Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • 8 - State

  • from Part III - Criminal Responsibility in Relation
  • Arlie Loughnan, University of Sydney
  • Book:
    Self, Others and the State
    Published online:
    11 November 2019
    Print publication:
    12 December 2019, pp 221-252

  • Summary

    This chapter provides the third and final investigation into relations of responsibility. As I show in this chapter, the position and function of the state in relations of responsibility is dynamic, reflecting changing social and political norms regarding the role of the state. I argue that there are four historic positions of the state in relations of responsibility, which are prominent at different points across the twentieth century and first years of the twenty-first century. In these relations of responsibility, the position of the state is less or more prominent, and its function is less or more elaborate – restricted to condemnation and prosecution, extending to prevention and deterrence, and to more elaborate functions concerning reconciliation with the past, preservation of the state and active strategies to avoid recurrence in the future. Each of these historic positions of the state posits a particular relation to individual responsibility for crime, revealing the ways in which criminal responsibility is distributed between individuals and the state and showing that such a division is dynamic.