The Incompleteness of ‘Punishment as Fair Play’: A Response to Dagger

Richard Dagger (in this issue) provides perhaps the most persuasive version of a ‘fair play’ theory of criminal punishment, grounded in an attractive liberal republican political theory. But, I argue, his version of the theory still faces serious objections: that its explanation of why some central...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inRes publica (Liverpool, England) Vol. 14; no. 4; pp. 277 - 281
Main Author Duff, Antony
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01.12.2008
Springer Nature B.V
Subjects
Crime
Criminal law
Education
Ethics
Law
Legal History
Offenders
Philosophy
Philosophy of Law
Political Philosophy
Political Theory
Punishment
Republicanism
Theories of Law
Criminal punishment
Fair play theory
Mala in se and mala prohibita
Dagger
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Richard Dagger (in this issue) provides perhaps the most persuasive version of a ‘fair play’ theory of criminal punishment, grounded in an attractive liberal republican political theory. But, I argue, his version of the theory still faces serious objections: that its explanation of why some central mala in se are properly criminalised is still distorting, despite his appeal to the burdens of ‘general compliance’; and that it cannot adequately explain (as it should explain) the differential seriousness and wrongfulness of different kinds of crime.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1356-4765
1572-8692
DOI:10.1007/s11158-008-9072-0