PUNISHMENT IN MODERN SOCIETY

Can Punishment be Justified on Utilitarian Grounds?

Can punishment be justified on utilitarian grounds?

Introduction

Punishment on utilitarian grounds is a controversial policing style that has taken several forms over time and has been implemented in a variety of institutional settings. There are disagreements regarding the historical origin and the theoretical basis for punishment on utilitarian grounds. It is related to other similar policies designated by other terms, such as broken windows, hot spots, order-maintenance policing, and quality of life policing. A more descriptive, or neutral, term for these types of strict enforcement in the criminal justice system is intensive enforcement. This paper presents an assessment of whether punishment can be justified on utilitarian grounds or it is an unethical act on utilitarian grounds.

Discussion

Punishment involves a deliberate infliction of hardship or an imposition (a loss of liberty or rights) on wrongdoers, by a recognized authority, as a censure for the wrong done. This calls for an account of its purposes and justifications (Reyes, 2006). Since it is the duty of the state to protect its citizens and safeguard their rights, the imposition of punishment for crimes raises questions about the circumstances when and the extent to which punishment may be justified, as well as about its purposes (Pratt et al., 2005).

Often discussed in contrast with community policing, Punishment on utilitarian grounds is defined as a policy of strict enforcement of law, without regard to the particularities of a case or the nature of the offense (Newburn & Trevor, 2007). Thus, punishment on utilitarian grounds is a strict-enforcement policy starting with interrogation and arrest, followed by decisions to prosecute, through the meting out of often-severe punishments, or especially when, the offense is considered a petty offense. Some of the petty offenses that have come under punishment programs include graffiti or jumping turnstiles in a subway to evade the fare (Valier, 2002).

While community-policing initiatives emphasize citizen involvement and police accountability, punishment on utilitarian grounds accentuates the government's exercise of authority and its monopoly over the legitimate control of antisocial behaviour. According to some observers, the various forms of punishment on utilitarian grounds or intensive-enforcement policies contribute to the problem of mass incarceration in the United Kingdom.

Although early instances of punishment on utilitarian grounds can be found in the areas of domestic violence and neighbourhood improvement, many agree that the policing style and terminology of punishment has an origin in the federal policies launched during the 1980s in the War on Drugs lead by the Reagan administration, and as is more commonly cited, with strategic innovations in the policing of the subways and streets of London City during the 1990s. With these historical points in mind, police authorities and consultants, including moral entrepreneurs who were engaged in the War on Drugs and the punishment initiatives in London, have contributed to the diffusion of intensive-enforcement policies across the United Kingdom and to other countries, especially the United Kingdom, most often under the rubric of zero tolerance (Reyes, 2006).

Zero tolerance can be pursued at the points of fieldwork, arrest, prosecution, ...