Taking Prison to Court: Exploring the Judicial Review of Prison Decision-Making Through Supreme Court Judges in Israel

Netanel Dagan, Shmuel Baron
{"title":"Taking Prison to Court: Exploring the Judicial Review of Prison Decision-Making Through Supreme Court Judges in Israel","authors":"Netanel Dagan, Shmuel Baron","doi":"10.1093/bjc/azad068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholars have criticized the gap between judicial work and the realities of prison life. In this article, drawn from qualitative findings from Supreme Court Judges in Israel, we analysed how such Judges negotiate their administrative judicial review over prison officials’ decisions. We found that through their judicial review, the Judges either bureaucratise, re-sentence the prisoner or reform prison life. Each theme imagines differently both the purpose of judicial review, as well as the values, emotions, legal ‘tool-kit’, and players (prison service, the claiming prisoners) involved in the review process. The findings move the scholarly focus of judicial decision-making from the quantity to the quality of punishment and expand the understanding of judicial consciousness regarding prison life.","PeriodicalId":501092,"journal":{"name":"The British Journal of Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British Journal of Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azad068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Scholars have criticized the gap between judicial work and the realities of prison life. In this article, drawn from qualitative findings from Supreme Court Judges in Israel, we analysed how such Judges negotiate their administrative judicial review over prison officials’ decisions. We found that through their judicial review, the Judges either bureaucratise, re-sentence the prisoner or reform prison life. Each theme imagines differently both the purpose of judicial review, as well as the values, emotions, legal ‘tool-kit’, and players (prison service, the claiming prisoners) involved in the review process. The findings move the scholarly focus of judicial decision-making from the quantity to the quality of punishment and expand the understanding of judicial consciousness regarding prison life.
将监狱诉诸法庭:通过以色列最高法院法官探讨监狱决策的司法审查
学者们批评了司法工作与监狱生活现实之间的差距。在本文中,我们根据以色列最高法院法官的定性调查结果,分析了这些法官如何就其对监狱官员决定的行政司法审查进行谈判。我们发现,通过他们的司法审查,法官要么官僚化,要么重新判决囚犯,要么改变监狱生活。每个主题都对司法审查的目的、价值观、情感、法律“工具包”和审查过程中涉及的参与者(监狱服务、声称的囚犯)有不同的想象。研究结果将司法决策的学术焦点从量刑的数量转移到量刑的质量上,拓展了对监禁生活司法意识的认识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信