Law and Philosophy

, Volume 29, Issue 3, pp 337–369 | Cite as

Fallibility and Retribution

  • Göran Duus-OtterströmEmail author


The fact that human fallibility virtually ensures that punishment will sometimes befall the innocent presents a theoretical puzzle to all forms of retributivism. Retributivists usually say that desert is a necessary condition for justified punishment. It remains unclear, following this view, how retributivists can support punishment in (imperfect) practice. The paper investigates a number of possible replies available to the retributivist. It concludes that one reply in particular can overcome the problem posed by fallibility, but it is not obvious that this reply is convincing.


Penal System Innocent People Penal Practice Actual Punishment Human Fallibility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



Financial support to write this paper was provided by the Swedish Research Council and Riksbankens Jubileumsfond. I am grateful for the comments offered by audiences at the CELPA seminar at the University of Warwick, the political theory seminar at the University of Gothenburg, and the political theory workshop at the 2009 conference of the Swedish Political Science Association. In particular, I would like to thank Douglas Husak, Ann-Kristin Kölln, Sandra Lindgren, Ed Page, and three anonymous referees for helpful comments.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations