在黑暗中行走:公共政策和立法行动中缺乏使用刑事统计数据

Q4 Social Sciences
S. K. Assefa
{"title":"在黑暗中行走:公共政策和立法行动中缺乏使用刑事统计数据","authors":"S. K. Assefa","doi":"10.4314/MLR.V12I2.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As an exercise of sovereign power, the lawmaker adopts public policies to achieve certain ends. However, public policies need justifications. One such public policy is criminalisation of conduct whereby the lawmaker may have to use both doctrinal and empirical justifications. Such empirical justification is criminal statistics. All the three organs – the police, the prosecution office and the court – are required by law to collect and keep criminal statistics. Statistical data may not be available for initial adoption of legislation; yet they are essential inputs during the revision process. Even though criminal statistics do not define the outcome of the decision of the lawmaker, one would expect that they would be used as one major input for the continuous evaluation of such law. This article examines the use of criminal statistics in the adoption/revision of criminal provisions and finds that no criminal statistics is presented in the legislative process. This appears to be for two reasons. First , the various bills were drawn up and presented by agencies claiming to have specialisation on the subject; often, such agencies do not possess criminal statistics. Second , even for those bills drawn up by agencies with potential criminal statistics, the lawmaking process is skewed, that it does not demand aspiration to make ‘good’ laws. Key terms Criminal statistics · Criminalisation · Legislative reform · Legislative rationality","PeriodicalId":30178,"journal":{"name":"Mizan Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4314/MLR.V12I2.6","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Walking in the Dark: Lack in the Use of Criminal Statistics for Public Policy and Legislative Actions\",\"authors\":\"S. K. Assefa\",\"doi\":\"10.4314/MLR.V12I2.6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As an exercise of sovereign power, the lawmaker adopts public policies to achieve certain ends. However, public policies need justifications. One such public policy is criminalisation of conduct whereby the lawmaker may have to use both doctrinal and empirical justifications. Such empirical justification is criminal statistics. All the three organs – the police, the prosecution office and the court – are required by law to collect and keep criminal statistics. Statistical data may not be available for initial adoption of legislation; yet they are essential inputs during the revision process. Even though criminal statistics do not define the outcome of the decision of the lawmaker, one would expect that they would be used as one major input for the continuous evaluation of such law. This article examines the use of criminal statistics in the adoption/revision of criminal provisions and finds that no criminal statistics is presented in the legislative process. This appears to be for two reasons. First , the various bills were drawn up and presented by agencies claiming to have specialisation on the subject; often, such agencies do not possess criminal statistics. Second , even for those bills drawn up by agencies with potential criminal statistics, the lawmaking process is skewed, that it does not demand aspiration to make ‘good’ laws. Key terms Criminal statistics · Criminalisation · Legislative reform · Legislative rationality\",\"PeriodicalId\":30178,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mizan Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4314/MLR.V12I2.6\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mizan Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4314/MLR.V12I2.6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mizan Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/MLR.V12I2.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作为一种主权权力的行使,立法者采取公共政策以达到一定的目的。然而,公共政策需要理由。其中一项公共政策是将行为定为刑事犯罪,立法者可能不得不同时使用理论和经验的理由。这种实证证明就是犯罪统计。法律要求所有三个机关- -警察、检察机关和法院- -收集和保存犯罪统计数字。初步通过立法时可能没有统计数据;然而,它们是修订过程中必不可少的输入。尽管刑事统计数据不能确定立法者决定的结果,但人们可以预期,它们将被用作持续评估此类法律的一项主要投入。本文考察了在通过/修订刑事条款时使用刑事统计数据,并发现在立法过程中没有提出刑事统计数据。这似乎有两个原因。首先,各种法案是由声称对这一问题具有专长的机构起草和提交的;这些机构通常没有犯罪统计数据。其次,即使是那些有潜在犯罪统计数据的机构起草的法案,立法过程也是扭曲的,它不需要制定“好”法律的愿望。关键词:犯罪统计·定罪化·立法改革·立法合理性
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Walking in the Dark: Lack in the Use of Criminal Statistics for Public Policy and Legislative Actions
As an exercise of sovereign power, the lawmaker adopts public policies to achieve certain ends. However, public policies need justifications. One such public policy is criminalisation of conduct whereby the lawmaker may have to use both doctrinal and empirical justifications. Such empirical justification is criminal statistics. All the three organs – the police, the prosecution office and the court – are required by law to collect and keep criminal statistics. Statistical data may not be available for initial adoption of legislation; yet they are essential inputs during the revision process. Even though criminal statistics do not define the outcome of the decision of the lawmaker, one would expect that they would be used as one major input for the continuous evaluation of such law. This article examines the use of criminal statistics in the adoption/revision of criminal provisions and finds that no criminal statistics is presented in the legislative process. This appears to be for two reasons. First , the various bills were drawn up and presented by agencies claiming to have specialisation on the subject; often, such agencies do not possess criminal statistics. Second , even for those bills drawn up by agencies with potential criminal statistics, the lawmaking process is skewed, that it does not demand aspiration to make ‘good’ laws. Key terms Criminal statistics · Criminalisation · Legislative reform · Legislative rationality
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
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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