Social Sciences, asked by rupsonabasumatary68, 8 months ago

critically discuss the reformative theory of punishment.​

Answers

Answered by anugyapokharel870
0

Answer:

The reformative theory was born out of the positive theory that the focal point of crime is positive thinking. Thus, according to this theory, the objective of punishment needs to be reformation by the offender. So, this is not a punishment virtually but rather a rehabilitative process.

Explanation:

Answered by sandrasunil87
0

Answer:

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THEORIES OF PUNISHMENT

Mere denunciation of crime is not enough; it must be pushed to its logic end that

crime does not pay by punishing the offenders. Punishment means, “It is the redress that

the commonwealth takes against an offending member”1

Punishment is some sort of social

censure and not necessarily involving physical pain. H Kelson in his General Theory of

Law and State described “sanction is socially organized consists in a deprivation of

possession- life, freedom, or property”2 According to Jeremy Bentham punishment is evil

in the form of remedy which operates by fear.3 Johan Finnish has said that delinquent

behavior of a person needs to be taught lesson not with melody but with iron hand.

“There is the need of almost every member of society to be taught what the requirement

of the law—the common path for pursuing the common good—actually is: and

{relatively!} Vivid drama of the apprehension, trial, and punishment of those who depart

from that stipulated common way”4

Various reasons justify punishment but criminal law as sanctions has one

important object, is to eradicate the self-help and private sanctions.5 Once society realizes

that there is need of sanction, it must be applied collectively, officially, legally and

publicly.6 Different authors have offered various theories of punishment but those can be

broadly classified as non-utilitarian and utilitarian.7 What distinguishes these theories is

their focus and goals: utilitarian theories are forward looking concerned with the future

consequence of punishment; non-utilitarian theories are backward looking, interested in

the past acts and mental states; and mixed theories are both forward and backward

looking.

Punishment is awarded to reduce crimes and used as means to an end, is the claim

of the utilitarian. George Hegel and Immanuel Kant criticized and rejected the utility

theory, presented the contrast retributive theory of punishment, which is of non-utilitarian

on the premises that punishment is not means to an end but end in itself. This tug of war

between the George Hegel and Immanuel Kant on one side and Jeremy Bentham on the

other side is carried even by 20th century scholars. In 1949, Lord Denning appearing

before the Royal Commission on ‘Capital Punishment’ expressed the following view:

“The punishment inflicted for grave crimes should adequately reflect the

revulsion felt by the great majority of citizen for them. It is a mistake to

consider the object of punishment as being deterrent or reformative or

preventive and nothing else … The ultimate justification of any

punishment is not that it is a deterrent, but that it is the emphatic

denunciation by the community of a crime: and from this point of view,

there are some murders which, in the present state of public opinion,

demand the most emphatic denunciation of all namely the death

penalty.”

Explanation:

HOPE IT HELPED

Similar questions