Enemy句话说

IF 2.3 1区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Netanel Dagan
{"title":"Enemy句话说","authors":"Netanel Dagan","doi":"10.1177/14624745221092983","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Pushing and expanding the boundaries of the ‘criminology of the other’ and ‘enemy penology’ to the post-sentencing phase, this study aims to analyse parole for terror-related prisoners. For doing so, the study thematically analysed 207 decisions of the Israeli parole board for individuals labelled as ‘security prisoners’. It found that for security prisoners, the parole board employs a distorted version of the more discretionary-individualised logic that applies to ordinary prisoners. When performing such ‘enemy parole’ – and overwhelmingly denying parole to security prisoners – the parole board uses three conflicting discourses: security-group logic, responsibilisation and resentencing. Through these discourses, the parole board negotiates the categories of self/other and citizen/enemy in order to suspend the reintegrative components of ‘citizen parole’. In conclusion, ‘enemy parole’ is constructed as an exclusionary, punitive and exceptional process disguised as inclusionary, equal and legitimate.","PeriodicalId":47626,"journal":{"name":"Punishment & Society-International Journal of Penology","volume":"43 6","pages":"600 - 620"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enemy parole\",\"authors\":\"Netanel Dagan\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14624745221092983\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Pushing and expanding the boundaries of the ‘criminology of the other’ and ‘enemy penology’ to the post-sentencing phase, this study aims to analyse parole for terror-related prisoners. For doing so, the study thematically analysed 207 decisions of the Israeli parole board for individuals labelled as ‘security prisoners’. It found that for security prisoners, the parole board employs a distorted version of the more discretionary-individualised logic that applies to ordinary prisoners. When performing such ‘enemy parole’ – and overwhelmingly denying parole to security prisoners – the parole board uses three conflicting discourses: security-group logic, responsibilisation and resentencing. Through these discourses, the parole board negotiates the categories of self/other and citizen/enemy in order to suspend the reintegrative components of ‘citizen parole’. In conclusion, ‘enemy parole’ is constructed as an exclusionary, punitive and exceptional process disguised as inclusionary, equal and legitimate.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47626,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Punishment & Society-International Journal of Penology\",\"volume\":\"43 6\",\"pages\":\"600 - 620\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Punishment & Society-International Journal of Penology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14624745221092983\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Punishment & Society-International Journal of Penology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14624745221092983","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

将“他人的犯罪学”和“敌人的刑罚学”的界限推进并扩展到判决后阶段,本研究旨在分析与恐怖有关的囚犯的假释。为此,该研究从主题上分析了以色列假释委员会对被称为“安全囚犯”的个人做出的207项决定。研究发现,对于安全囚犯,假释委员会采用了一种扭曲版的、适用于普通囚犯的更自由裁量的、个性化的逻辑。当执行这样的“敌人假释”——以及压倒性地拒绝对安全囚犯的假释——假释委员会使用了三种相互冲突的话语:安全团体逻辑、责任和重审。通过这些话语,假释委员会协商了自我/他者和公民/敌人的范畴,以暂停“公民假释”的重新整合成分。综上所述,“敌假释”被构建为一种伪装成包容、平等和合法的排他性、惩罚性和例外性的程序。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Enemy parole
Pushing and expanding the boundaries of the ‘criminology of the other’ and ‘enemy penology’ to the post-sentencing phase, this study aims to analyse parole for terror-related prisoners. For doing so, the study thematically analysed 207 decisions of the Israeli parole board for individuals labelled as ‘security prisoners’. It found that for security prisoners, the parole board employs a distorted version of the more discretionary-individualised logic that applies to ordinary prisoners. When performing such ‘enemy parole’ – and overwhelmingly denying parole to security prisoners – the parole board uses three conflicting discourses: security-group logic, responsibilisation and resentencing. Through these discourses, the parole board negotiates the categories of self/other and citizen/enemy in order to suspend the reintegrative components of ‘citizen parole’. In conclusion, ‘enemy parole’ is constructed as an exclusionary, punitive and exceptional process disguised as inclusionary, equal and legitimate.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
60
期刊介绍: Punishment & Society is an international, interdisciplinary, peer reviewed journal that publishes the highest quality original research and scholarship dealing with punishment, penal institutions and penal control.
×
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