Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Crime, Guilt and Punishment: Dignifying Criminal Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Quest for Core Values in the Application of Legal Norms

  • 277 Accesses

Abstract

The right to dignity plays an important role in constitutional law, and a more important one in criminal law. The chapter proposes taking substantive criminal law beyond the conventional dogmatic discourse, thus discussing the nature of substantive criminal law in light of universal fundamental constitutional principles and the need to investigate the nexus between constitutional law and substantive criminal law. It suggests that constitutionalizing substantive criminal law is necessary and inevitable, as it brings constitutional models of balance between confronted rights and interests, and provides the justification for attributing the stigma of guilt to certain acts. Attributing such a stigma needs to be highly supervised and justified, and that can be best done through constitutional scrutiny.

Research Fellow, the International Center for Health, Law and Ethics, Haifa University (Israel). I would like to dedicate this article to my mentor Prof. Mordechai Kremnitzer, a man of dignity and values, to whom I owe a lot.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Grundgesetz fur die Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Basic Law, GG). Art. 1(2). Translation at https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.html.

  2. 2.

    Council of Europe (1988) the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights) as amended by Protocol No. 11. In Council of Europe Treaty Series 155. Articles 3 and 4.

  3. 3.

    Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) s 7, Part 1 of the Constitution Act 1982. Article 15.

  4. 4.

    Civil Appeal (The Supreme Court of Israel) 6821/93 Bank Hamezrahee Ha-Meuohad v. Megdal Kfar Shetufey (1993) 49(4) P.D. 221.

  5. 5.

    Article 4 of the Basic Law.

  6. 6.

    Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996) Act 108 of 1996. Article 10.

  7. 7.

    Defoe (1994).

  8. 8.

    Kafka (1956).

  9. 9.

    Stuntz (1997), p. 6.

  10. 10.

    E.g., U.S. Const. amends. IV, V, VI, VIII.

  11. 11.

    Powell v. Texas (1968) 392 U.S. 514; Robinson v. California (1962) 370 U.S. 660; Lambert v. California (1957) 355 U.S. 225.

  12. 12.

    Fletcher (1998a), p. 159; Hart (1958), pp. 404–405; Stuntz (1997), p. 6; Dressler and Greenawalt (1999), p. 1532.

  13. 13.

    Fletcher Fletcher (1998a), p. 12.

  14. 14.

    Hart (1958), p. 431.

  15. 15.

    e.g., U.S. Const. amends. IV, V, VI, VIII.

  16. 16.

    Achour v. France (2006) IV, Eur. Ct. H.R. 268; Kokkinakis v. Greece (1993) Eur. Ct. H.R. 20.

  17. 17.

    Fletcher (1996), pp. 11–42.

  18. 18.

    E.K. v. Turkey (2002) Eur. Ct. H.R. 21.

  19. 19.

    Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) Part I, § 11 of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act, c. 11.

  20. 20.

    Stuart (1995), pp. 249–250.

  21. 21.

    R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd. (1985) 1 S.C.R. 295, 244 ¶ 117 (Dickson J).

  22. 22.

    Curr v. R. (1972) S.C.R. 889, 899.

  23. 23.

    Grundgesetz fur die Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Basic Law, GG). art. 1.

  24. 24.

    Ibid, art. 2.

  25. 25.

    BVerfGE 95, 96–103, 2 BvR 1851/94 (hereinafter “East German Border Guard Case”). https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/DE/1996/10/rs19961024_2bvr185194.html; Poetter S (2009) The Main Leading Cases of Federal Constitutional Court – East German Border Guard (BVerfGE 95, 96). http://www.juraexamen.info/die-wichtigsten-leitentscheidungen-des-bverfg-ddr-mauerschutzen-bverfge-95-96/.

  26. 26.

    Law v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) (1999) 1 S.C.R. 497, 507 (Can.); Barak (2006), p. 88.

  27. 27.

    Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) 381 U.S. 479, 484.

  28. 28.

    Barak (2006), p. 86.

  29. 29.

    Compare Jareborg (1988), pp. 76–78; Smith and Hogan (1996), pp. 4–5.

  30. 30.

    Fletcher (1998b), p. 43; Kant (1949), p. 46; Fletcher (1984), p. 171.

  31. 31.

    Ibid, p 59.

  32. 32.

    Ashworth (1995), p. 3, 83.

  33. 33.

    Hart (1968), p. 157.

  34. 34.

    Dostoevsky (1993).

  35. 35.

    Ashworth (1995), p. 22.

  36. 36.

    Blackstone (1769), pp. 4–5.

  37. 37.

    Kant (1965), p. 140.

  38. 38.

    Bishop (1892), p. 16.

  39. 39.

    Ashworth (1995), p. 40.

  40. 40.

    Mill (1859), p. 15; Cf. Feinberg (1988a), p. 124.

  41. 41.

    Smith and Hogan (1996), p. 17; Eser (1966), p. 346.

  42. 42.

    Mill (1859), p. 9.

  43. 43.

    Fletcher (2000), p. 456, 458, 472, 473; Simester and Sullivan (2002), p. 2.

  44. 44.

    Green (1997), p. 1570.

  45. 45.

    Murphy (1988), p. 25.

  46. 46.

    Barak (2006), p. 9.

  47. 47.

    Ibid, p. 4; cf. Holmes (1881), p. 1.

  48. 48.

    Colautti v. Franklin (1979) 439 U.S. 379.

  49. 49.

    Shoham (1970), p. 47.

  50. 50.

    Greenawalt (1995), p. 710.

  51. 51.

    Bishop (1892), p. 19.

  52. 52.

    Fletcher (2000), pp. 569–573.

  53. 53.

    Fletcher (1998b), p. 12.

  54. 54.

    Fitzgerald (1966), pp. 123–124.

  55. 55.

    Eser (1966).

  56. 56.

    See supra text accompanying note 41.

  57. 57.

    Feinberg (1988b), pp. 1–3.

  58. 58.

    Ibid, p. xiii.

  59. 59.

    Ibid, p. 2.

  60. 60.

    Ibid, p. 3.

  61. 61.

    Ibid, p. 25.

  62. 62.

    Ibid.

  63. 63.

    For a comprehensive study on the various approaches, see Bendor and Dancig-Rosenberg (2016), p. 325 (Isr.) (Hebrew).

  64. 64.

    e.g., CA 4424, 4713, 4779/98 Selgado v. The State of Israel (2002) IsrSC 56(5) 529, 539–41 (Isr.) (Barak, C.J.); Roach (2011), p. 91. For other approaches in between, see Gur-Arye and Weigend (2001), pp. 77–80.

  65. 65.

    Selgado (2002) IsrSC 56(5) 529, at 551–62 (Strasberg-Cohen, J.).

  66. 66.

    See In re Davis, 557 U.S. 1, 2 (2009). See also Fletcher (2010), p. 330.

  67. 67.

    Compare Kremnitzer (1993), p. 86; Stribopoulos (1999), p. 227.

  68. 68.

    Langodny (2011), pp. 764–765.

  69. 69.

    e.g., Lawrence v. Texas (2003) 539 U.S. 558, 575.

  70. 70.

    Barak (2006), p. 57.

  71. 71.

    E.g., Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 558, 567.

  72. 72.

    Dworkin (1990), p. 11.

  73. 73.

    Barak (2006), p. 58.

  74. 74.

    Summers (1982), p. 810.

  75. 75.

    Barak (2006), pp. 55–56.

  76. 76.

    E.g., East German Border Guard Case, BVerfGE 67 at 151, 173.

  77. 77.

    Donald and Howard (2015), p. 18.

  78. 78.

    R. v. Oakes (1986) S.C.R. 103 (Can.).

  79. 79.

    Fletcher (2002), pp. 77–78.

  80. 80.

    Fletcher (2000), p. 532.

  81. 81.

    I mean only those who could fairly be blamed for wrongdoing.

  82. 82.

    Davis v. United States (1895) 160 U.S. 469, 485–486; Fletcher (2000), p. 536.

  83. 83.

    Crimes are public wrongs, for in addition to the particular victim the public as a whole is injured in its sense of security and well-being.

  84. 84.

    Fletcher (1998b), p. 77.

  85. 85.

    The wrongdoing is reflected by the harm caused by the criminal actor to the legal-social order, namely violating a particular protected interest. On the notion of harm as wrongdoing. See Feinberg (1984), pp. 105–125.

  86. 86.

    Fletcher (1998b), p. 213.

  87. 87.

    Or ‘imputation.’ See Robinson (1997), pp. 279–377.

  88. 88.

    On ‘criminal responsibility,’ see Brandt (1960), pp. 106–115.

  89. 89.

    Fletcher (1998b), pp. 81–82.

  90. 90.

    On ‘punishment,’ Feinberg (1960), pp. 152–167; Fletcher (1987), p. 551 n.78.

  91. 91.

    Kafka (1956), p. 209.

  92. 92.

    On the meaning of moral guilt, see Fletcher (1998b), p. 99.

  93. 93.

    Babcock Gove (1993).

  94. 94.

    Wendell Holmes (1963), p. 3.

  95. 95.

    E.g., Nozick (1981a), p. 363.

  96. 96.

    Ashworth (1995), p. 86.

  97. 97.

    Ibid, p. 1.

  98. 98.

    Simester and Sullivan (2002), p. 3.

  99. 99.

    Ibid, pp. 20–21.

  100. 100.

    E.g., Rawls (1973), p. 83.

  101. 101.

    Kant (1965), p. 100 (parenthesis added).

  102. 102.

    Jareborg (1988), pp. 44–46, 76–78.

  103. 103.

    Simester and Sullivan (2002), p. 4.

  104. 104.

    Nozick (1981a), pp. 366, 370.

  105. 105.

    Hart (1968), p. 160.

  106. 106.

    Ripstein (1999), pp. 140–141.

  107. 107.

    It is remarkable that the German term for guilt is schuld. The German word associated with schuld is verschulden, which means debt, indebted, under obligation, and be blamed. Alike, the German term for retribution is vergeltung, which means to pay back or to repay.

  108. 108.

    Nozick (1981b), pp. 60–61.

  109. 109.

    See generally Descartes (1641).

  110. 110.

    As Abraham Lincoln said during a speech, he delivered to the U.S. Congress on December 1, 1862, “The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present.” Lincoln (1953), p. 537.

References

  • Ashworth, A. (1995). Principles of criminal law (Vol. 3, 2nd ed., p. 83). Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babcock Gove, P. (Ed.). (1993). Webster’s third new international dictionary (p. 1009). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barak, A. (2006). The judge in a democracy (p. 88). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendor, A., & Dancig-Rosenberg, H. (2016). Averout Pliliout v-Zkhoyut Hukatout [criminal offense and constitutional rights]. Mishpat U-Mimshal [Law and Government], 17, 325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, J. P. (1892). New commentaries on the criminal law (8th ed., p. 16). Chicago: T.H. Flood and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackstone, W. (1769). Commentaries on the laws of England (pp. 4–5). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, R. B. (1960). The conditions of criminal responsibility. In C. J. Friedrich (Ed.), Responsibility (pp. 106–115). New York: Liberal Arts Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Defoe, D. (1994). Robinson Crusoe. London: William Taylor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Descartes, R. (1641). Meditations on first philosophy (Donald A. Cress, Trans.). 1993, Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donald, A., & Howard, E. (2015). The right to freedom of religion or belief and its intersection with other rights. ILGA-Europe, Res. Paper, p. 18. https://www.ilga-europe.org/sites/default/files/Attachments/the_right_to_freedom_of_religion_or_belief_and_its_intersection_with_other_rights_0.pdf.

  • Dostoevsky, F. (1993). Crime and punishment (R. Pevear & L. Volokhonsky, Trans.). New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dressler, J., & Greenawalt, K. (1999). Criminal responsibility, and the supreme court: How a moderate scholar can appear immoderate thirty years later. Notre Dame Law Review, 74, 1507.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dworkin, R. (1990). A bill of rights for Britain (p. 11). London: Chatto & Windus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eser, A. (1966). The principle of ‘harm’ in the concept of crime. Duo Law Review, 4, 345, 346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, J. (1960). On justifying legal punishment. In C. J. Friedrich (Ed.), Responsibility (pp. 152–167). New York: Liberal Arts Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, J. (1984). The moral limits of the criminal law: Harm to others (pp. 105–125). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, J. (1988a). The moral limits of the criminal law: Harmless wrongdoing (p. 124). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, J. (1988b). The moral limits of the criminal law: Offense to others (pp. 1–3). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, P. J. (1966). On Jurisprudence (12th ed., pp. 123–124). London: Sweet & Maxwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, G. P. (1984). Human dignity as a constitutional value. University of Western Ontario Law Review, 22, 171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, G. P. (1987). Law and morality: A Kantian perspective. Columbia Law Review, 87, 533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, G. P. (1996). Basic concepts of legal thought (pp. 11–42). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, G. P. (1998a). The meaning of innocence. University of Toronto Law Journal, 48, 157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, G. P. (1998b). Basic concepts of criminal law (p. 43). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, G. P. (2000). Rethinking criminal law (p. 456). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, G. P. (2002). Romantics at war: Glory and guilt in the age of terrorism (pp. 77–78). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, G. P. (2010). The relevance of law to the incest taboo. In F. Herzog & U. Neumann (Eds.), Festschrift für Winfried Hassemer (p. 321). Heidelberg: C.F. Müller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, S. P. (1997). Why It’s a crime to tear the tag off a mattress: Overcriminalization and the moral content of regulatory offences. Emory Law Journal, 46, 1533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenawalt, K. (1995). Commentaries: Legal enforcement of morality. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 85, 710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gur-Arye, M., & Weigend, T. (2001). Constitutional review of criminal prohibitions affecting human dignity and liberty: German and Israeli perspectives. Israel Law Review, 44, 63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, H. L. A. (1968). Punishment and responsibility (p. 157). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, H. M., Jr. (1958). The aims of the criminal law. Law and Contemporary Problems, 23, 401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, O. W., Jr. (1881). The common law (p. 1). Boston: Little, Brown, and Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jareborg, N. (1988). Essays in criminal law (pp. 44–46). Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kafka, F. (1956). The trial (W. Muir & E. Muir, Trans.). New York: Modern Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1949). Fundamental principles of the metaphysics of morals (p. 46). New York: Bobbs-Merrill Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1965). The metaphysical elements of justice (J. Ladd, Trans.) (p. 100). New York: Bobbs-Merrill Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kremnitzer, M. (1993). Constitutional principles and criminal law. Israel Law Review, 27, 84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langodny, O. (2011). Basic rights and substantive criminal law: The incest case. University of Toronto Law Journal, 61, 761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, A. (1953). Annual message to congress. In R. P. Basler et al. (Eds.), Collected works of Abraham Lincoln (p. 537). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J. S. (1859). On liberty (p. 15). London: Longman, Roberts, & Green Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, J. (1988). Forgiveness and resentment. In J. Murphy & J. Hampton (Eds.), Forgiveness and mercy (p. 25). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nozick, R. (1981a). Philosophical explanations (p. 363). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nozick, R. (1981b). Anarchy, state, and utopia (pp. 60–61). New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J (1973) Punishment as a practice. In: Murphy JG (ed) Punishment and rehabilitation. Wadsworth Pub., Belmont, CA, p 83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ripstein, A. (1999). Equality, responsibility and the law (pp. 140–141). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roach, K. (2011). The primacy of liberty and proportionality, not human dignity, when subjecting criminal law to constitutional control. Israel Law Review, 44, 91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, P. (1997). Criminal law (pp. 279–377). Aspen: Aspen Law & Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoham, G. S. (1970). The mark of cain: The stigma theory of crime and social deviation (p. 47). Jerusalem: Israel University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simester, A. P., & Sullivan, G. R. (2002). Criminal law: Theory and doctrine (p. 2). Oxford: Hart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J., & Hogan, B. (1996). Criminal Law (8th ed., pp. 4–5). Butterworths Law.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stribopoulos, J. (1999). The constitutionalization of “fault” in Canada: A normative critique. Criminal Law Quarterly, 42, 227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, D. (1995). Canadian criminal law (3rd ed., pp. 249–250). Toronto: Carswell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuntz, W. J. (1997). The uneasy relation between criminal procedure and criminal justice. Yale Law Journal, 107, 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Summers, R. S. (1982). The general duty of good faith – Its recognition and conceptualization. Cornell Law Review, 67, 810.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendell Holmes, O. (1963). The common law (p. 3). Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Zefat Academic College, Safed, Israel

    Mohammed S. Wattad

Authors
  1. Mohammed S. Wattad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

    Khalid Ghanayim

  2. Faculty of Law, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel

    Yuval Shany

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Wattad, M.S. (2021). Crime, Guilt and Punishment: Dignifying Criminal Law. In: Ghanayim, K., Shany, Y. (eds) The Quest for Core Values in the Application of Legal Norms . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78953-4_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78953-4_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-78952-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-78953-4

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation