NOTARIAL DISTRICT IN A FEDERAL TERRITORY

In connection with the creation of the federal territory ≪Sirius≫ the article provides an analysis of the proposed public authorities, taking into account the function of preventive justice performed by the Russian notary.

THE CONFLICT RESOLUTION COMPETENCE IN THE NOTARIAL PRACTICE

The article is devoted to the problem of conflict prevention in notarial practice. Notarial activity, referring to the “person-to-person” system, requires notaries to develop conflictological competence as a necessary component of notarial activity in the framework of preventive justice.

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

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.

Punitive and preventive justice in an era of profiling, smart prediction and practical preclusion: three key questions

In the context of a technology-driven algorithmic approach to criminal justice, this paper responds to the following three questions: (1) what reasons are there for treating liberal values and human rights as guiding for punitive justice; (2) is preventive justice comparable to punitive justice (such that the guiding values of the latter should be applied to the former); and (3) what should we make of preventive measures that rely not so much on rules and orders, but on ‘technological management’ (where the preventive strategy is focused on eliminating practical options)? Responding to the first question, a Gewirthian-inspired theory of punishment is sketched – a theory that is, broadly speaking, supportive of liberal values and respect for human rights. What makes this theory apodictic for any human agent is that it demands respect for the very conditions on which any articulation of agency is predicated. With regard to the second question, we indicate how a Gewirthian view of the relationship between punitive and preventive justice supports the logic of referring to the principles that guide the former as a benchmark for the latter; and we suggest some particular principles of preventive justice where the restrictions are targeted at individual agents (whether in their own right or as members of classes). Finally, we suggest that, although technological management of crime changes the complexion of the regulatory environment in ways that might be a challenge to a Gewirthian moral community, it should not be categorically rejected. Crucially, technological management, like other preventive strategies, needs to be integrated into the community's moral narrative and authorised only to the extent that it is compatible with the governing moral principles.

The Rise and Restraint of the Preventive State

Security has always been a core function of the modern state. Yet the rise of the Preventive State captures an intensification of that role as threats to security and demands for public protection increase, prompting states to prioritize new practices of preventive criminalization, policing, and punishment. The rise of the Preventive State may promise greater security, but the costs of ever more coercive preventive laws and measures are burdensome and pose a threat to civil liberties. This review considers the drivers, multiple manifestations, and direct and collateral consequences of preventive endeavors that assess and manage risk, target hazards, and restrain or detain those deemed dangerous. It also explores their ramifications for criminology and criminal justice. It concludes by considering the potential of criminology to join cross-disciplinary efforts to articulate a new jurisprudence of security and to elaborate principles of preventive justice with which to restrain the excesses of the Preventive State.