Preventive justice: A paradigm in need of testing

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 391-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Slobogin
Keyword(s):  
Preventive Justice

scholarly journals Preventive justice: Exploring the coercive power of community protection notices to tackle anti-social behaviour

2021 ◽  
pp. 146247452198980
Author(s):  
Vicky Heap ◽  
Alex Black ◽  
Zoe Rodgers
Keyword(s):  
Due Process ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Coercive Power ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Specific Behaviour ◽  
Preventive Justice ◽  
Community Protection ◽  
First Time ◽  
Detrimental Impact

Community Protection Notices (CPNs) are civil preventive orders used in England and Wales to prevent and/or require specific behaviour by an individual or organisation, where existing conduct has a ‘detrimental impact on the quality of life of those in the locality’. Breach of the notice results in a £100 fine under a Fixed Penalty Notice or a possible criminal conviction. To date, CPNs have tackled an array of perceived anti-social behaviours, ranging from rough sleeping to overgrown gardens. Using Ashworth and Zedner’s preventive justice as an analytical framework, our research qualitatively explores recipients’ experiences of this new tool for the first time. The findings highlight how the operationalisation of CPNs extends the coercive power of the state, with a range of negative consequences relating to the concepts of disproportionality, due process and accountability. We also offer three empirically-grounded recommendations for reforming CPN practices.

Book review: Preventive Justice

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 622-625
Author(s):  
Harry Annison
Keyword(s):  
Preventive Justice

Protection seekers and preventive justice

2017 ◽  
pp. 95-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Billings* ◽  
Dallal Stevens
Keyword(s):  
Preventive Justice

Empirical Desert and Preventive Justice

2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 376-403
Author(s):  
Christopher Slobogin
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Preventive Justice

This essay is a response to an article by Paul Robinson, Joshua Barton, and Matthew Lister in this issue of New Criminal Law Review that criticizes an article I authored with Lauren Brinkley-Rubinstein entitled Putting Desert in Its Place, which was itself an analysis of several works published by Robinson and various coauthors making the case for “empirical desert.” Robinson’s suggestion that utility can be optimized by a focus on desert as it is viewed by the average citizen opens up a new line of inquiry that could lead to a better appreciation of the influence desert should have on the criminal law. Where we disagree is how much utility a system founded on empirical desert is likely to have. Robinson appears to hold that failing to subscribe to empirical desert in most cases will result in noticeable disutility, whereas I am inclined to believe, consistent with the studies in Putting Desert in Its Place, that only significant, continuous and highly publicized departures from lay views will occasion the loss of compliance and cooperation that Robinson describes. This article also defends the punishment scheme that I have called “preventive justice” against some of the claims made by Robinson, Barton, and Lister.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document