israel law review

7/29/2019 Israel Law Review

1/16

ISRAEL .AW REVIEW lIr,L.R,Vol.26that legally permit criminalisation. Among them, young menthe most disadvantaged sectionsof the populutior.,"" Leavity orre"-

within the concept of criminality a wide range of situations aretogether. Most of these, however,have seplrate p"op""ti"" urrdcommon denominator: violence within the family; vio[nce in ancontext in the streets; breaking into private dwellings;divergent ways of receiving goods llegaly; different types ofin traffic; polution of the environment; and some forms ofactivities. Neitfrr in the-motivation of those who are involvedsuch events, nor in the nature of the consequences,nor in theof dealing with them (be it in a preventive sense,or in theof the control of the conflict) can any common structure be discov-All that these events have in common s that the criminar justiceis authorised to take action against them. some of theseeventsconsiderable suffering to those directly involved, quite often af-both perpetrator and victim. consider, ro" "*.-fe, traflicand violence within the family. The vast -.Gty of thewhich are dealt with by criminal justice however,*olta not scorehigh on an imaginary scaleofpersonar hardship. Matrimo-difficulties, difficulties between parents and children, serious dif_at work and housing problems wil, as a rule, be experiencedserious both in degreeand duration. If we .o-p""" criminarwith other events, there is - on the level of ihose directly- nothing intrinsic which distinguishes those ,criminal events,,other difficulties or unpleasant situations. Nor, as a rule, are theyout by thosedirectly involved to be dealt with in "o, *u, whichradically from the way other events are dealt with. It is thereforesurprising that a considerableproportion of the events which wouldas "serious crimes" within ihe context of the criminal justiceremain completely outside that system. They are settled withinsocial context in which they take place (the famiiy, the trade union,associations, the neighbourhooaj in a similar way as other ..non-conflicts are settled. All this meansthat there is no ontol.ogi_of crime.2

L. Hulsman and J. Bernat de C6lis, peinzs perd.ues paris, 19g2); L. Hulsman,"critical criminology and the concept of crime" (19g6) r0 contemporary crisis 63-0 .

Nm,6. l , l99l l ALTERNATI\IECRIMN POLICIASThur, Ibom an abolitionist perspective, I experienc some difficwlth the way in which the organising committee has phrased cerprrtr of the prtgram. A terminology in which we speak about "aOltlve fOCial esponses o crime" and "non-punitive responses o crit3am! 0oconvey hat there is anontologicalreality of crime ind.epenof the deftning actiuities of criminal justice. In an abolitionist approIt ia apecifically that idea that is, in the first place, challenged.

Criminalisation and criminal justiceWhat is criminal justice? For us, criminal justice is a specific fofcooperation between a certain number ofagencies such as the pothe courts (in the broadestsense, .e., notjust thejudges, but alsopublic prosecutor, solicitors, etc.), the probation and the prison serlaw and criminology departments in the academic world, the Minisof Justice and Parliament. We can make our definitions of the crimjustice system visual by meansof the figure on the next page. Nonthese organisations are in themselvesmarried to criminal justice; thave (evenif they are somarried to an extent) a life of their own. M

of the activities of the police for example, do not take place withinframework of that special form of cooperation. Similarly, most ofactivities of the courts do not take place within a criminal jusframework. Often they act n the frame ofcivil or administrative justWhat then is that specific form of cooperationor - in other w- of cultural and socia l organization3 which producescriminalisatiI will bevery brief and only highlight a certain number of aspectswseem to me important for our immediate topic.The first specific hing of the cultural organization s that crimjustice is the act of constructing (or re-constructing) reality in aspecific way. It produces a construction of reality by focusing onincident, narrowly defined in time and place and it freezes the acthere and looks in respect to that incident to a person,an individuawhom instrumentality (causality) and blame can be attributed.result is that the individual then becomes separated out. He icertain important ways isolated in respect of that incident fromenvironment, his friends, his family, the material substratum of

J. Gusfield, The Culture of Public Prcblems. Drinking and.Driuing ond the SytnOrdzr (Qhicago/London,1981).


2/16

ISRAELLAW REVIEW lIg.L.R.Vol. 25He is also separated from those peoplewho feel victimized in awhich may be attributed to his action. Thoee '\rictims' aren a comparable way. So, the cultural organization of refer-sets certain individuals apart from their distinctive en-and it separates people who feel victimized fron people whon this specific setting as "perpetrators". trn this senseorganization of criminal justice creates "fictitious individu-and a "fictitious" ihteractiorr between them.

scHooLS I]NIVERSITY(Criminal aw andcriminologT

GOVERNMENTALDEPARTMENTS (Ministryof Justice, the Home Offrce

and others)

PARLIAMENT

LEGAI IEXTS(law,politicaldecisions,doctrine)

COURTS COSMOLOGY(last udgment)

!lcr,8.,1,98ll ALTERNA1IIVE RIMEPOLICIES 68fuiother feature of the cultural organization of criminal justice is

ftOUron tla.me allocation". There is a strong tendency within criminjUrttce to asEembleevents and behaviour dealt with and sanctioapprraa in a consietent and coherent pattern around a hierarchyiil"itt,. This hierarchy of gavity is mainly built on experience ofnttoa rsnge of events within the actual (or considered)competencelno ryrter] m tnir pyramid practically no comparison is made wiaventr and behaviour outside that range. Grading takes place to a Iarextont in a separaie universe determined by the structure of criminJurtice itgelf. Consistency of the scalewithin the system necessaieeds to inconsistencies with the scales of those directly concernOUtaidehe system, n so far as values and perceptions n society are nuniform. The "program" for blame allocation typical for criminal justi1 a tme *py tf the doctrine of "the last judgment" and "purgatordeveloped in certain varieties of western christian theology. It marked aleo by the features of "centrality" and "totalitarianism", sdfic for thosedoctrines. Naturally, thoseorigins - this "old" rationali- is hidden behind new arords: "God" is replaced by the "Law', and tuconBensugof the PeoPle".I come now to the sp'ecial features of the social organizatinncriminal justice. I will mention two: the first feature of the soorganization of criminal justice is h]ne ety weak pasition whi'ch nuictin- *a by victims I mean the person or person who feel troubled byevent or a sequence fevents - have in its frame ofreference.

we would argue that the activities of professions and bureaucraccan be only useful to clients when they are grridedby an altive partpation of att ttte people n whosebehalf they are working. In a criminiustice frame of reference, there is - in principle - no roo-m or sLn active participation and guidance. When the police s working witha criminai justice frame they tend not to be directed any more by wiehes and desires of the complainant, but by the requirements of logal procedure which they are preparing' The complainant -p""ro" who asked for action from the police - becomes nstead oguide for their activities a "witness'. A witness is mainly a "toolf,ring legal proceedings to a successfulend. In a comparable way frame of court proceedings precludes - or makes it anyway specidifficult - that the victim expresses reely his view on the situationontsrs irr an interaction with the person who is standing as a suppooffonder before the court. Algo n that situation he is firstly a "witneven in those legal systems n which a specialposition has beencrea


3/16

ISRAEL I"AW REVIEW lIs.L.R.Vol.25The evaluation studies which have up till now been donethe result ofchanges n legal procedureswhich tend to reinforce theof victims within a criminar justice ftame have up till nowa very disappointing result.asecond eature of the social organization of criminal justice is itsdivision of labour orientedon a centralized criminaiaw (writtencommon law). this makes it very difficult for the functionariestheir activities to the prtbrems as experiencedby those direcilyAnd it makes it extremely diflicult for them to assumeresponsibility for their activiiies in this respect. one of thecharacteristics of criminal justice is that it preachis in its discourseresponsibility' for'offend,ers" ana tnit it supp res e 'personalfor the persons which work in its fraie of reference.an abolitionist approach "criminalisation,' (definitions of eventsresponses to events thus defrned above) tend to be rejected asunjust and ineffective under a preventive, a controlling and aperspective. This doesnot imply that all the activities of the- even when they are defined formally as criminal justice- are rejected. Abolition of criminari"ution may take placethe offrcial label of criminal justice. It is not the official name butsocial and cultural organisation ofthe activities which deter-if an activity is to be consideredas "criminalisation,,.

about crime policy (and also activities provoked by decisionspolicy) may be classified into three different catejories:situations as they are supposed o or clnirned. o exist

category consists ofthose (supposed)undesirabreevents whichobjectof a claim that criminalisation could help control them orthem (robbery, drugtrafficking, speeding,beating of women,fraud, pollution of the environment, etc.)

van Dijk, "state Assistance to the Victim of crime in $eking compensation,, ino vbtim por4y (Helsinki, Heuni publication series i, rssa).

Nr,8.1,19011 ALTERT.IATIVE RIME POLICIES 67, Pwblema aa they are supposed to or claimed, to be createderlmlnol juatice in aociety.Thlr category consists of the (supposed)"social costg" of criminJurtlce, e.9,, the creation of suffering and stigmatisation, the reinforacat of erieting inequalities, the alienation experiencedby those$stly involved in events which are subsequently criminalised and fblr-of-crlne igsue.8, Internal problems which affect the organisations"belonging"to orlmtnaljuatice (police, courts,prison seruices,robation, Iegislator)a

tln peraonnel working in those organisations.We can distinguish internal problems within the organisation (elrck of manpoweror training within the police o fulfil certain tasks) aIntornal problems betuteenorganisations (e.g., a d.iscrepancybetwetho rentencing policy of the judiciary and the places available in tgriton gervice).Very often debates around these three categories of problems apurruod and are decided upon in a fragmented way. Thus the issuethe rolo of criminal justice with respect to sexual violence againwonon may be dealt with without taking into account claims relatinto the second category, as, for exemple, the reinforcement of soclnoquality resulting from criminal justice intervention. very oftectivists in a particular field (feminists, militants for the environmeor rafety in the streets) are not aware of the claims relating to the seco

cruogory. They are hardly to blame since the problems included in thcltogory seldom appear in a coherent way in the official discoursecriminal justice. The possibilities of criminal justice dealing wiproblematic situations are generally overestimated in the offrcial dcourg6, and its "social cogts" underestimated.s The reporting in thmall-modia often reinforces this distortion.l'ragmented claim making in the first category s often answereda ftagmented study of the object of the claim. when this study takplace in an official governmental context or in an academic contedominated by consensus criminology, claims belonging to the thircategory (internal problems of criminal justice) wilr possibly be takeinto account. It is however improbable that claims belonging to th

6 Eurnpran ommitteencrimehoblemr,Roport n Dccr.lmlnalhadon19g0)t{ ,


4/16

IERAEL"AWREVtrEW lk.L.R.Vol.26category(general aspectsofsocial costs)will be adequately dealt

the secondcategory are generally in a very weak positionthe preparation towards decision makingas weII as n the actualonly when the three prablem areas are taken intotogether in the decision making can we consider criminal justice(as acceptedby the official wortrd).policy" is often understood as a "policy witJr respect to crimecriminals'?. The gxistence of "crime and criminals' is generallyas a "given", as a natu.ral social fact, not a pnlcess of (selec-definition, the responsibility and the object of,policy. It would beerror in our debate to define 'crime policy'in such away. one of the necessary conditions f,ora useful diseussion onpolicy is to problematise the notions of "crime and criminals". Theo which "eventsand situations" should be subjected o criminali-will be one of the main issues in our debate.is, on the one hand, part of a wider social policy, but,other hand, must retain a certain autonomy with respect to thisuseful approack in this respeet taking into account theof looking at the three categories of problems mentionedand their inter:relationship in the process of criminalisation -oerimepolity" as a 'policy with respeet o crirninal justice

policy with respect to 'criminal justice systems" would be(1) it would address itself to the development of, thewhich form. he material base of the s;rstem (police, courts,etr.) and the systemsof reference hey use; (2) it wourd addressto the question as to which type of events eould be dealt with byunder which conditions and in which mErnner (under thisthe "gate-keepingf function of crine policy would requireattention); (3) it would voice recommendations about socialin other aneas of society with respect to problenaticwhich have becode the objeet of a crime policy debate.6

a conctete application of such an approach to crime policy, see, the l5thResearch conference ofthe council ofEurope (lgg4), especially therecommendations and conclusions of the conference. council of Europe,Behaviour and Attitudes and rheir Implicatione for Cyiminal Law" (stras-1984).

h, a*,l'lll ALTERIIIATIIIE OBIMB FOLICIES 6Tlt{FJthoutdbe contrclledand rernedie{l Howdowepoint out whil flat tOdarl wlth whenwe cannotuse he word "crime"any moru*f iil Fthrp oontlol"trouble"or "problematic ituatione"?WhaH tloubla ocout? Pfohl defines t as follows:Ttguur orn bc doftnedas that situation which occurswhen(1) Fop[ gc not ritualistically linked to a relatively similar seof lm' llfs tr and shouldbe structured, and(r) fu hck of ruch links result in conflictover ways of thinkinbrlhg rnd rcting.TPbH mtr{ctr himslf in this definition to a "trouble" whosesoub ta 193trtconflict. we canextendhis approach, owever, o the wAJlr lVff falAte to'nature". Troublealsooccurswhen"nature" reala r dlfhrcnt way than we expect t to'behave"'Pfuhldtrtinguishea wo typesof rituals whichare essential o mAlrf trpuble. The first, when successfully nacted,prevents roub?brrr src ritudle of prirnary ordnring. The seconddeals with

9qr6nce of tmuble. They are rituals of reordering. When succestbry curtail or contain trouble.irpuble (or problematicsituations) are thus defined as negaavantr which deviatefrom the order in which we seeand feel our lillot d,Cfeative eocialcohesionoften foms itself around "trouble', arou"prcblematicevents', but a high density of thoseeventsmay becdfftructive for creativecohesion nd social nteraction. Under thOOnditionen activity which diminishes t;he tequencyof thoseevesry b6 useful. It alsoseemsuseful to try to diminish the degre"lrarm, which is involved in certain events. It may, under cerconditions,beconsidered positiveeventwhenpeoplephysically iolch other, but the fact that they fight eachother with knives or giutead of their frsts, can ead to harmful consequenceshich areconduciveo a better understanding. This ham, oncenflicted, mbe prevented rom being aggravatedeither by the type ofinterventured or by the lack ofintervention.Dealingwith utrouble"or "problenaticsituations" nsofaras hey"criminaliiablen (in other words: nsofar as they can becone'crim? s, J, Pfohl, "Lcbelllng criminals", in H. D. Ross, ed., Law and Deuiance(Bev

Hlllr, Begr' 1081).


5/16

ISRAELI"AW REVIEW [ Is.L.R.Vol.25they are looked upon from the point of view of criminar lawand are corrstructed n the special cultural and sociarorgani-of criminal justice) is not different from dealing with otheras we have seen, here is no ontological reality of crime andhas no properties which separate t from other troublesomeevents.dealing with these situations, in this case has an addi-dimension. In the*manner in which we defined criminal justicein this paper, "&minalisa-tion' tends to grve an unrealisticofwhat happened. It therefore arso tJnds to grve an un-answer,and to exclude the community from dealing with thosein a creative way and learning from them. It means that whenwith troublesomecriminalisable events, we should not onry trythefu frequency a''d t]^ed.egreeof harm invorved, but arsothem from triggering processes f criminalisation which willadditional harm (secondproblem category).and remediar activities may be pursued in many contexts.Report issued by the council of Europe on decriminalisation'es four dimensions:

change in the symboric enuironment of the euents an increasetolerance for different life styles in communities.changes in the forms of sociarcontror- an approach n which anis attributed to an individual and the answer contains normativeand is addressed to individuals.respect to "sociar controro t distinguishes different styresofcontrol, each with its own languageand logic, and its own way ofan event and reacting to it: pe;al, "omp"oratory, therapeutic,and conciliatory.can also distinguish between more positive and more negativeof exercising social contror. The different emphasis may be ex-n the following list of keywords:Positive

ways and meansrestoring compensating

informingto duty and solidarity

NegativeSetting up barriersPunishingRepressingPreventingSplitting up and dividing

of Europe, "Report on Decriminalisation" (Strasbourg, 19g0).

Nor.H 4, l l l l ) l I ALTERNATIVE CRIME IIOLICIES 6Tttc lirllowing s another division of the ways in which social contlilHt t'work":

External Internall'ormal

VerUoel In w (alsocivilIrtw) urveillancepunirhmentrtrwnrdmrmrndo ourt

mutual aid,guidance bypeers

fear, guilt,conscience,stigmatisationfeelingsofsolidarseclusion,ostracand shame

Ilorl:ontel

Wc nccopt as a rough and ready rule that more "positive" waysrtnial control uro preferable to negative ones.il)'l\,chwryreuention changes n the physicalenvironment n whievcrttr tako pluce.4l fltx:iu,l (re)organisation - an approach to prevent problemaxiluation; and sterile and divisive waysof dealing with them which cl,ahepluco at various levels:il ul, h,echtcpesteuel there are forms of social reorganisation whiilttluurtcu gonoral living conditions and help to create an integrat:ociety in which peoplehave a chance o grow up in conditions whif'avour hcir pussageo adulthoodand their search or a meaningful at'nrlxrctodpluco in society. Such conditions diminish the numbereverrtnwhich could be "objectively" regarded as "undesirable"; thrnnko t rrusior or peopleon their own to copesensiblywith undesiraevctttn, li


6/16

ISRAELLAWREVIEW lIs.L.R.Vol.2Ec) a third reuerof social eorganisationmay bedefinedasthe organ_of the nstitutiyns ""a J""n-*ir"-" orr*i"r "o"t*r. rne ReportU".i.:lf,* ""f" reorganisationof this t54re, ewcom_betweenphasesof the p"rr.ll"*"ss (the policephase)andof the civ' process.other -"uJrr"". couldbe inspired by theollowed or shipping"" J"""n r"";;;;;-:;ffi;""" anaty_of a specific ategoryoi "rr"it, (;;J th" way eommunitiesogetherthe systemworld a:af witfrit) cJnlontribute to suchevents.reventiveand remedi"ru"ti"ites i..iti ort"r, be pursued n a combi-of the contextsmentionedabove.

Jt7*:f&i\i:"",:::;i?t*' rheNegatiueides rcriminatwish to have an artematiue crime policy finds its source n theof dissatisfacti"" *itrr ii";;;* crime poricy: dissatisfactionits basic assumptions brrt alo ai.atisfaction with the concreteof criminal justice functioning. We will rro* a".r with thisaspectof dissatisfa"tio". iiorl-d"rirrr" of dissatisfaction are alsofor giving us the ai""otioo i, which to look for alternatives.an important {9s"", *hrt;il;e definedearlier as ourproblem"two" (Frofr"Tr * they are'supposed to or craimed to be*JnT:inal jusicensociev) Joo* thedi ecti n o ".,.,u*r,

it is not possible n the franeygrk of this paper to give aoverwiewof the probie-J rrri"t, in our opinion, criminalcreates in society. N"""Jrr"r".*, a rough sketch of the mainof this probiem, "" ;;;;;, should be ou,ined here.knows (and, becausewe shat not say much about it, thisnot be taken u. ? llco or arry dissent on our part) about tJreconsequenceswhich crimlnalisatisn, ard in particular sanc-such as imprlsonmentn have for o6rn&r, and lke groups theybetonso. That_u"h i*;iik";*".gmuchess.tvid"fy"pp"i"t"j'""g is increasinglyeing utasamqior :ri :t?*'"j*g"" svstems,s thedirficultn whicht puts."urct*""G"pfJ who eel hemselvesanagedycriminalisable

"""itri.'-

llt, t.l' legll ALTENNATIVECRIMEPOLICIES 6tt{glndtrltionn, as we have seen,puts concretevictims intol{34 ta whlch hey osecontrolover }resituationdefinedascriminEd tbil rddr conriderably to the problems hey experience. NChilrlilr putr forward the view that conflictscanbeviewedaspropegi trqott-.lnrl justiceand other professional ystemsmay be selt hllryf gonflictgfrom the people o whom thly properly t torlhtra h rlro rnother point which concerns he negative mages$dd lffi whtchcr{minal ustice createsn thepopulationat large. wlffi a'o!r l numbor of siudies how fear of crime canbe created.amdtgfortrln llnhsbetween riminal usticeand hemassmedia,a

*! S. firr d'ply.affecte the ivesof ceroain roupsn the populat;!e ata baconc rolated because f it.A {tt*lrrr nrjrtive correlativeofcriminalisation o which will drafttEll[ lr tho tondency or the f,rarnework f criminal ustice to codH|y llnit the creativity of those eopreworking within these shr, & tlrr lnftastructureof eriminailusticedevelops, eopreworkitt[b thr ryrtam find it moreand*o"l diffi.,rlt to think imaginativerbilr tfu probleuatic situationsseenby others n the outsideworhorun t"ltoy re increasinglyengagedn nnaiog solutions o the intend gcroraco roblems hey encounier.|h &vrlop t"his etter point, I refer to Lesliewilkins, who summUl Ertlm m followe:It nowm6mr well eetabliehedhat whatever s done o thoseoffengn whsere dentifiedandprocessedy the systemt is mostunriketo arhc mors than the very slightest mpact upon the amountclar In any oociety.we nowrealise hat in criminal ustice wehavttuo dlrtinct prubleme. The first problem:what to do with thosofrndrn who are brought into the decisionnetwork. The secoptutlem: what to do about reducingcrime - two quite distincprobloar, we can no longer simplify the problemofirime to thprubhm of the criminal.rotlc talkr olgowhere n the semepaper of the primary task of criminaJurtloe bolng that of 'blame alrocation" - what we do with thosNllr Ohrlrtlr, "ConfllcEar hopertf (IS7I) 17 Br. J. of Criminology1-19.Itllff nr, rirtlondtty and Moralrty n crimrnal Jultice", ln EffectiueationoranHrncn Qrlmlnol Jwtict (Hcblnkt, Hcunl publlcaHonSerlerg, lg84).

Fl0


7/16

ISITAEL AW IT!]VIT]W l ls.L.R.Vol.26

who are brought into the system' Later in the paper he says:allocation does not provide data useful for control or remedialwith respectof these types of events". Furthermore, he under-fact that, when you are looking at problematic situations whichcriminalised and are therefore criminalisable events, t is neces-take not only a micro-view, as is presently done in the processallocation, but also a broader, macro-view of the events inur criticisms of the criminala conclusion we can *ummarrse osystem as follows: our deepestreproach to criminal justice is

to give an unrealistic construction of what happened, endsalso to give an unrealistic answer and therefore tends tothe formal organisations such as the police and courts fromis unjust insofar as by its very structure it denies

varieties in social life and the different "meanings" thusIt is also unjwst - on its own terms - because t cannot dealcriminal justice (dark figure); as a rule they are dealt within a way which is not even known inside criminal justice.

to Criminal Justice

caueatswe give some exannplesof different "alternatives' we mustthat discussionsabout alternatives to criminal justice often takecontext in which the presuppositions of criminal justice, as wethem earlier in this PaPer,are not really challenged- In mostdiscussions he existenceof crime and criminals is consideredfact, and not the outcomeof selectivedefining processes

are also open to social choice. Therefore, we would like tohere a certain number of 'caveats", against these often madewhen we are talking about alternatives to criminal justice, we areabout alternative sanctions,but about alternatives to theof "ri*io"l justice. Those alternatives may be of a predomi-

l= l , lF l l Al,'l'14tNA'l'lVl': ( atM : l{ } Ll (: l l' lltag*tl* teEtl, tt r ttf a ltrctktminttntlynon-logal, ature'tStv:ry ||flprr,al[errrel,ivoHll criminnl usticeare seenasan alternativFHfEf t$ erttrltral lphnviour, whon we take that view, we do not takHie rwtrnt Lhel every lrrgrrlnpproach s firstly a way of constructinler, lf yorrwRrlt, r.rxruel,rucl,ing)n event. Looking for alternatives tednfriel Jttrt,tt'e,r irr lho first place ooking for alternatiue d'efinitioCf,lVentr rhlch ran t,riggorcriminalisation processes.The alternativenflrrf Siverr rr srrnlktrnntivc to criminaljustice is thereforean a,nswH a iltiathn uthlt:h han a d.ifferent oshapeoand dffirent ndynarnicFe6n tha atrcnll ne lhey appear in a criminal justice context.{Hl ln mcny dircufieionson alternatives to criminal justice, we aeenfnrntc.lwll,h hn mi$understanding hat what is called the "prevetlon qf erltttc" lr n gtxxl and desirable hing' It is, in my opinion' nnttGtrgrlly co, Arrd his for two reasons. n thefrs/ place,whatis callln t Fertallr llrnerr f lOgaldevelopment'crime', is not necessarilya "bathLt5", tL rnn.y xr noutral or indifferent. It may even be desirableItenrfu,,lriurirrtrl trw and the practiceof criminal justice systemscannbe upcd nr nn ultimutely authoritative standard to judge the "right""tvfrrngf, )f lxlhaviour. In the secondplace, even when 'crime" refers :6meliring which is according to all those concernedrightly defined'tntultltt", it may, for societaland human development,be har:rnful to tlo erndicute t'(4).|'ho last subject we want to draw attention to as being importanfrrr n roalistic discussion on "alternatives" is the factor known as th,,durk ligure" of crime. It is widely known that this phenomenon arisellrrl of ull, becausecertain events which could give rise to criminalistion lrre not reported to the police by those directly involved (or in tcruur9f the so-called"victimless-crimes" are not discoveredor reportby the prolice)and then, secondly,becauseeven where the events akirow' lo the police, they are dealt with in ways which do not resultprosecution. Many "crimes" are not cleared up at all and others, whelrurrlons are suspected, do not result in action through the criminjustice system.

when you examine closely victim studies, self-report studies aother data in a country like Holland you find that this "dark figure"very high. In rhe field of traditional crimes - and we are not talkinabout unimportant events which the average policeman or prosecuwould ,r".r"" think to criminalise, but of events 'rightly" drawn to tattention of the prosecutor a,sprima facic exomplesof crime, suchproperty offences (theft and fraud), offences involving physical violen

69


8/16

ISRAELT,AWREVIEW lIe.L.R. ol.25sexual offences far less than lVoof all the events which could beare, in fact, effectively criminalised. Even if the figure ofthan 17owould be different in another national context (less thanor SOVo), ne thing remains for sure, narlely, that alternatfues tojusti.ce are the rule rather than the exception.the strange thingis that we do not know much about the otheror 9O/oor TOVo),f ciminalisable events which are not criminal-One consequenceof this is that these events do not feature indebate about cridnal justice, since the latter is based on public,private knowledge. ACtually, we all have quite a lot of- private knowlefue - about things which could be crimi-and are not, but we have no public knowledge about theseand no agreed framework of language within which they couldthis reason, they are not "on the table" for debate.

the world of al.ternatiaesall eventsproblematic to someone a person,an organisation;may be approached n a egal processn one way or anothercivil justice or administrative justice), but very few ofas the dark numbers in criminal justice as well as other formsshow. Most of the altematives-to criminal justice are of anon-legal nature. These altematives are generally notof people nvolved in crime policy or legal policy in general,by those involved directly or indirectly in problematicapproaches are "statistical" and also "normatively''normativity of the people involved) tJre rule; legalisation" is aexception. This has always been so, s.so now and will be so n thereality is obscr-rredwhen we take as a starting point theimplied in the traditional criminal justice debate. Be-there we find a normativity in which criminal justice is theand is often (unconsciously) supposed to be - contrary to all- also a statistical fact.present three examples to throw some ight on the world"hidden" altematives. Not with the intention to claim that I havewould ever be able to grve - an accurate and representative de-

of what is going on in this world. I an frrmly convinced thatompletely impossible to do so. What I am setting out to do withthree sxamples is to convincemy audience, nsofar as necessary,

Ll4r lfrlf AI.?HRNATIVE RIMDPOLICIESF:t fu &rgns cf orlmin'l juotice is distorting the way in which{AF!ilar' orlelnallreblo svents,and to showpossiblewaysof dea#tb.kg, ro that we will be able to changeour discouree ndF.li|klt ln !b! rclpct. Alternativesare not farawayutopiasbutl cf $a dally lfi continuouelvnventedby the socialalt;"u..I tql SFIp thrce.aramples: )A caee tudyof a collectiveemeSF_q furo grnetly Involved it is the story of a burglary in whl+! glt ttl.lntrulvod); (2) Some esultsof an empirical researc=Y1T?31law bt wonenwho eer ictimisedbv exual iolencetl ruuE 0f en aotlon esearchas a means o trigger and suppruIlgty lnyolvcoont n dealingwith criminalisable roblematicffilftl, A aa..rtudy of a collcctiueemcd.iar ctipnby those ,irectryn-udsrdrl

% fbwJur rgo, w had three burglaries n our housewithin trp&teof twowoel$, fire first of these,at least, u, orr"oitior" ourr6r'tr ofburglary n which ittle is actually aken "t -u,,y tiings adcrtrnyod, I camehome,entered he houseand saw u"otur, "gvrywharc (andnobirds n the house!) and hen I noticed ht palatlngandsomeurniture hadbeensmashed nd hat therewehcaprof cigareon t},e loor. Gradually,acertain pictureof whathlalpuntU dawneduponme. In circumstances uchas this, youthtuugh the house,aking n thesescenes ndyouget angry;at leaI lpt very angryand fert a need o break "gg. orr"" rreir"aa ofthperrcnwhohad done his, and to take their thingsand destroy heend ark them how they liked this happening o them.But, aa a victim, I found my feelings o be morecomplicated hathat,becauses wentaround arso hought: Thankcoa, Ji"y t "rot deatroyedhat!" and therewassome erief. Theyhad destmymuch eee han there was to destroyand had shownsomesignsrcrtraint, so ater on I felt relieved,evenhappy, hat morehad nobsen ost. so, alongside nger herewas erieiand evencuriositywhy did they do this, what does his mean_ the eggs,he heapsocigars, heseotherstrgnge hings?

I I On th'ca80 8oalso stijn Hogenhuis, The Disappearanceof a victim position,,J' R' Blad, H' van Maetrigt, and N. uildrika, eda.,The crimirnr Justiix system oo $rrcioJPrcblzm: An Ablitianist perspectivte,supta n. l.


9/16

ISRAELLAW REVIEW lIs.L.R. Vol. 25police came o take fingerprints and they did this a second

a few days later. The policeman, who was very helpful, saidalthough he was taking frngerprints, this did not necessarilyan anest would bemade since he prints were ofbenofpoorand even where this was not the case, the culprits may bewhosefingerprints would notbe recorded. They have togiven a chance,he suggested,and we agreedfully with this idea'in all it was somefLing of a ritual but it was nice to talk to theand to ask them questions such as whether they thought thatyoung people who were responsible. Since this kind ofnot happen frequently to houses n Dordrecht, andin viewanount that had been d"maged, could it perhaps be the worksoneone with a personal grudge against us?few days later, my wife came home in the a{ternoon and heardhouseand t was apparent that the intruders were there

She could see people but not well enough to identify them'time they did not do so much damagebut, once again, broke aand took some tems. The policecameagain and we beganfeel quite well acquainted with them! Following each of thesewe took new precautions to prevent a recurTencebut, afterfew more days, we came home to discover that the intruders hadfor a third time. This time, nothing had beendestroyedand onlyfew things wenemissing. Strange though it may seem' we beganget used to the intrusions and to feel that we could picture thein our minds. we knew that there were probably three ofand I began to wonder what I would say to them if we shouldsomething which I hopedmight be possible. Naturally, my wiferather apprehensive at this prospect.the third incident, I began to think that the perpetratorsbe quite courageous to returrr to the very place in which theydisturbed only two days previously. I also thought that ita strong attraction on their part to the house and a fascina-for the strange objects within it. This gave us something insince , naturally, am fond of my home and possessions'Theless had been destroyed on this nost recent visit perhaps

that they were coming to love the place in a way not unlikeI say this, not to suggest that I did not have the angrywhich I spoke earlier, but rather to emphasise the highlynature of the feelings one experiences in such circum-

I have always had an interest in refldcting on the ways in

tr!, t.4, ffill ALTERNATIVECRIMEPOLICIES 6rhkh I ayrolf, end others, eactto criminalisableeventsand haGmvend thir rlways to bea complicated ndq-biguous procestrflrh tlura err mrny different facets.T* lbtr 0lrl wrr evidentlynot differentandbecause believe hfE!ryi not! rr I mentionedearlier, "steal" conflicts rom otheI llH tlre pollo if, when ihey found out who was reslnnsibleEIFI h dlowrd to talk with them. Some wo weeks ater aFt dt oddr, rlnce only a small proportionof city burglariesHhad $r. ruoo.rffully clearedup - iin Dordrecht his wouldSaut gti) - ttrrcpolice elephonedo saythat they had identifith ailpiltr bccrureof their involvement n a caseof vandalisma#by !own, They ndicated hat some four possessionsadbetlsfvFnd rnd aakodme o comedown o dentify them. As t turneuh tlu pollcewsrp holdinga largenumberof tems rom the hou*Ee of whlch I had not even ealisedhad beenstolen. Nearly acf.thg rtolcn goods adbeen ecoveredwith the exception fa kni*hloh I rhall mention ater. It is not an expensivenife, but a vethu? hnife which I had recently brought back from Finland an*hloh I like to use or cooking. It has a specialvalue for qe.of tho three youthsconcerned,wo weresixteenand the third setuhtn' end I madea request o speakwith them. Trrepolicesathrt prcvided he parentsconsented,hey wourdhaveno objectioGonrrquently, he parentsof oneboywerecontacted ndagreedanI wontoff to vieit that family the sameevening. 'hadno deaof hothlr would turn out, sincewe do not havemodels or use on suco@uion6. Also he boy himselfwasmuchsmaller han I had maIncd the burglar to be;he seemed osmall; with spectacles, lmobirdlike. I hadan idea hat I wouldshowhim how felt and gethimto rhow romorse or his actionsbut I foundthat I couldnot-do hrnd it remaineddifficult for usto talk toeachother. It was,howevemucheaeier o identify with the parents or whomthe wholethinhedboonhorrible. After the offences adbeendiscovered,wo ofthlxryahad run awayand the parentshad spentmany anxioushouunruccesgfullyooking or them. Theynow had real drama n thelives n manywayssimilar to the drama had and this made t easto idontify with them.compared to what happens o you as a parent in thosecircum

liancos, the burglary wasa small matter and this hada significanlrnpncton my feelingsabout he events. I started o talk to ttrebotlth r view to hie making somekind of reparation or what he ha


10/16

ISRAEL "AW REVIEWWhen I asked him if that was something he would like to do,really" and that created a sort oflink between the

of us becausehe came across as real and authentic. I couldhim replying in this way to the strange man who hadto his house. I asked him about the knife - perhaps anmatter in view of the large amount of damage in thebut of essential importance to me - and this proved thepoint for a commonunderstanding. He then understood thatthe knife and that was something he could do somethinghe would try to find it fon' me. Then we aII went off to meettwo boys and their parents where we encountered the same

in communication. Finally, as a group, we wenthouse where the parents sat with us in the kitchen whilst thesearched n a deserted hotel next door for the missing knife.discussionsI said: "I{ow that you have found my house,should enter it by the front door; that is the way to come n". Itme satisfaction to say that. I was then told the sad story of thefamily. At this important moment, it was apparent that thejustice frame of referencewas ndeed artificially segmentingin every possible way. It was cutting the links betweenwho ordinarily belonged ogether and was, n a sense,makingsituation unreal at a social level. For the parents it was a bigthey were talking about it the whole time, but they didclear or completepicture of what had happened. They hadof information fmm the police and from their children, butpicture of the ev-ents. It was only after being gatheredin our house that, for the first time, they got a picture of the

sequenceof events which could then become the subjectbetween themselves and their children. It was at thisthat the whole thing began to have a concrete reality. The in'of the criminal justice system resulted in a tendency forparents to say "it is not my child, but the others who are respon-This meant that we were inclined to deal with the youthscutting them off from each other in an unhelpful way.it was as a group that they were involved in the commonwhich had brought us all together in my kitchen.kids found the knife and the parents, who were far more prac-skilful than I, started to repair things in the house. This gagood feeling of being involved in a shared activity and

to know each other better. I could see that the

lIg.L.R.Vol. 26 14, rt t AI.TINITNATIVN)RIMEPOI,ICIEFIbci*gn the perentaand [ho childrenwae that the parentswentlnudly rcfering back o tho burgraries o hat, witiout a dotk Ltdr rerc rlek [, doathof hearirigabout hem. For this reaI *ddrd thet tt wouldbsagooddea ithey couldgetawayon holigt fud t n? rtlmulua; we had, I thought,beenengagedor loffih ln lnBrttlc debate.one wasa middle-clars oyaia the ottlg *gn *orhln3 claro,andonewasunemployed ith practicaily$y1re they :rid that theycouldnot possiblyafforda holidayF?*d eut that campingwas elatively nexpensive ut theyhadF?tr :c we leut them a tent and the three of them went a*ayicEfuf furr rhort ime.

Ic {dr pttlent! holped ueand the kids cameon sundays or more of[tg & rsrh ln tho garden. They seemed o enjoy .olirrg urrd tt "rn tlucr when the frequency of their visits becamesomethingI aulrancs bocausewe had other things to do! one ofthe reasothey had got into house-breakingwas that they were bored.at sch- e oommon enough reason - and had begun truanting. on oruoh occacion hey had beenplayrng about in the desertedhotel abnd uoticod our house which had attracted them by its varietyEontnta a mixture of Aladdin's cave and Ali Baba and the ForThleverl As a result of the crisis precipitated by the break-inoertain aspectsof the relationship between the youngsters and theparcnte had becomeclearer and they had moved to a school whelhcy wore getting on rather better.ws wore coveredby insurance which met the costsof all the materidamageand we have becomea sort of aunt and uncle to the kids anftionds of the parents' As for me, I rearnt a lot about people livinin situations about which I previously knew very little, au in att finally turned out to be a fruitful experience or thoseof us concernand I am not exaggerating when I say this. Ifmatters had not takethe course they did, we could not have gained in these various waybut I did not organise things thus, I merery triggered them off bgoing as a victim to seethe boys and their famities. rnngs then tootheir own course and the only specffic part I prayed *u. u resurt omy knowing about the criminal justice process.It was six months before the kids were charged with the burglariesand sevenor eight months before they cnmeto court and, in uu tnrtime, I was never onceapproachedby any ofthe severalsocial servicagencies involved. I had not approached them because I was interosted,from a research point of view, to seewhat would happen. Th


11/16

ISRAEL .,AWREVINW lIn.L.R. d.25were visited by a number of social service personnel, fromagenciesaccording to their social status. They were givencontradictory advice and guidance and often came to seek ouron these matters. By the time the charges were brought,I nor my wife could seewhat was to be gained from this courseIt seemed o make no senseat all to have a hearing so Ihe public prosecutor who lives oppositeme and, since hebuilding is also nearby, I went along to speak to her personally,professor of criminal law and criminology but as a victim.

was touched by the account-of events but insisted that, withburglaries and the other matter of vandalism to be considered,would have to be a prosecution. However, afber nitially havingsentence,she now said that she was prepared toa conditional discharge. Despite my arguments, shethat criminal justice is not simply a private affair and thathad to be considered. My wife started to laugh; afterwe - the public prosecutor and myself - joined her in this

was the judicial hearing which was, I thought, a movingThe public prosecutor had prepared her case well and saidshe knew about, and fully accepted, the way in which thehad been dealt with and that the only reason she wasthem was to underline the seriousnessofburglaries ofthisas an important matter of symbolism. The udge, I considered,also very understanding and spoke in a way which everyonecomprehend but which also preserved a sense of dignity andimportant legal safeguards; an interesting skill in itself.had all goneto the court together from our house, a party of eightnine, becauseeveryone was a little nervous so we had coffeeandtogether beforehand to ease he tension a bit. We sat on then the court-room and, despite being a little deaf, I heard

and though that everyone spokevery clearly. The others,afterwards of the offrcials speaking too softlyit was clear that they had not understood much of the proceed-presumably because hey were still so tense. In spite offavourable circumstances - we knew each other well and I hadto them everything that would take place - they under-virtually nothing. One of the boys said that he had beenabout the court appearancesso it was not a lack

Another said that he had nearly fallen asleep and I

l { , l r l l Ar,'nt: NATTVF:RtMIq{)t.t(:lt:FtFCellFdhet, wherr I hnve a seriousrow with my wife, I sometim*cl V*rf tlrerl n aort of safety valve against emotional overloal{Bil 6at h [hc rtory and it taught me much about the way in whtk g+lalnel Jurtlca tyntem artificially segments our concerns. Na

$lf | & nni wlrh to unduly generalise from this one experiendfuUgh I do rrot bcliove that it was all that special- it merely seep la lhpm slrcumntancos because have shared it with you in so*tfll, I do know of comparable examples in Holland (it is, of courat fmy hagei to know about them). There was, for example, a DutEg!&r eFrc In which the parents of the murdered girl andthose of tEcl*}pl net bognthorand formed a relationship which was importabfih t6 ihcm and to the offender. Think also at the exa-ple of tItatueeen traln nflirir in which the former hostagescontinue to berriefnd t vlrlt tholr lirrmer captors n prison.Fherc cramplon support the experience n our case, .e., that und**rla enndltlona where events are initially reacted to in such a wth:t n +aorecolloctive, less fragmented response s made to criminalmblg aventn, thon an enormous potential is created for members of t*launlly to ttke actions which are fruitful, remedial for perpetratornd vletlmr nliko, and which permit them to o.,ercome he victim-peFtlet{rr arrtithosis n their relation.rzBy nrrrtrnal traditional responses o criminalisable events provieroallent oxnmplesof what Nils christie refers to as the 'stealingt,tutnielt", ninco they frequently inhibit the natural uniting togetherlteople nround a crisis and prevent the consequent social and persontlevclopmontwhich can occur n suchcases.Now this means,we thinthat ono of the important aspectsof the notion of "community involv1p6111" an idea to which most peoplesubscribe,but of which only a fehnvo anything but the vaguest images - is an attempt to recover thrupportunity for ordinary people to become directly involved in socftr;Ix)nseswhich are victim-oriented.'lll return for a moment to what wilkins has suggested, we havel,ltu rnicro context the processesof blame allocation - and remedittction related to this particular event - and in the macro context thlrrocogsos fremedial action and control - the question ofhow to dewith this type of event and how to change social organisation in suc

l,l Flxr S. l{eg"tt1tuis, supro n. 11.

7


12/16

ISRAEL .AW REVIEW tIr.L.R.Vol.26it makes this easier. Bringing both these spheres together,that all the organisations which have to do with criminal- the police, teachers, he public prosecutor, social workers, theand academic esearchers should suggest and make clear thepossibilities of responding to criminalisable events in waysa wider public involvement. After all, if you do notknowledge or possessnitial ideas ofhow to go about it, thenperhaps daunting, for people to even get starbed. Oncehowever, the processmay have a monentum of its own'our firm conviction that what we are doing when we pursue such

of action is simply to re-activate the potential which alreadyin society. The developmentof this potential is not dependentonanswers to the problem of crime - those involved do not per-themselves as being concernedwith such matters - but rather aswith an immediate crisis situation which requires action. It is,orr he attitudes and activities of the police service,of their key position as the entry point to the criminal justiceon the one hand, and as a resource o directly involved people,other hand. It was the police that really made possible my ownif they had not cleared up the case,and given me the in-possessed, could not have visited the family.

uiolznceand the use of ciuil lawMarch 1984 we have been studying a development in thein the direction of -aking more use of civil justice in casestype of criminal justice might be applied. An exampleis the use of civil summary proceduresby victimsviolence. Women who are continually tmubled or threatenedex-partrrer, or more recently, victims of assault or rape, cancourt order which prohibits the man to enter the area wherelives.our empirical study we found that the possibility of a civil courtwas a far better answer to the needs of the women victimscriminal justice system ever gave them.made the court injunction very useful as a (strategic)cases of sexual violence by feminist lawyers and theirIn the first place this specific kind of sunmary proceedingsto be highly attractive and accessible to people who have no

Nor,8.4, 90l I ALTDRNATIVECRIME FOLICIECnon.legal means eft to deal with their probleme.To women n Hollawho aro depondentupon social welfare, for instanco, t is a low cearlly understandable,quick and flexible procedurewith a relativblgh rste of success. At the same time it also deals with the victimfo0nition of threat in her daily life. She also remaing in control of gtoedure from the beginning to the end. At any time she can decta ndthdraw from the proceedings, o bargain with the other party,Itouto or not to execute the sentence of the judge. She is not at&pendent on other institutions as, for instance, in the caseof a criminJurtloa affair.Ehr only needsan attorney, and the kind ofattorneys who specialn thcro proceedings are highly motivated and supporting to thgllgah, This brings me to the second reason that makes the co!ilJUlction soeuitable for handling sexual violencecases. From a vicgf terull violonce and from a pitiful humiliated, dependent state bgoacr an active party, a claimant in a civil law case. By doing tfu rhow: not only the one who threatens her, but also herself and *tfldc *tofld, that she has her own life and her own identity, and th*f lr rble io draw her own line. And this alone increases her defTHlltf , Therofore being a claimant in civil proceedingsmeans persoFB$th end brings with it an individually emancipating function.The ihird element we want to refer to is publicity. Not only victicf rrual yiolence but also ournalists find summary proceedings arpaolflcally, the civil court injunction, an accessible aw suit. T&BnEa krt of publicity. Feminist lawyers made deliberate use of tpublici[y to bring attention to the problem of sexual violence, andrhow tho world and other women that it is really possible to draw llno und to make an end to this problem. We can call this a structuraamuncipatingeffect, whereas the combination ofthe f irst and the secolomont to which we referred, created an individually emancipatell'oct.Also in other problem areas we found interesting examples of lxrnaibilities of civil law to fulfil an emancipating function in dealwith criminalisable events. It permits integration of activities of cornunities and social movements of a legal and non-legal nature, atrrrnbines preventive with remedial effects.13l:l J. Hes, "IYom Victim of (Sexual) Violence to Claimant in a Civil Law Case", Pafor the 5th International Symposium on Victimology, Zagreb, 1985; J. Hes andllulsman, "Civil Justice as an Alternative to Criminal Justice", Paper for ICOPAMontreal, 1987; M. Spector and S. Batt, -Iowards a More Active Victim", in J


13/16

ISRAEL I,AW RHVII')W l ln. l , . l l .Vol .26

Elad,H.vanMastrigt,andN.Uildriks,eda.,TheCriminnlJustineSystemasaSrcinlProblem: An Abolitinnist Perspective,supro n' l'

Action researchas a means to trigger and' support communityinuoluernentn PreuentionInaneighbourhoodofamiddle.sizedDutchcityser ioustroublepart ;f the population felt seriously menacedby other gloups inarea, and the quality of life deteriorated. This gaverise to numerousof criminalisation and extensive dramatising press coverage'increased police activity in the neighbourhood- of a criminalizinge_didnot improvethesituat ionbutmadetheworse. People Ftarted t4r eave the neighbourhood'

Weadvisedtheneighbourhoodcommitteetotakemattersmoreinown hands, and offered to help with an action-research in theof a conceptualisation as developed n this paper'

our proposal was io start with an independent research under theofihe neighbourhood committee in which we would try to makeinrrentory of (1) the different groups ("tribes') inhabiting the neigh-and their Iife style, (2) the interactions between those groups,the good hings and the bad things they experienced n the area, (4)which persons,groups' institutions or structures they attributed thethey experienced, 5) what they thought shouldbe done aboutproblems, and (6) what they themselvesdid about theseproblems'

sameway (7) we would make an inventory of the opinions of theinstitutions (different types ofpolice, different types ofsocialr'housingauthorities)workingintheareaaboutquestions under 3-6.

we would use as research method: (1) documentary analysis also ofhistorical nature, (2) observation and (3) open interviews'Wewouldpresentthe. .map"whichwouldbetheresultof th isfor discussion n the neighbourhood, and adapt it on the basisthis discussion. Eventually we would formulate certain recommen-about ways in which improvement could be reached. Thingsaccording to our proposal'on the basis of our data we distingrrished nine different gToups n theand described their life styles and the interactions be-

them. we gave each of those groups positive pames (the group

Nrrg. l 4, l ! [ l l I Ar,'r'hrRNA'ntvhl(lltlMn{)l, l( l l l{f i ltwlricl wlrsso()6y someof the ot,hcrnts httrdolt(!(1,ltlttgttt'tlllFrilf l l l lw1 r:rrllt:d thc strong men") arrd irt t,ho 'urt,ltr,rlint:ttepltttt,ltgxrnil,ivuameswere accepted y all.'t'lrgnrsoarchshowedgreat differencesbetwocn ,hodifftrnttrl,grrtttlptwlgn thc institutions, between he groupsand tho institutirlnl tln lr16enti9n hat the problemswere, o whom or to what thoy woro gt[rtul,etl.tntl what should be done about them"llotwccn some groups there was considerableoverlap in thoir lltylea; l,hoywere n daily direct nteraction. Betweenother groupe holv6t llo Httch verlapping" Quite often the sameproblemsaroso n intrEnnrp lttornction and in intergroup interaction.Wlrr,rr honr,',roblemsarose n an intragloup settingor in intergrorafl,llrgr wil,h vcrlapping life styles, he directly involved were ablotfunlwitlr l,hono roblems hemselves n a containedand remedial wffhprr l,hey txr,trrred in intergroup settings without overlapping lftyler t,heygrrvo ise to claims of criminalisation and sometimeseslrbd arrl, ll' onl,rol.,fhe ilailr tlrrust of our recommendations was to promote soiF*ffEatllFHl,ilrrn such a way that life styles would overlap more',l lrp lhr,l, hat the neighbourhood committee took responsibilitylltp pllrrsl,iorr n the neighbourhoodand the researchworked from l-gfur1irrg ru+ "reordering ritual", indicated that social reorganisat*pr ||n itn w1y. The primary problems have diminshed in frequency airrletreit,.y,hile the secondaryproblems, elated mainly to the crimiflnl.irr, iptcrventions which aggravated the primary problems, hareaar,rl rr cxist as the negative presscoverage. The inhabitants arelenvirrg hc neighbourhooduxymore. The relation between the differeirrsl,il,rrl,ignsnd the different groups in the neighbourhoodhas berrrrrch mproved. The research was a contribution to the emancipat1f'l,lurrliffcrent groups in the neighbourhood and the emancipation prrril,krd he neighbourhood to deat with the crisis'raA cOmparable esearch n a rnore rural area showedsimilar result

ll_ van RansbfJk, EIet Noordzrkt'arti.er, .ergernis en plzzier (Rotterdam, Erasmtlniversiteit, 1985).ll. van Ransbeek" Kteine criminatiteit? (Rotterdam, Erasmus universiteit, 19

l. l

I r


14/16

ISRAEL .AW REVIDW lk,L.R.Vol .26

point of view, it is not possible to give a ready-alternative crime policies.to the way in which Foucaultls defrnes the role of the(the specific ntellectual, as he calls her/him) in these issues.to him, the academic should not strive to play the role of thethe people what they have to do, andfor them framegof thought, objectives and means (which hen his head, working in his gtudy surrounded by his tools -many criminal law academicshaveworked).the role of the academic s to show (1) how institutions reallyand (2) what are the real consequences f their functioning insegmentsof society. In addition, he has to uncover (3) theinstitutions and their prac-He has to show the historical context of these systems, thethey exercise on us, and the fact that they have becomesothat they are part of our perceptions, our attitudes and ourLastly, (4) he has to work together with those directlyand with practitioners to modify the institutions and theirand to develop other forms of thought.tried in this paper to be faithful to this model. Consequently,not provide you with fixed models of 'alternatives" nor with anof developments in "alternatives". Instead, I tried to offer a

scheme, which I hope will be helpful to contextualize theon alternatives to criminal-justice and the concrete projectsn many countries which are founded on such ideas or referwe want to makc progress in the field of alternatiyes we have tothe cultural and social organisation of criminal justice. Crimi-is perpetrator-oriented, based on blame-allocation, and on ajudgment" view of the world. It doesnot therefore provide us withand a context in which problematic situations can be de-and dealt with in an emancipatory way.we need- if we wish to make progress is an approach whichfirst place oriented towards those directly involved (personsor

Foucault, "Quappelle-t-on punir", in F. Ringelheim, ed., Punir mon beou souciPresses universitaires de I'universitd libre, 1985).

kr I *, test l

i:rstly endhla[err[lv r{uct'

AI,TERNATIVE CRIME POLICIES 7frgBr yyht('lr inrctly oxpcrienceproblematicevents),and which coEii. lr. [' lrxrkat rl l tha ro$ourceswhich couldbe mobilized o dealwievFnti and nituntions. This is only possible f we free ourselvths tdea .lrnt ho oxtromclydiversesituationswhich are.criminahtve rotttol,hirrgn common. We have to redefrneeachproblellrdrlnrulenlly 0f l,ho lofinitionsof criminal ustice (and of crimiiFt*l l'r'far er lt, r part rl'crinrinnljustice).Only hendoest becoi*il6ta fo refognlrearrd o rln('ourageelements OalternativeprFal-Ura ge t riit 6f mee:rtrr*6gitimizedas punishment, hicha


15/16

IlsraelLa\MReviewLOUK I{TN.SMAN

TIIE ABOLITIONIST CASE: ALTERNATIVECRIME POLICIES

A Reprint from Volume 25, Nos. 3_4, Summer_Autumn1991

THE ISHAELLAW REVIEW ASSOCIATTONIunder he ausplcas tTHEFACULWOF LAW,HEBREWUNIVERSITYFJERUSALEM

E


16/16

ALTERNATIVES TO PUI{ISHMENT

THE ABOLITIOMST CASE:ALTERNATIVE CRIME POLICIES

Louk Hulsrnan*

l.IntroduetinnA- Same impnrtant thernesand,eoncepts n an abolitionist analysisrCrime

We are inclined to consider'ncriminal events" as exceptional, eventswhich differ to an important extent from other events which are notdefined as criminal.. In the conventional view, crirninal conduct isconsidered to be the most inportant cause of these events. Criminalsin this view - a special category ofpeople, and the exceptionalnature of criminal conduet, andlor the criminal, liustify the specialnature of the reaction against it.People who are involved in 'criminal" events, however, do not inthem.selvesappear to fom a special category. Thoee who are oItrciallyrecorded as "crininal" constitute mly a small part of those involved in

Profesgor Emcritus in Criminal l-aw and Criminologl, Erasmug University, Rotter-da.rn.For recent literature oqrthe abditionist peirspective in the English language see:(f 986) fO Contennporary Crisis 3-106; ttr. Bianchi and R- van Swaaningen, ed., Alr.-Towards o Non-rcprcssiue Apprauk to. Crirnz (Amstcrdam, FYee Univer-sity hess, f986); J. R. Blad, If. van Mastrigt, and N. Uildriks, ede., The CrhninolJustie System os o Social Prcblem: An Abolitionist Perspective (Rotterdam, Med-edelingen van het Juridisch Instituut van de Erasmus Univeniteit Rotterdam, nr.36, 1987);J. R. Blad, H. van Mastrigt, and N. tlldriks, eds., ,gocrolPrcblzms and.Criminal Justice (Rottedam, Mededelingen van het Juridisch Instituut van deErasmus Universiteit Rotterdarn, m. 37, f987) W. de llaan, The Politice of Redrees:Crime, Punishment and Penal Abolition (London, Unwin Hyman, lgg0).

israel law review

Documents