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 6, 26–44.Google Scholar
  103. Revised Code Washington. Google Scholar
  104. Richards, D. A. J. (1979). Human rights and the moral foundations of the substantive criminal law. Georgia Law Review, 13, 1395–1446.Google Scholar
  105. Rhode Island General Laws. Google Scholar
  106. Roach, K. (2010). The problematic revival of murder under section 229(c) of the criminal code. Alberta Law Review, 47, 675.Google Scholar
  107. Roach, K. (2011). The primacy of liberty and proportionality, not human dignity, when subjecting criminal law to constitutional control. Israel Law Review, 44, 91–113.Google Scholar
  108. Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962). Google Scholar
  109. Rosenthal, A. M. (1964). Thirty eight witnesses. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  110. Saletan, W. (2007). Getting virtually naked. National Post (f/k/a The Financial Post) (Canada).Google Scholar
  111. Schachter, O. (1983). Human dignity as a normative concept. The American Journal of International Law, 77, 848–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Scott, A. W., Jr. (1957). Constitutional limitations on substantive criminal law. Rocky Mountain Law Review, 29, 275–295.Google Scholar
  113. Sendor, B. (1985). Crime as communication: An interpretive theory of the insanity defense and the mental elements of crime. Georgia Law Journal, 74, 1371–1434.Google Scholar
  114. R. v. Sharpe, 2001 S.C.R. 1, 45. Google Scholar
  115. Skogan, W. G. (1984). Reporting crimes to the police. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 21(2), 113–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Smith, L. S. (1991). Private possession of child pornography: Narrowing at-home privacy rights. Annual Survey of American Law, 1991, 1011–1046.Google Scholar
  117. Smith, A. M., & Menlow, M. (Eds.). (1993). The duty to rescue: Jurisprudence of aid (Applied Legal Philosophy). London: Dartmouth Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  118. Stanley v. Georgia 394 U.S. 557 (1969). Google Scholar
  119. Sykes v. D.P.P. [1961] 3 ALL E.R. 33. Google Scholar
  120. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. (1982). Google Scholar
  121. R v. Vaillancourt [1987] 2 S.C.R. 636. Google Scholar
  122. The Canberra Times. (2010). Full body scan or pat-down. Google Scholar
  123. The Constitution of South Africa. (1996). Google Scholar
  124. The German Basic Law. (1949). Google Scholar
  125. The Israeli Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty. (1992). Google Scholar
  126. The German Penal Code. Google Scholar
  127. The Israeli Penal Code. (1977). Google Scholar
  128. Tison v. Arizona 481 U. S. 137 (1987). Google Scholar
  129. The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography. (2000). A/RES/54/263. Google Scholar
  130. The Program of Action for the Prevention of the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography. 55th Mtg., 1992/74. Google Scholar
  131. UN Treaty Collection. http://treaties.un.org . Accessed 27 February 2011.
  132. U.S. Constitution (1787). Google Scholar
  133. United States Code. Google Scholar
  134. U.S. v. Farrar, 38 F.2d 515 (1930). Google Scholar
  135. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). Google Scholar
  136. van Dieen, J. (2002). The 20th anniversary of the charter: Development in criminal law under Section 7 of the charter. Windsor Y.B. Access Just, 21, 129–152.Google Scholar
  137. Vermont Statutes Annotated. Google Scholar
  138. Wenik, J. (1985). Forcing the bystander to get involved: A case for a statute requiring witnesses to report crime. Yale Law Journal, 94(7), 1787–1806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Whitman, J. Q. (2004). The two western cultures of privacy: Dignity versus liberty. Yale Law Journal, 113, 1151–1222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Woozley, A. D. (1983). A duty to rescue: Some thoughts on criminal liability. Virginia Law Review, 69, 1273–1300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Judge Basil Wunsh Professor of Criminal Law, Faculty of LawThe Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations