瑞典废除精神错乱辩护与《联合国残疾人权利公约》:人权边缘政策或证据不起作用?

IF 0.4 Q2 Social Sciences
P. Gooding, T. Bennet
{"title":"瑞典废除精神错乱辩护与《联合国残疾人权利公约》:人权边缘政策或证据不起作用?","authors":"P. Gooding, T. Bennet","doi":"10.1525/NCLR.2018.21.1.141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) may require the abolition of the insanity defense and similar “special defenses” in criminal law. Proponents argue that abolishing the defense would advance efforts to fully recognize the legal capacity of persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others; detractors suggest it would compound the substantive inequality of an already marginalized population. This paper seeks to accelerate this debate with reference to Swedish criminal law, which saw the abolition of the insanity defense in 1965. Neither side of the debate appears to have considered the anomaly of Swedish criminal law. Equally, Swedish legislators appear to have overlooked CRPD-based considerations. Instead, Sweden seems likely to reintroduce the insanity defense following long-standing domestic criticism. This paper brings together developments in Sweden and international human rights law, and draws out conceptual and practical lessons in the quest for due process rights and substantive equality for people with disabilities in criminal law.","PeriodicalId":44796,"journal":{"name":"New Criminal Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"30","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Abolition of the Insanity Defense in Sweden and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Human Rights Brinksmanship or Evidence It Won’t Work?\",\"authors\":\"P. Gooding, T. Bennet\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/NCLR.2018.21.1.141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) may require the abolition of the insanity defense and similar “special defenses” in criminal law. Proponents argue that abolishing the defense would advance efforts to fully recognize the legal capacity of persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others; detractors suggest it would compound the substantive inequality of an already marginalized population. This paper seeks to accelerate this debate with reference to Swedish criminal law, which saw the abolition of the insanity defense in 1965. Neither side of the debate appears to have considered the anomaly of Swedish criminal law. Equally, Swedish legislators appear to have overlooked CRPD-based considerations. Instead, Sweden seems likely to reintroduce the insanity defense following long-standing domestic criticism. This paper brings together developments in Sweden and international human rights law, and draws out conceptual and practical lessons in the quest for due process rights and substantive equality for people with disabilities in criminal law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Criminal Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"30\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Criminal Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/NCLR.2018.21.1.141\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Criminal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/NCLR.2018.21.1.141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 30

摘要

《联合国残疾人权利公约》(CRPD)可能要求废除精神错乱辩护和类似的刑法“特殊辩护”。支持者认为,废除辩护权将有助于在与其他人平等的基础上充分承认残疾人的法律行为能力;批评者认为,这将加剧已经被边缘化的人口的实质性不平等。本文试图以瑞典刑法为参照,加速这一辩论,瑞典刑法在1965年废除了精神错乱辩护。争论的双方似乎都没有考虑到瑞典刑法的反常之处。同样,瑞典立法者似乎忽视了基于crpd的考虑。相反,在国内长期的批评之后,瑞典似乎有可能重新引入精神错乱辩护。本文汇集了瑞典和国际人权法的发展,总结了在刑法中为残疾人争取正当程序权利和实质性平等的概念和实践经验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Abolition of the Insanity Defense in Sweden and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Human Rights Brinksmanship or Evidence It Won’t Work?
The U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) may require the abolition of the insanity defense and similar “special defenses” in criminal law. Proponents argue that abolishing the defense would advance efforts to fully recognize the legal capacity of persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others; detractors suggest it would compound the substantive inequality of an already marginalized population. This paper seeks to accelerate this debate with reference to Swedish criminal law, which saw the abolition of the insanity defense in 1965. Neither side of the debate appears to have considered the anomaly of Swedish criminal law. Equally, Swedish legislators appear to have overlooked CRPD-based considerations. Instead, Sweden seems likely to reintroduce the insanity defense following long-standing domestic criticism. This paper brings together developments in Sweden and international human rights law, and draws out conceptual and practical lessons in the quest for due process rights and substantive equality for people with disabilities in criminal law.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Focused on examinations of crime and punishment in domestic, transnational, and international contexts, New Criminal Law Review provides timely, innovative commentary and in-depth scholarly analyses on a wide range of criminal law topics. The journal encourages a variety of methodological and theoretical approaches and is a crucial resource for criminal law professionals in both academia and the criminal justice system. The journal publishes thematic forum sections and special issues, full-length peer-reviewed articles, book reviews, and occasional correspondence.
×
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