Esquema de antecedentes penales en el Reino Unido: ¿un caso de discriminación sin justificación? (original) (raw)
Related papers
Conviction records in Spain: obstacles to reintegration of offenders?
This paper argues that conviction records pose a serious obstacle for the reintegration of offenders, especially in the labor market. It argues that this reintegration will be different in countries where publicity of conviction records is freely available, where employers are required to carry out regular checks before hiring their employees, and where conviction records never get expunged. The first part of the paper presents the regulation of conviction records in Spain, regarding these three matters. The paper then moves on to offer some reflections on how the erasure of spent conviction records could be strengthened and how this might aid the desistance process.
Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law
In recent years, the aim of offender rehabilitation has grown to become one of the most prominent features of European penal policy. European legal texts, however, lack a clear definition of this concept, thus leaving to supranational Courts the responsibility of clarifying its meaning. This article analyses the case law of European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union as regards rehabilitation. It argues that the Europeanization of criminal justice is generally contributing to a re-conceptualization of this aim of punishment with relevant implications for the national criminal justice system and its actors. Finally, the article underscores the differences in the approach to rehabilitation between the two Courts, trying to assess their potential impact on national law and their significance in the broader context of European penal policy.
Some Open Issues Concerning the Resocialization of the Convicted People
Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2014
Today, it is rightly considered that issues related to the selection and use of tools and methods with which the resocialization (treatment) is realized, has increasingly become the main issue of penology. The issues that occur as most actual and typical will be examin edhere in shortlines. Usually, when it comes to general principles the notion treatment, deals with all criminal sanctions, but it requires the application of tools and methods specific to every sanction separately, depending on its specific nature. Given the more frequent application of imprisonment, as the most used measure to fight criminality, today, without reason, the utmost attention is fixed on the treatment applied during the conduction of this sentence. Therefore, not coincidentally also this term (treatment) is exactly identified with this sentence. Regarding this definition the need for clear subject-substantial definition of the notion treatment in general and its elaboration and processs ingrelated with specific ways of implementation and execution of certain penal sanctions is also emphasized. In this regard, fully entitled are those authors who claim that the treatment for thesentencesofinstitutional characterandthoseofnon-institutionalcharactercan not (and should not) be the same. Here it comes to qualitative substantial differences that require the application of clear means and methods, defined and differentiated in the realization of resocialization.
In recent years, the aim of offender rehabilitation has grown to become one of the most prominent features of European penal policy. European legal texts, however, lack a clear definition of this concept, thus leaving to supranational Courts the responsibility of clarifying its meaning. This article analyses the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the EuropeanUnion as regards rehabilitation. It argues that the Europeanization of criminal justice is generally contributing to a re-conceptualization of this aim of punishment with relevant implications for the national criminal justice system and its actors. Finally, the article underscores the differences in the approach to rehabilitation between the two Courts, trying to assess their potential impact on national law and their significance in the broader context of European penal policy.
Manifesto for a new penal culture
2016
After over two centuries of penitentiaries as the principal instrument of criminal sentencing, and countless penal reform efforts, the same basic problems remain: the abuses; recidivism; the high social and financial costs. Alternative sentences have shown the potential to minimize all of these problems. However, the use of alternatives has not altered an increasing reliance on incarceration (10 million prisoners worldwide, of which one and a half million are in Europe), a practice which, in principle, should be ultima ratio, last resort. Prison population variation in some EU countries 2000-2014 The primacy of prison sentences reflects the logic of how trials are organised. Centred on the evaluation of culpability, trials exclude the victims from meaningful participation and, in spite of the presumedinnocence principle, are charged with stigmas from the outset. Concepts such as restorative justice criticize the insularity of the criminal justice system and its focus on punishment and prison. Restorative justice
The transfer of sentenced persons in Europe: Much ado about reintegration
Punishment & Society, 2009
In recent years new instruments have been developed in Europe that allow sentenced persons to be transferred to their country of nationality/origin or permanent residence, where the sentence is then carried out. The most commonly referred to ratio legis for these regulations is the reintegration or rehabilitation of offenders. But is the optimization of offender reintegration really the objective and the result of these transfers?
2013
The special issue (no 5, 2013) of Critica Penal y Poder is the result of a research that has been developing in the last four years. Indeed, since we thought in 2009 on the translation of Wayne Morrison’s book entitled Criminology, Civilization, and the New World Order, (Barcelona, Anthropos OSPDH, 2012) in the OPSHR, we have been questioning ourselves about the meanings that criminology and sociology of penal-law might have within the 21st century as well as the researches that would thrive from them in the coming decades. Besides the questions referring to the 19th and the 20th centuries atrocities, wars, and genocides and the fact that criminology until the 1990s has replied with an unjustifiably silence, new questions came up over. Indeed, these new worries depicted questions like what should the latter disciplines accomplish (if they should do so) over great problems related to the sufferings that are happening in all around the globe. Which have as perpetrator(s) a relationshi...