Cultural Defence and Culturally Motivated Crimes (Cultural Offences)
01 Jan 2001-European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice (Brill Nijhoff)-Vol. 9, Iss: 1, pp 1-32
About: This article is published in European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice.The article was published on 2001-01-01. It has received 45 citations till now.
Citations
More filters
Book•
21 May 2007
TL;DR: Acknowledgments ix INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER ONE: Multiculturalism without Culture 11 CHAPTER TWO: Between Culture and Cosmos 42 CHAPTER THREE: What's Wrong with Cultural Defence?
Abstract: Acknowledgments ix INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER ONE: Multiculturalism without Culture 11 CHAPTER TWO: Between Culture and Cosmos 42 CHAPTER THREE: What's Wrong with Cultural Defence? 73 CHAPTER FOUR: Autonomy, Coercion, and Constraint 100 CHAPTER FIVE: Exit and Voice 133 CHAPTER SIX: Multiculturalism without Groups? 158 Bibliography 181 Index 191
672 citations
Dissertation•
04 May 2017
TL;DR: The authors analyzes le systeme judiciaire hexagonal and permits de conclure que les institutions judiciaires sont productrices dinjustices. But, their analysis is limited to the case of the case de la Republique francaise.
Abstract: Cette these interroge l'apparente contradiction scalaire entre la proclamation de lois spatialement uniforme a l'echelle nationale et la territorialisation des populations francaises. Elle essaye de comprendre comment le systeme judiciaire hexagonal reussit a concilier ses exigences constitutionnelles d'indivisibilite et d'egalite avec la pluralite des territoires. L'analyse, enchevetrant une demarche qualitative et une demarche quantitative par l'exploitation des donnees des juridictions et du casier judiciaire national, permet de conclure que les institutions judiciaires sont productrices d'injustices. Plus ou moins asphyxies par les flux de delits a reprimer, les tribunaux de grande instance ne condamnent pas uniformement a l'echelle nationale, d'autant plus qu'ils doivent suivre les priorites definies dans la politique penale du procureur de la Republique. Possedant une propension diverse a devenir de veritables acteurs politiques de leur territoire, les chefs du parquet jouent ainsi un role essentiel de passeur scalaire mais accentuent l'iniquite du systeme penal. En effet, l'egalite proclamee comme un des fondements de la Republique francaise est abandonnee au profit d'une stigmatisation des territoires les plus defavorises qui sont plus severement condamnes que ne laisserait attendre la geographie des delits alors meme qu'ils sont oublies dans les politiques de prevention de la delinquance. Rompant des lors completement avec le principe de l'equite, les institutions judiciaires accentuent les fractures socio-spatiales du territoire francais. Ces processus de fragmentation revelent d'une part la pertinence de l'analyse de la justice penale par la geographie et d'autre part l'impossibilite de ne penser une amelioration du systeme judiciaire qu'en vase-clos.
73 citations
Cites background from "Cultural Defence and Culturally Mot..."
...Everson dès 1920 ou E. Green en 1961. Ces études s’insèrent dans le champ plus large de la substantive political theory. Ces travaux sont complétés depuis par les recherches de L. S. O’Neill et de B. D. Johnson (2010) qui examinent le rôle du procureur dans les sanctions pénales en s’appuyant et, c’est assez rare, sur des données statistiques de grandes quantités, à savoir les données relevées par la Sentencing Commission des États-Unis et par le Bureau administratif des tribunaux américains....
[...]
...Ainsi, J. Van Broeck (2001) montre que si les chercheurs anglophones abordent plutôt la thématique sous l’angle de la défense culturelle (cultural defence), les sociologues et criminologues continentaux s’intéressent plutôt aux infractions culturelles (cultural offences)32 comme l’excision…...
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose a cultural defense test and show how it could be applied appropriately in a few cases, and demonstrate the potential for abuse by showing how in particular cases cultural arguments failed to meet the requirements of the cultural defence test.
Abstract: Invoquer la defense culturelle est devenue une strategie judiciaire populaire bien que controversee. Expliquant dans un premier temps que la portee de la defense culturelle est plus vaste que generalement comprise et qu'elle sert aussi bien a attenuer des sentences, a creer des exceptions a des politiques etablies qu'a augmenter les montants de dommage et interets accordes, j'identifie ensuite les principes normatifs qui justifient ce type de defense. Meme si elle peut etre appuyee fonde sur des principes, si la defense culturelle a une chance d'etre adoptee
formellement, des politiques doivent etre etablies pour prevenir des abus. Je propose des criteres d'application de la defense culturelle qui sont illustres par quelques cas. La presentation d'exemples ou la defense culturelle est appropriee est suivie d'une demonstration des abus potentiels, a partir de cas particuliers dans lesquels les arguments culturels avances ne remplissaient pas les criteres du test propose. L'article se termine sur des recommandations pour assister les tribunaux a trouver les experts qui peuvent authentifier les requetes culturelles.
Invoking a cultural defense has become a popular but controversial legal strategy. After explaining that the scope of the cultural defense is broader than is often understood and that it is used to mitigate punishment, create exemptions from policies, and increase the size of damage awards, I identify the normative principles that justify such a defense. Although it may be defended as a matter of principle, if this defense has any chance of being formally adopted, policies must be established to prevent its misuse. I propose a cultural defense test and show how it could be applied appropriately in a few cases. Following the analysis of its proper use, I demonstrate the potential for abuse by showing how in particular cases cultural arguments failed to meet the requirements of the cultural defense test I propose. Finally I recommend ways to assist courts in finding cultural experts who can authenticate the cultural claims.
54 citations
Dissertation•
01 Jan 2018
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined whether indigenous peoples' demands for access to their cultural practices can be accommodated within criminal law, and concluded that the claims of indigenous peoples cannot be.
Abstract: This thesis is the conclusion of doctoral research that pursued to examine whether indigenous peoples’ demands for access to their cultural practices can be accommodated within criminal law. In a globalised context in which states become increasingly multicultural this question raises fear of social fragmentation and the anxiety for achieving unity. Certainly, Rwanda and Kosovo evidence that claims to access culturally diverse practices may lead to war or even genocide. The context of the thesis is a more benign form of response to these claims: accommodation. While accommodation in general has received great attention from scholars (Kymlicka 1989, Gutmann et al 1994, Tully 1995), within criminal law the only focus has been cultural defences (Renteln 2004, Kymlicka et al 2014). However, little research has been conducted to understand the broader implications of this phenomenon for both the accommodated and the accommodating. The research aims to shed light on these broader implications of accommodation by exploring it within criminal law. Certainly, the simplicity and individualised nature of cultural defence conceals what is at stake for both the accommodated and the accommodating. Specifically, it conceals how criminal law cannot be responsive to the claims of minorities because it seeks to maintain the practices of the constitutional order of which criminal law is part. The result is that the claims of indigenous peoples cannot be accommodated. In order to uncover these implications, the research employs social holism (Pettit 1998) to develop a broader understanding of criminal law as a socio-cultural practice, which enables an adequate description and assessment of the diversity of claims to recognition that minorities make to the state of which they are part. In broadening the view the claims of minorities become linked to their position within the constitutional order (Tully 1995), and then the question arises as to whether minorities have been unjustly excluded or included (Lindahl 2013) in that order, which may lead to recognise a new plurality of responses that the state and its criminal law should provide to them. By broadening the understanding of criminal law it is enabled an adequate framework for the assessment of the phenomenon of accommodation. Certainly, this is necessary for claims to access diverse cultural and social practices to be met with justice, for the state’s responses need to be sensitive to the diversity of claims put forward by minorities, without overlooking that the state as well need to access its particular social and cultural practices.
46 citations
Cites background from "Cultural Defence and Culturally Mot..."
...370 See Alan MacFarlane, The Origins of English Individualism (CUP 1978)....
[...]
...See Bhikhu Parekh, Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory (MacMillan Press 2000) 101....
[...]
...It follows that by treating individuals who hold these conceptions unequally, the critical 183 See Jeffrie Murphy, ‘Legal moralism and retribution revisited’ (2007) 1 Criminal Law and Philosophy 10....
[...]
...399 Broeck, ‘Cultural Defense’ (n 383) 8; Renteln, The Cultural Defense (n 380) 11-12; Kay Levine, ‘Negotiating the Boundaries of Crime and Culture: A Sociolegal Perspective on Cultural Defense Strategies’ (2003) 28 Law and Social Inquiry 43; Woodman, ‘The Culture Defence’ (n 383) 11....
[...]
...487 See Levy, ‘Cultural membership’ (n 407) 153....
[...]
TL;DR: The authors examines the problems arising when culture is teleologized in courts of law, by being treated as "objective evidence" or as the direct cause of persecution or delinquency.
Abstract: This paper examines the problems arising when culture is teleologized in courts of law, by being treated as ‘objective evidence’ or as the direct cause of persecution or delinquency. It starts by explaining the role of expert witnesses, and the kinds of evidence they can and cannot provide. It then addresses the widespread use, especially in the United States, of the ‘cultural defense’ in cases involving immigrant or minority defendants. It summarizes anthropological approaches to the notion of culture; the ongoing debate between rights-based and culture-based approaches to international law; and the impact upon anthropology of current notions of legal and cultural pluralism. Finally, it briefly addresses the treatment of anthropological evidence in English courts, with special reference to asylum appeals under the rubric of the 1951 Refugee Convention.
Resume
Le present article etudie les problemes qui surviennent lorsque la culture est teleologisee dans les tribunaux en etant traitee comme une « preuve objective » ou une cause directe de persecution ou de delinquance. L'auteur commence par expliquer le role des experts devant les tribunaux et les types de preuves qu'ils peuvent et ne peuvent pas fournir. Il etudie ensuite l'usage tres repandu, notamment aux Etats-Unis, de la « defense culturelle » dans les cas impliquant des accuses issus de l'immigration ou d'une minorite. Il resume l'approche anthropologique de la notion de culture, le debat en cours entre les approches du droit international basees sur les droits et celles basees sur la culture, et l'impact sur l'anthropologie des notions actuelles de pluralisme juridique et culturel. Enfin, il aborde brievement le traitement de la preuve anthropologique dans les tribunaux anglais, en faisant specifiquement reference aux appels en matiere de droit d'asile dans le cadre d'application de la Convention sur les refugies de 1951.
44 citations