Deaths in Custody Are a Controversial Issue a Critical Approach in Relation to Race and Police or Prison Custody - Essay Example

Deaths in custody are a controversial issue – a critical approach in relation to race and police or prison custody Racism and death in police custodyis a disturbing problem with a multifaceted manifestation. Police custody is a reformatory place rather than a pace to punish an offender. The old proverb comes into action “Hate the sin not the Sinner”. However far from being perfect the current repeated incidents of death in police custody and that out of racism is turning the present circumstances into a nightmare especially for minority groups and aboriginal people. Such a heinous offence to mankind has no border and no country specification. Australia, United Kingdom, United States of America and Canada along with many others are suffering from this deadly disease that constantly eroding the roots of humanity. In relation to the topic under discussion, the first word that comes to our mind is ‘Humanity’, to be more specific it is ‘Human Rights’, that is being questioned when people talk about custodial deaths that are coming into the news these days. Human Rights watch is devoted to shielding the human rights of the populace. Humanity needs to support the victims to prevent discrimination, to protect them from being inhuman further and above all to bring those offenders onto the path of justice. One might challenge the government and the ‘Police’ who safeguard human rights, and possess the authority to end offensive activities from the society. In relation to the issue, race comes as a vehement factor. People of Los Angeles believe that the white officers show bias actions towards the racial minorities in terms of abusive acts against them (Collins, 1998). The paper highlights the racial bias experienced by victims under police and prison custody. Deaths in police custody, whether it is it a suicide or a murder, is a disagreeable offense in any case. Off course, in a real case of suicidal death, the police can relieve themselves from the responsibility. Yet the fact remains in all cases of custodial suicides the culpability of the policeman cannot be ignored. To create adverse situations for a victim to commit suicide and directly or indirectly indulging him/her to carry it out within the prison indicate direct involvement of the police in the execution of suicide by the victims or the prisoners under custody. “In such assisted suicides, the policeman becomes the perpetrators of injustice, which can never be justified under any circumstances” (Vadackumchery, 1999, p.15). News about prisoners hanging themselves with socks, shoestrings and torn bed sheets have often been in the media. Some deaths are occurring due to the lack of medical attention towards the prisoners who are clearly demonstrating signs of distress. (Vadackumchery, 1999; Barak, 1991; Controversial Death of another Black man in Cincinnati Police, December 22 2003) Racial discrimination refers to offensive attitude towards the people belonging to other race. All expressions of racism, according to George M. Frederickson’s conception, refer to the differences between races, which indicates they cannot coexist in one society in terms of equality. Overt actions that deny the opportunities of some, result in preferential treatment for others. The consequence of discrimination finds its outlet in the life expectancy rates of the US. The life expectancy of the non-whites are several years less than whites because they receive somewhat inferior kind of healthcare, food and shelter while being in the custody in the U.S. As Dow and Dow (2002, p. 74) report, “after an Afro –American youth disappeared in Columbus, Georgia, he was first reported missing”. Then his father was told that a body has been found but it was not in an identifiable condition because it had badly decayed. Two weeks later the bereaved father was informed that the body was definitely of his son, who has been stabbed brutally in the custody. A thousand of such examples were found in US – innocent people have been compelled to die only because they are Black in color. According to a survey conducted in March-April 2001 by the Washington post, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and the Harvard University 52% Afro-American men said that the police have unjustly made them halt owing to their dark color of the skin. Corrupt or biased judges do not encourage the consideration of anti-discriminatory cases. The conduct of police and law enforcement organizations is especially important in this context. In many societies, (Dalits are again examples) these social institutions fail to protect marginalized crowds from assailments, or fail to examine threats and crimes against them, as it expected from them. In most of the cases the police himself are responsible for vulnerability and discrimination against them. Violence in police custody, harassment and disproportionate rates are common problems. (Dow and Dow, 2002, p. 74; Anand, 2008, p.180; Menon and Banerjea, 2005, p.202) A certain case referred as Velikova v. Bulgaria investigated by the ERRC (European Roma Rights Center) the claimant for justice said that her spouse’s Roman ethnicity led to his wrong and ill treatment within the police detention. The applicant even put forward several examples of superstitions and racial discrimination initiating aggression in order to support her claim. Despite all her testimonials, the court could not identify any violation of human rights under article 14. The verdict of the court could be summed up as follows: "The Court observes that the applicants complaint under Article 14 is grounded on a number of serious arguments. It also notes that the respondent State failed to provide a plausible explanation as to the circumstances of Mr. Tsonchevs death and as to the reasons why the investigation omitted certain fundamental and indispensable steps which could have shed light on the events ... The Court recalls, however, that the standard of proof required under the Convention is proof beyond reasonable doubt. The material before it does not enable the Court to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that Mr. Tsonchevs death and the lack of a meaningful investigation into it were motivated by racial prejudice, as claimed by the applicant. It follows that no violation of Article 14 has been established." (Pleše, 2004) The ERRC opposed this, stating that in such cases where evidences from the ill treated people, medical proofs, the safeguarding of Article 14 might seem to be deceptive. It becomes a problem therefore to identify which kind of proofs or testimonies might be suitable for the identification of such a legal case as a racial bias. An incident of Cincinnati involving the death of a black person at the time of a police encounter stirred the investigation at national level. The racial issue and distrust based upon racial grounds came to the front. A videotape revealed a 350 pound man named Nathaniel Jones being struck with batons several times and for a long period of time by the police until he fell unconscious and was handcuffed. Again a report found 18 black men dead in the police custody of Cincinnati in 1995 in a similar manner. Some of the offices including five whites and one black were on leave from their administrative job. The County Coroner of Hamilton called it homicide despite several warnings. He justified his grounds saying that the death could not be categorized into any other classification such as accident, suicide and natural deaths and hence he named it homicide. He also mentioned that the police did not apply any “excessive force” but the death occurred due to his struggle. The stress was drawn towards his habits like drugs and other ailments like obesity and heart problems. The Coroner Parrott also reported that he had taken cocaine around three hours before the fight – “Since the struggle was the result of a purposeful act, in this case, the effort by the police to subdue him, to do their jobs, that purposeful act was weight, he had a heart problem, there was cocaine in his system” (Controversial Death of another Black man in Cincinnati Police, 2003, p.10). Despite all, he even pointed out that the NAACP was looking for the following: “..possibility of exploring legal options as they relate to a pattern of discrimination within the police department as reflected in the deaths of a number of Black men in the city. The issue for us is broader than this one incident; it is the pattern and the continued existence of inequitable treatment by the police on African-American men in this city” (Controversial Death of another Black man in Cincinnati Police, 2003, p.11) Despite his report, the Mayor Charlie Luken reported that the police officers’ lives were at risk when a 400 pound man attacked them and he even opined that the police did nothing wrong. Such wide difference in observation and comments on a single videotape doe simply a hint of racial discrimination associated with the death of the black man. The Christopher Commission stated in this context, “The problem of excessive force is aggravated by racism and bias…an officer’s prejudice towards the suspect’s race may lead to the use of excessive force” (Collins, 1998, p. 203) Another case of death in police custody was reported by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) while surveying the British police department. The report was about Christopher Alder, who was 37 years of age and a black ex-soldier. Alder was enagged in a tussle in 1998 besdie aclud house at Hull. Suddenly he was beaten on his head and taken to the nearby hospital by the ambulance which arived only to find the man undergoing convulsions. When he was released from the hospital he was dragged harshly by the policement to the custody for “breach of peace”. The video was broadcast on BBC news and this revealed the following act of the police towards the black man, “…..officers dragging Alder, unconscious and with his trousers around his ankles, into the custody suite. For 10 minutes he was left face down on the floor, still handcuffed, in his own vomit and blood, gasping and choking to death, whilst officers ignored him. Some made monkey noises and other jibes. At one point an officer is seen throwing one of Alder’s teeth onto the floor” (Morgan, 2006). The above incident clearly reveals the brutality shown by the police department. Despite later investigations into this issue no step was taken against the five oficers who were guilty. On the other hand Jason Paul who was also enagged in the ocnflict with Alder received £30,000 to deal with his injuries. Facts also reveal the retirement of four of the five officials on health realted perpectives. The important proofs were all kept away formt he forensic study and even the post mortem showed that the blow on his death during the fight was not the cause of his death. So the evidence revealed that the death took place owing to the blows of the police. Accoridng to IPCC the police officers could be accused of “unwitting racism” and it also ascertained that the fialure was that of the mechanism and not really of the individual officers involved. The term “unwitting racism” was quoted by Lord Macpherson while dealing with a case where a black young boy named Stephen Lawrence was killed and his assaulters were released unpunished. Such a death was termed as “institutionalised racism” existing among the police. On one hand he suggested that the system should change and on the other he did not blame any individual. The case of Alder was similar to the one involving Lawrence. No officers could be punished. The reasons for the lack of concern about the black man were quoted as ““inflexible police ethos” on one hand and “negative stereotyping” on the other (Morgan, 2006). These causes compelled the police officers to assume that Alder was cheating on thema nd not being genuine about his health. Another comment by the IPCC personnel shows how diplomatically the issue was disregarded with respect to blaming the officers directly – “I believe they were guilty of the most serious neglect of duty [but] I do not believe ... that any of these officers assaulted Mr. Alder” (Morgan, 2006). Similar discriminaiton in the institution of police and deaths in custody became evident when a case was reported form Queensland in 2004. Mulrunji’s dead body was found in his cell on November 19 2004. The police department was blamed for lack of proper investigation regarding his death. Mulrunji was reported to have made a comment to the Aboriginal policeman called Llyod Bengaroo who, along with one of his seniors was investigated a domestic case. The victim said, “Why are you hassling other Aboriginal people?” (Riley, October 6, 2006). At this comment he was followed and forcefully pulled him inside the police van. The observers noted and reported that “Hurley used an enormous amount of force to subdue Mulrunji and throw him into the police van”. Hurley was the senior of Bengaroo. Mulrunji was thrown to the ground while the senior officer repeatedly inflicted blows on him. Mulrunji did not have any problem with law before. On the other hand Hurley was previously accused of harassing aboriginals. Mulrunji was attacked for quite sometime until he could not breathe. The officers in charge of the ambulance also reported that there was no purpose in taking him for medical care because he was already cold and dead. His family was reported that the situaiton was fine. The other people were not allowed to access the victim and the police made up stories about his condition and death. A press release reported the death of an Australian aboriginal Douglas Scott in his cell. He was arrested on illegal grounds and later found hanging in his prison cell. He was tormented and killed before being hung up to make it seem like a suicide. His wife Letty Scott Nupanunga was arrested for using offensive language and being scared that she might as well lose her life, the woman file her application for the Asylum instead of the custody. Such an incident reveals shameful gestures of the police officers where a victim is choosing to be rather insane than find herself in custody even for 60 days. Despite a lot of proofs and witnesses the case of her husband was subdued. The lady commented in this context, “There is no justice in Australia. Australia has two laws, one for the white people and another for the colored. Colored, ethnic minorities and refugees are treated in an evil way. I want to know why we are treated as inferior beings in Australia” (Sikh Human Rights Group, 2000). Sometimes the police arrest people on illegitimate grounds. On occasions, the victims die in the custody due to the torture, illness, suicide or accidents. They are even killed by criminals within the prison. Women (especially of minority community) are raped and killed by the direction of the majority community people. Death of a prisoner or accused in police custody is not peculiar in case of India. Laws were enacted to curb the tendency of police officers to resort to torture to extract wrong confessions etc. The National Human Rights Commission has laid down that all district Magistrates and Superintendent of police shall report every incident of incident of rape and deaths of prisoners within a day of such occurrences. The commission also wanted that post-mortems of all deaths in the police as well as prison custody should be recorded in the form of videos and the recordings should be sent along with the post-mortem reports. (Ganessan and Gossman, 1996, p. 93) Paul Haywood mentioned with deep agony that in Australia the indigenous aboriginal people are given a treatment that no way is better than the subordinate second-class citizen. Paul’s brother Deon breather his last breathe on March 14, 2010 in Perth police custody. Paul kept on saying with deep passion and throat chocking emotion “Deon’s son is here today. Now he hasn’t got a father. I haven’t got a brother. My mother has lost her son and my sister in law has lost her man.” (Everett, April 2010) This is neither a beginning nor an end in another incident, Woods a thirty plus diabetic found to be unconscious in his cell and passed the night in that manner, no one attended him, given him any medical attention or taken him to hospital. When he was taken to hospital next day he was declared as expired on arrival. Gratley Winmer another aboriginal man aged thirty-nine shared the same fate only after seven days of the previous incident. Winmer was facing hemarage on his brain for almost six to seven days in his cell. A previous sufferer of two strokes and diagnosed with meningitis his case was beyond words to explain. The poor fellow was taken into custody following his driving without licence and only 21 days were left between him and his freedom. Ian Ward another aboriginal person died when he was transported in scorching heat (42 degree centigrade) from Laverton to Kalgoorlie (a four hour hectic journey) without the favor of air conditioner. The investigators hold responsible the state government prison department along with GSL the prisoner transport contractor and the twin drivers of the prison van. However such action on behalf of the government seems to have little impact on this distinctive problem. Just after two years of Ward’s demise Davis Yarran a 46 years old with same ethnic background again collapsed in a prison van in his Journey to attend a family funeral from Casuarina prison to Fremantle cemetery. It has been observed by Yvonne Henderson that rate of imprisonment (6.67% computed) of Aboriginal man in Western Australia is in parity to the rate of Adult black man taken into custody in United states of America. This rate is higher than USA for the woman counter part of both the ethnic background (0.63% computed to 0.49% computed). Furthermore, she moved one step ahead to add that Aboriginal adults were 25 times higher probability in Western Australia than non-Aboriginal adults to be behind the bars. Comparing to its nominal demographical presence in Western Australia that stands little over 3% of the total Western Australian Population; it is really alarming and disturbing. The statistics does not change if Juvenile imprisonment is considered rather gives a more gloomy picture. Of the total juvenile imprisonment in Western Australia Aboriginal Juveniles account to 75% to 80%. In an article published in Melbourne Age on 16th November 2009 it had been claimed that Aborigines between 10 years to 17 years are with forty five times higher probability than non-Aboriginal people of the same age group to be confined in jail in Western Australia. It is true that government is making some effort but considering the level of atrocities that effort is falling far too short. Rather the civil organizations protesting strongly against such racial discrimination and has drawn the government into a process of collective bargaining. The Western Australian Attorney General Christian Porter has announced an interim compensation of 0.2 million dollar to Ward’s widow, but that only after being asked about the clarity of their intention. Deaths in Custody Watch Committee, Australian Legal Service, Western Australian Equal Opportunity and National Symposium on Racism are relentlessly testing their might against all the odds and n extension of hand of friendship from the government will only quicken the process of a new sunrise up the Australian Horizon. (Everett, April 2010) Law gives even hard-core criminals a chance to regret and in a way correct the flaws in their characters. By giving them appropriate punishment, the law provides justice to them against which they have committed those crimes. The law, administration, and police are the carriers of justice for the humanity. But corruption among them have reached such a level that the media and even the public is compelled to protest against the brutal torture of police on the prisoners and even sometimes in case of innocent people. Only a critical review in the newspaper or a documentary on the social issues like custodial death due to racial discrimination cannot help the society get rid of it. In order to restore the faith of the society in the police justice greater monitoring and more impartial treatment needs to be delivered. Macpherson was right when he accused the system but it is the people who collectively make up the system. Unless punishment due to racial discrimination is meted out to individual police officers, no lesson shall be learnt and implemented while the law will remain under the taint of racial discrimination. Criminals are taken to prison for resurrection and not to be killed. Otherwise a death sentence is equivalent to any normal arrest. The monitoring at the prison cells should be stronger and more effective. The corrective steps need to be adopted at the micro level and the root must be reached in this manner. References 1. Anand, M. (2008). Dalit Women. Gyan Books. 2. Barak, G. (1991). Crimes by the Capitalist State, New York: SUNNY Press. 3. Collins, A. (1998). Shielded from Justice. Human Rights Watch Controversial Death of another Black man in Cincinnati Police. (December 22, 2003). Jet, 104 (26), Johnson Publishing Company. 4. Dow, D. and M. Dow. (2002). Machinery of Death. London: Routledge. 5. Everett, N. (April 2010). Deaths in custody expose racism in WA justice system, Direct Action, available at: http://directaction.org.au/issue21/deaths_in_custody_expose_racism_in_wa_justice_system (accessed on August 4, 2010) 6. Menon, N.R.M. and Banerjea, D. (2005). Criminal Justice India Series. Chandigarh: Allied Publishers. 7. Morgan, M. (April 8, 2006). Britain: Inquiry into death in custody whitewashes racist police brutality, World Socialist Website. Available at: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/apr2006/poli-a08.shtml (accessed on August 4, 2010) 8. Pleše, B. (2004). The Strasbourg Court Finally Redresses Racial Discrimination, European Roma Rights Center. Available at: http://www.errc.org/cikk.php?cikk=1851 (accessed on August 12, 2010) 9. 10. Riley, D. (October 6, 2006). Police racism: Stop deaths in custody!, Green Left, available at: http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/36315 (accessed on August 4, 2010) 11. Sikh Human Rights Group. (November 29, 2000). ‘Racism and Injustice Drives Australian Aborigine Family Out Of Their Country’, available at: http://www.shrg.net/campaigns/dscott/Press%20Release%2029-11-00.doc.pdf (accessed on August 4, 2010) 12. Ganessan, A. and Gossman, P. (1996). Police Abuse and Killings of Street Children in India. Human Rights Watch. 13. Vadackumchery, J. (1999). Third Millennium Police, APH Publishing. A critical approach to the famous criminological classic: CRIME, SHAME, AND REINTEGRATION by John Braithwaite In this age of growing crime rate, it appears increasingly important to take measures to put a check to it. The theorists of criminology are also sorting out different plans and procedure to tackle the situation. John Braithwaite has taken a similar agenda. Contemporary criminology is unimaginable without involvement of sociology or social psychology. Revealing the global use as well as nationally distinct variations in the practice of sociological theory and criminology and their relationships with the feeling of shame and reintegration, this volume of John Braithwaite namely Crime, Shame and Reintegration, first published in the year 1989, is a masterpiece because of its in depth analysis and insight. He has tried to formulate how shame can be used to as a protective measure to control the spiraling crime rate. For example, if a child watches his parents committing crimes without feeling any shame, by intuitive imitation he will learn the trick of the trade and become an offender afterwards (Sharma, 1998, p. 10). The theory of the author about re-integrative shaming and its succeeding application are perceived and convincing. As a criminologist and academic, Mr. Braithwaite is inclined to make use of "in-house" terms, which enriches the book further, and provides straight answers even for a first time reader of such issues. Although Braithwaite’s theories require rethinking and refinement, it has been able to greatly influence the criminology of the turn of the century. Braithwaite can be a very good starting point for a novice who is interested in the study of criminal psychology. This book is helpful not only for students and researchers but a close study of it can make a citizen more apprehensive regarding his social role. Braithwaite argues that several societies can have an unusual crime rates because they use shame in different ways. Shaming instead of controlling crime can ignite it further and therefore can be counterproductive. According to the author, “when shaming is done within a cultural context of respect for the offender, it can be extraordinarily powerful, efficient and just a form of social control” (Braithwaite, 1999, p. 230). The theory suggests that the key to crime control is cultural commitments to pursue re-integrative shaming against lawbreakers. “Societies with low crime rates are those that shame potently and judiciously” (Braithwaite, 1989, p. 1); persons who chose crime as an option are automatically shielded from any feeling of shame over their wrongdoing. Hence “…. shame can be applied injudiciously and counterproductively” (Braithwaite, 1989, p. 1). In contrast, stigmatizing shame can create criminal subculture, which is more favorable to crime producing activity. Research and policy implications of the theory are also explored in this book. The book has some clear ideas in the subject line like the author’s conceptual thinking about what a criminology means, the dominant theories behind criminal psychology- labeling, sub-cultural control, opportunity and learning theories. The familiar structures of the criminal process include re-integrative shaming, the process of shaming, the social circumstances favorable to re-integrative shaming, the association between re-integrative shaming and white-collar crimes are discussed in it. Above all, there is a critical approach of how far the theories given by him (author) is right. The review demands to know certain terms or to be more specific certain theories behind the criminology. The first is the labeling theory – the author discusses the theories with reference to Frank Tannenbaum’s Crime and the community. According to this theory, ‘the person becomes the thing he is described as being, the harder they work to reform the evil, the greater the evil grows under their hands’ (Braithwaite, 1999, p. 20). It works mischief as it brings the bad behaviour, which otherwise the person would have suppressed. “ A labeled person, far from being pushed into a deviant self-conception, may through confronting the low regards expressed by others, decides that he/she has a problem with drugs, for example” (Braithwaite: 1999, p. 20). The next is the subculture theory. It has a strong relationship with the labeling theory. Some of the instances of sub-culture formation arise in part from the fact that the society creates similar types of outcasts with a common fate who face the same problems. Braithwaite’s discussion on the subculture formation is indeed so informative that it can allow a reader a gather a comprehensive understanding of a criminal mind. “Control theories assume that all individuals are subjects” to many temptations to engage in criminal behavior (Braithwaite, 1999, p. 20). One of the attractive features of control theories is that they do not consider human beings as predestined creatures. From this book, the readers can explore that when an individual fails to achieve his or her objectives, the individual becomes exhausted and in this way, he becomes desperate and resort to violent means, which leads to criminality. In this regard, the concrete social bonds like the family cultures and the impact of school or rather the socialization in student life is repeatedly mentioned. Social learning is a process, which can help an individual rationalize, evaluate and judge what is right or wrong. Some key concepts like differential associations and identifications, positive and negative support and their impact on criminology are vividly explained in the book. The book shows how social learning theory explains that the criminal standards, ethics, thoughts, methods, and expressions pass on from one being to the other. Another issue highlighted in this book is integrative shaming, a way in which an offender is punished and forced to feel shame for doing a misdeed in a manner that makes the individual feel degraded and devalued. But it does not label him as a criminal permanently. Criminals suffer from enormous desperation, and perform criminal acts and are consequently punished, which temporarily relieves them of their guilt feelings. According to Braithwaite, disintegrative shaming tries to control future misconduct. In addition, vulnerability of losing esteem for future misconduct do not seem to be associated to past history of shameful experience. Nor do they conform to the Braithwaite proposed relationships between past shaming experiences and present misconduct. This kind of loopholes suggests that more thinking is necessary and the theory of Braithwaite needs to be more refined. A person’s socialization can determine and explain his future misconduct because there is an undeniable relation between nature and nurture. After having read the book the question comes to the reader’s mind whether an individuals genetic structure responsible for making him a criminal or is it the environment in which he is raised that determines the outcome? Braithwaite argues that family life teaches us that shaming and punishments are possible while maintaining the bonds of respect. Crime, Shame and Reintegration, presents a general idea about the process of shaming. The relationships between the criminals and their communities, and the emotions the offenders feel are identified as central to the explanation of criminality. According to the author, the process of shaming plays a more important part in the reduction of crime than the punishments imposed by courts. Shaming appeals to the individual’s moral values and thus maintains as well as develops conscience. Another term that appears after the publication of this criminological classic is the white-collar crime. From the book, readers come to know that, the new breed includes criminals who are apparently suave, soft-spoken, well dressed, and well educated in the formal sense and are socially respectable. They have propagated with the rise of modern industrial capitalism. It is very difficult to have an exact figure of white-collar crime in a society. Braithwaite thinks, “it is ultimately untestable because of the impossibility, given the extraordinary capacity of powerful offenders to conceal their offending” (Braithwaite, 1999, p.136). The scope of criminology as an educational course is somewhat limited. Braithwaite lays out 13 “facts a theory of crime ought to fit” and maintains that his model fits them (Braithwaite, 1999, p.44). In the social context, a reading of the book would definitely make one equipped to understanding the criticality of the mind of a criminal. To the social reformers, this book will invariably have an impression and this will, of course, help them to bring the hard-core criminals into the realm of justice. One flaw of this book is the depth of the theoretical concepts that turns it to be illegible to the common readers. As the book has no stereotype storyline, readers who like to enjoy story out of every book will not be satisfied and the book will appear to them as monotonous to read. According to the author, “A general theory of crime is an ambitious undertaking. While the theory in this book purports to be general, it is at the same time partial” (Braithwaite, 1999, p. vii). Here the author himself opines that he has a bit partial approach not general which he wanted it to follow. Shame and guilt can have immense bearing on our idea of self and our behaviors towards others. This is the final implication of the book Braithwaite -Crime, Shame and Reintegration. Braithwaite’s theory of integrative shaming has great influence on the present criminology, both at the level of theorizing the reason behind crime and at the level of using shame to curtail the crime rate. Pondering on the concept of shame forwarded by the author, Siegel illustrates it as a feeling “we get when we don’t meet the standards we have set for ourselves and or that significant others have set for us” (Siegel, 2008, p.244). The experience of shame can lead an offender to believe that they are defective and something is wrong with them. Siegel also made appoint that in a country like Japan the conviction of criminal is aimed at making the convicted inordinate amount of shame and as a result the country have considerably low rate of crime. There the court proceeding is held only when the process of reintegrating shame fails. “The cultural assumption of basic goodness and the belief in each individual’s capacity for eventual self-correction mean that ‘nurturant acceptance’ (‘amayakashi’) is the appropriate response to deviance once shame has been projected to and accepted by deviant” (Braithwaite, 1999, p. 65). This outstanding exemplary crime control device has been juxtaposed by the United States. There the crime rate is higher because they do not accept crime as shameful and consequently they are unable to internalize any abhorrence for criminal act. Instead they resort to crime out of the feeling of a victim of a justice system. Braithwaite has borrowed an instance from Bayley. He says that when a policeman accuses an American he is more likely to say ‘Why me?’, while a Japanese would apologize, ‘I’m sorry’(Braithwaite: 1999, p.65). When a conviction leads to social rejection and humiliation, the offender joins a subculture of like-minded people recognizing a common but imaginary bond among them. If the justice system seeks to make the shame permanent in public it may lead to telling effects on the human rights of the state, apart from criminalizing the convicted for ever. Siegel finds out that quite a number of “states have passed sex offender registry and notification laws that make public the names of those convicted of sex offences and warns neighbors of their presence in the community” (Siegel: 2008, p.244). The object of shame management is to make people acknowledge their mistakes and pine for the misdeed and work out for making things right. Similarly the improper management of shame can have a converse effect. Instead of feeling shame, sometimes the offender blames the victim of instigating their offensive action. There is no doubt that men are more prone to crime than men. Braithwaite has scrutinized the socialization process of both the sexes to find an answer for this imbalance. Just as one’s participation in scandal makes the individual sensitive to the fact that he or she himself may become object of gossip, ‘there is a reciprocal relationship between being an instrument and an object of reintegrative shaming” (Braithwaite: 1999, p.94). Women are more dotted to their family for this reason and they are less likely to cut off the familial tie in order “to have a period in their life cycle where they can make a break with their mission” (Braithwaite: 1999, p.94). Although women have fewer propensities towards crime, they are more often victim of domestic violence. Braithwaite has broken new grounds, if not in his proposal of shame management, at least in his suggestion that domestic violence on women can be controlled by mounting shame on the abusers. According to Braithwaite, community is a better place than a legal court for the settlement of a conflict. The ultimate goal of justice is to reconcile the offender to his native community. “Ceremonies of restoration to signify the re-establishment of harmony among the conflicting parties are culturally pivotal; the best way for this reconciliation to occur is by mutual apology” (Braithwaite: 1999, p.64). The author is of the opinion that it is very important that the proceeding take place within the community in which the conflict originates, rather than transferring it to a mechanically designed institution, which has nothing to do with the offender’s native community or that of the victims. This reintegrative shaming and reconciling approach operates on a number of related principles. The offender ought to recognize that he has caused injury to a social or personal relation and accept his responsibility. It is only then that he can be considered a prolific member of the group or community. The legal system should assume a healing responsibility and not a vengeful wheel of justice. Instead of sympathizing with the victim and humiliating the offender, the system must address the conflict and focus on the eradicating methods. The success of such a system relies on the stake that a member has in the community. If he does not value himself as a responsible member of the social community, he is less likely to feel shame and restitute materially and symbolically through statement of apology or correction. It is clear from the preceding discussion that a considerable amount of focus has given on the restorative principle. This pertains not only to the restoration of the offender but also of the victim – “Certainly one of the most significant developments in the treatment of young offenders in Britain over the past decade has been the move away from punitive forms of cautioning towards a new type of informal disposal known as ‘restorative cautioning” (Goold, 2003, p. 1). Inspired by the policies undertaken in Japan, the British legal system has moved more towards application of “the principles of restorative justice and the use of reintegrative shaming techniques” (Goold, 2003, p.13). The author for the effective use of shaming has taken certain presumptions. Crime is more than a mere violation of criminal law and government authority. “Crime involves disruption in a three dimensional relationship of victim, community, and offender” (Hagan: 2010, p.187). In the disruption, the most harmed parties are the victim and the community and therefore the target of justice is to repair and heal the community and the victim. They also elaborate that the victim, “the community, and the offender should all participate in determining the response to crime; government should surrender its monopoly over that process” (Hagan, 2010, p.187). Braithwaite feels that the re-building of the socially disrupted relationship between the offender and the victim can be more valuable by “facilitating reconciliation and restitution between the offender and victim” (Braithwaite, 1999, p.182). But Hagan takes a step ahead of Braithwaite has done. A disposition of a case and legal sanction should focus as much on the needs of the community and the victim as on the necessity to bring the offender back from the realm of crime. The primal aim of this kind of justice is to restore the social order existing among the parties disrupted by the crime. The offender should act to recompense the material and emotional losses of the victim should confront shame and through the shame regain dignity. For this purpose, all the three sides should participate in the restorative program and they should be provided with the scope of face-to-face dialogue. No system or theory can be all-inclusive or all beneficial. Braithwaite’s rationalizing of the integrating shame is appealing and more rooted in reality. But it has certain drawbacks in the present society. Cullen, Wright and Blevins argue, “shame acknowledgement seems to prevent wrongdoing, while displacing shame into anger seems to promote wrongdoing” (Cullen, Wright and Blevins: 2008, p.397). They observe that it is not enough in some cases to make the offender believe that he is a good person and has committed a bad act. Instead the offender should be forced to recognize that he has a bad self or personality that needs to be repaired. Thus thee pride of the offender is brought under scanner and effective pride management is necessary for implementing shame management. “Shame is not something moderns are comfortable about. One reason for this is that it is understood crudely, and in criminal policy, used crudely” (Cullen, Wright and Blevins, 2008, p.398). ‘Shaming penalty’, which means an offender has to recognize his shame publicly and feel repentant, can lead to even worse crime. If a driver is required to fix a sign in front of the car mentioning that he was once convicted of driving in a drunken state, it ca not bring anything good, if not bad. Following the argument of Nussbaum the above writers mention, “it is an unconscionable threat to our liberty and an assault on our humanity to humiliate, to consciously set out to induce shame” (Cullen, Wright and Blevins, 2008, p.398). They also suggest, “the biggest implications of Crime, Shame, and Reintegration are macro-sociological” (Cullen, Wright and Blevins: 2008, p.398). The shame theory of Braithwaite implies that the society, which fails to make it clear that rape is an antisocial act, will face more cases of rape. Nussbaum’s analytical study was empirical in nature. The macro-sociological implication was examined in a more grounded context and the focus was shifted to shame-guilt analysis. The restorative proceeding on part of the offender was characterized with “feeling of having done wrong, concern that others have been hurt, feeling ashamed of oneself and one’s act, feeling anger at oneself, loss of honor among family and friends” (Cullen, Wright and Blevins, 2008, p.399). Therefore it is clear that the shame theory can better put into practice by taking into consideration the remorse that plays a vital role in the curtailing of crime and the restoration of normative social order. References Braithwaite J. (1999), Crime, Shame, and Reintegration, London, Cambridge University Press Cullen F., Wright J. and K. Blevins (2008), Taking stock: The Status of Criminal Theory, Transaction Publisher Goold, B. J. (December 2003), Restorative Cautioning, Theories of Reintegration, and the Influence of Japanese Notions of Shame (April 6, 2010). Hosei Riron: The Journal of Law and Politics, 36. 2, available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1585476 [downloadable] Hagan F. E. (2010), Introduction to Criminology, UK, SAGE. Sharma R. K. (1998), Criminology and Penology, Atlantic publisher Siegel L. J. (2008), Criminology, US, Cengage Learning. Broken window theory and its relevancy Introduction In the concluding decades of the twentieth century several crime-controlling theories were thought out as a result of the governmental concern over the growing rate of crime in the urban populations. Broken windows theory was one such policy framed by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling first published in 1982 in The Atlantic Monthly (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p. 400). This theory was based on the notion that a key control measure in reducing the rate of crime can be the strict monitoring of disordered society as the disorder can encourage some neophytes to think that he can easily get away with his crime. The conclusion was taken from the observation of police patrolling in community in Newark to monitor the disordered activity. The inventors of this theory write that although the “foot patrol had not reduced crime rates… residents of foot-patrolled neighborhoods seemed to feel more secure than persons in other areas” (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.400). This broken window imagery used by the authors was founded on the assumption that the then society ridden with crime was like a building with broken window. The authors argue that if “a window in a building is broken and is left unrepaired, all the rest of the windows will soon be broken” (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.402). This broken window theory is sought to roll out a model of appropriate monitoring of the society in order that it does not promote further crime. Kelling and Wilson took it for granted that imitation is at the heart of developing crime. It is for this reason that the police intervention or other state intervention in the community life appeared to be essential to prevent major crimes in future. Their particular type of theorization of the impetus behind the increasing rate of crime is reflected in the following statement: “one unrepaired broken window I a signal that no one cares, and so breaking windows costs nothing” (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.402). From the observation of the authors it can be deduced that the effective method for crime-control operates on three basic factors. First there needs to be an internal demand for conformity to social norms. Secondly, there should be some authority to envisage this conformation by the members of the society. And lastly, an inherently disordered society emits signals of fearless wrongdoing to the potential offenders. A major determinant of individual behavior is the social norm followed by a large number of productive members of the society. One individual’s act can motivate another irrespective of the implication of the action. In a communitarian society there is a uniform behavioral code that is not forced on the dwellers but accepted voluntarily. This uniformity is the result of the influences that one individual has on another. In other words people act according what the surrounding allows to do. The apprehension of the authors over the spiraling crime rate has, in fact, been preceded by the necessity to ensure a better social order where the commoners are safe and can live without fear. According to them citizens are “primarily frightened by crime, especially crime involving a sudden, violent attack by a stranger”, like drunks, addicts, rowdy teenagers and prostitutes (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.401). Broken window theory was notable at that point of time for taking into consideration certain facts, which were unacknowledged till then. But in the present time the relevancy of them is not beyond comprehension. It was the recording of undesirable behaviors, which are not criminal, in legal term. Such cases as ‘vagrancy’, ‘suspicious person’ and ‘drunkenness’ were not punishable in legal code but there was no reason to think that they were well acceptable to the society and harmless to the other civil members. As the criminologists and sociologists think this was due to the lack of universal standards “available to settle arguments over disorder” and the then prevalent tendency to handle this kinds of problems on the streets (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.407). During the time in question, such delinquency and sloppy attitude had ‘scarcely any legal meaning’. But in the contemporary crime scenario this kind of social disorder have been translated in well defined charges in legislature because, as the broken window analogy signifies, the security of the society requires an agency ‘to have the legal tools to remove undesirable persons from a neighborhood when informal efforts to preserve order in the streets have failed’ (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.407). As we can see in the present society that the civil society groups are on a flight to protect the interests of the civilians, the definition of a criminal act becomes increasingly important. The desire to see that the quasi civilians (a petty crime like public drinking does not label one as uncivil in present society) are fairly treated ‘makes us worry about allowing the police to rout persons who are undesirable by some vague or parochial standard’ (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.407). The political tendency to ‘decriminalize’ a disreputable behavior sometimes does not allow the police to intervention and take adequate measures. As a result the offender learns the trick of the trade and reengage in that socially acceptable act. But the author justly observes that the failure to anything on the preventive line can unarguably account for the scores of drunkards growing in number every day. This failure to do anything can lead to the destruction of an entire community. The broken window theory was not so much wrenched in its effort to give a satisfactory outline regarding the duty of the monitoring agency as it is in the contemporary context. The framers of this theory opined that the police selected for assigning the task should be well trained and supervised so that they are ‘inculcated with a clear sense of the outer limit of their discretionary authority’ (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.407). In today society the people have become tired and sick with crime taking place every moment around them and ‘feel overwhelmed by its apparently relentless upward trend’ (O’Donnell and O’Sullivan, 2001, p.35). They want the concerned authority to take action against ‘drunken loutish behavior’, ‘intimidating gatherings of young people in public areas’, ‘the public use of obscene languages’, drug-dealing and prostitution’ (O’Donnell and O’Sullivan, 2001, p.35). It is in fact, clear that the theory of Wilson and Kelling implied that no insignificant crime could be tolerated owing to the peril that the tolerance of petty crime may propose. The book by O’Donnell and O’Sullivan deals with the crime control policies in Ireland. The book reports that in 1997 Fianna Fail published a policy titled ‘Leading the fight against crime’, which had two proposals in it (O’Donnell and O’Sullivan, 2001, p.35). One was thee introduction of 2000 additional prisons and the acceptance of the ‘Zero-tolerance’ in regard to crime. O’Donnell and O’Sullivan observed that the zero-tolerance policy of Fail was linked to the Broken window theory of Wilson and Kelling. The authors of the book defines zero-tolerance as “a shorthand term for criminal policies that are based on the principle that no crime is insignificant or will be overlooked and that tolerance of small crime creates a climate in which big crimes flourish” (O’Donnell and O’Sullivan, 2001, p.35). There is nothing to suggest that this definition is a refiguring, if not rewording, of the broken window theory. The gist of the broken window theory as conceived Wilson and Kelling is that any disorderly activity in one’s neighborhood can make the resident afraid. Their perceptions regarding crime rate will change. Then high-level disorder will lead them to assume that the rate of crime is rising and this in consequence can evoke anxiety in the community as a whole. “They will change their behavior using the street less often and avoiding contact with others. This will weaken community bond and increase individual isolation” (O’Donnell and O’Sullivan, 2001, p.36). Such occurring can make the area more favorable for criminal doings. According to Wilson and Kelling this environment can be more conductive of harboring prostitution, drug addiction, smuggling and other varieties of misdeeds than other places where informal control of public behavior guarantee a better social morality. One of the very important points proposed in the broken window theory is that order-maintaining duty of police have been annexed with the law enforcement duty of the cops. Wilson and Kelling point out that this new drive of the police has often compelled them to face criticism from media, court and other authorities. ‘Order-maintaining function’ of the police refers to their responsibility in their community to control the any disreputable act, explicit or implied. Thus it allows the police to take action against any insignificant disciplinary failure apart from arresting a culprit. “The order-maintenance function of the police are now governed by ruled developed to control police relation with suspected criminal” (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.406). The inventors of the broken window theory reflected that till then the role of the police had been defined by their objective that is to bring the criminal under the hammer. But the order-maintaining task would make them work to concentrate more on the procedure of their inspection thus leaving less opportunity for budding crimes. Levinson detects that “prior to the development and implementation of various incivility theories such as broken windows police practitioners and scholars tended to focus on serious crime” like robbery, murder and rape etc (2002, p.128). The visible tendency of police was to react to a crime only after its effects begin to surface. This reactive pattern of crime control was not viable because when a major crime is detected it should be understood that it is the outcome of certain underlying causes. Levinson writes that Wilson and Kelling “saw the serious crime as the result of a lengthier chain of events” (Levinson, 2002, p.128). Major crime arises from disorder and if disorder is not eliminated, serious crime will continue to grow. Another advantages of the implementation of the broken window theory is that it can lead to the detection of crimes, which can be overlooked otherwise—that is the detection of subway crimes, which means the spotting of a crime in course of investigating another. A banal instance of this kind of incidents is not rare. For example, a good check on traffic rule can lead to the interception in arms smuggling. A similar kind of incident is reported by Levinson, the a New York police commissioner William Bratton fished out several arms smuggler when patrolling simply for the fare evasion in the transit system that was considered to be the biggest broken window in the 1990s (Levinson, 2002, pp.128-129). William Bratton opined that the implementation of aggressive order-maintaining function of the police was responsible for a dramatic decrease in the crime rate during 1990s. Apart from the police intervention in controlling minor disorders, there is another measure pointed out by Wilson and Kelling, which is true in respect to wide range of civilization and has been accepted in many societies. This is the patrolling by the citizens. It has been often objected by critics that community members can adversely respond intensive intervention by the public watchdog. But the citizens sharing the responsibility can have relatively better chance of acceptance. The authors find out that the use of “‘community watchmen’ is as old as the first settlement of the New World” (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.409). These community watchmen consisted of unarmed young men who were in charge of watching that no disorderly activity is done by anyone. They cannot take law in their hands—that is they are not authorized to punish anyone. But one thing can has been recognized both by the authors and the common citizens alike that the mere presence of such watchmen can reduce the likelihood of major crime, if serious crime at all were the result of social disorder. The authors rethink of the feasibility of such watchmen and add that “whatever their effect on crime, citizens find their presence reassuring, and they thus contribute to maintaining a sense of order and civility” (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.409). In today’s society the benefit of having community watchmen cannot be denied. One setback of the argument can be that today the communitarian societies are rapidly vanishing due to the urbanization of every nook and corner of the world. This rejection of the community watchmen scheme can be backed by another alternative that the authors offer. This is the appointment of ‘vigilante’. According to the authors, “their distinctive feature was that their members did take law into their own hands by acting as judge, jury, and often executioner as well as policeman” (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.409). The authors have cited the duty of such a vigilante group, which clearly signals that the functions of such a group involve more than anything the tracking of any suspected movement in the neighborhood. In order to explain how the unattended broken window can solicit the criminal, the authors argue that the tendency of the people to stay passive during any disreputable activity by strangers can signal tacit support. First, as pointed out by the authors, few member of a society is interested in assuming the responsibility that wearing a badge of a vigilante confers. Secondly, the instances are not rare, when, a crime committed in the daylight is unopposed by a bystander. Witnessing this kind of apathy anyone can jump on the conclusion that there is an alarming dearth of responsible citizens. If the police assume the responsibility of order maintaining on such a pretext, then it is not summarily unacceptable (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.409). But the number of such crimes reported by the eyewitness to the police is relatively higher. Wilson and Kelling reports that when the patrolling police are communicate in this way, this give them a, sense of importance, provides them ‘with the basis for gossip’ and ‘allow them to explain to the authorities what is worrying them’ (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.406). Through this kind of participation they ‘gain a modest but significant sense of having done something about thee problem’ (McLaughlin and Muncie and Hughes: 2003, p.406). For controlling disorderly activity as a supposed prelude to major crime, this type of social reform is essential, where the social psychology is an important factor. If a small group is really the miniature of the larger society then the sense of individual responsibility should be promoted at the micro level. According to Roberts “This important theory (broken windows) takes the position that quality-of-life problems such graffiti, public intoxication, loud radios, urban decay, and a host other petty annoyances of modern life are in themselves criminogenic—when left unattended, the subtly and overtly convey a message that disorder and incivility prevail, that social controls have broken down, and that no one really cares about the neighborhood in which they occur” (Roberts, 2003, p.128). This can be taken an unspoken verdict that since minor offences are acceptable, the larger ones are not much harmful. Although from this almost euphemistic analysis appears that the broken widows theory flawless and irreproachable in terms of crime control, several allegation have been leveled by criminologists against the broken windows theory. The chief ground of contention is the lack of unanimous definition the so-called disorder. The critics object on the binary opposition of between order and disorder as conceived by the Wilson and Kelling. In communities, which are characterized by some particular interest, the definition of order cannot only be distorted and ununiform but also deliberately reverted. The owners of real estate groups and business leaders can resort to unscrupulous means and design an entirely arbitrary meaning of ‘order’, which is simply aimed to serve their purpose and in this way undermine the interests of others (Chesluk, 2008, p.213). Another ground of objection is the simplistic presupposition that ‘order’ is an unquestionable state that can lessen the chance of any social complexity. Again in tune with the former allegation, different societies have varied notion of ‘order’. The vision of community as having some values, which are shared by every communities in existence is wrong in itself. And the intervention of police in certain situation can turn out to be extremely intolerant and oppressive. Ian Baird points out that “urban structures and harsh control measures are themselves contributing elements in community dissolution and dissents” (Chesluk, 2008, p.213). Harcourt (2001) criticizes the broken window theory on the level of collective police oppression. He observes that youth curfews, mass searching, anti-loitering ordnance, order maintenance crackdown, disciplinary practices and shaming penalties are not new to the criminological methods. Therefore what the broken window theory proposes is a kind of addition to the already existing oppression by the police. The “aggressive misdemeanor arrests, and intensive stops and frisks have become not a substitute but supplement—a supplement that feeds into and itself produces dramatic increase in detention, arrests, and criminal records” (Harcourt, 2001, p.6). If, the official record of criminal activity determines the frequency of crime, then it can give a false impression of the rate of criminal activity. Harcourt deplores that “what we are left with today is a system of severe of punishment for major crimes and severe treatment for minor offenders and ordinary citizens, especially minority communities” (Harcourt, 2001, p.6) Conclusion Despite the criticisms the theory in the 1990s was accepted with considerable efficacy as the citations above show. For a better social order, the proper monitoring of the social norms is inevitable. There are others who claim that disorder might not be the cause of major crimes. In fact disorder and crime both may find their source in some social policy. Thus it can be argued that in regard to crime control theory, the rationalization of broken windows theory demands reconsiderations. But one thing is sure that the presence of an informal social control mechanism offers an assurance of social security. In the light of this minimal unquestionable good to the society, the broken window theory can well be applied to the troubled communities and perhaps this is the reason why it was in such a vogue in the concluding decades of the twentieth century. References 1. Chesluk B. J. (2008), Money jungle: imagining the new Time Square, Rutgers University Press 2. Harcourt B. E. (2001), Illusion of order: the false promise of broken windows policing, Havard University Press 3. Levinson D. (2002), Encyclopedia of Crime and Punishment, UK, SAGE 4. McLaughlin E., Muncie J. and G. Hughes (2003), Criminological perspectives: essential readings, UK, SAGE 5. O’Donnell I. and E. O’Sullivan, (2001), Crime Control in Ireland, Cork University Press 6. Roberts A. R. (2003), Critical issues in crime and justice, UK, SAGE Impact of Counter Terrorism Measures Introduction: In the contemporary world terrorism is a global menace, affecting all the nations across the world. Precisely the entire human civilization is under immense threat due to the increasing power of terrorism. Terrorism has several faces; so one flat definition may not be enough to define its terrible intensity. However, a general notion can be presented as the definition of global terrorism: “Terrorism is commonly understood to refer to acts of violence that target civilians in the pursuit of political or ideological aims. In legal terms, although the international community has yet to adopt a comprehensive definition of terrorism, existing declarations, resolutions and universal “sectoral” treaties relating to specific aspects of it define certain acts and core elements.” (OHCHR, 2007, p.5) The terrorist organizations have their own logics and reasons to continue with this approach to annihilate the human race in a severe and random way, but humanity would never support it because it is a curse that would gradually erode the entire civilization that tool million years to flourish. The claws of terrorism have scarred the soul of almost all the nations of the world irrespective of their first world or third world position. Malicious terrorist groups like Al Qaeda, Lashkar e Tayyiba, Hijbool Mujahideen, Hamas, PLF (Palestine Liberation Front), LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam), Chechen, Hezbollah, Jaish e Mohammed etc., groups have tamed the world with their sheer exhibition of dire violence that resulted in massive mortalities and other damages to the nations where they have left their footprints. In order to prevent terrorism various nations and their respective administrations have taken counter terrorism measures. Terrorism has a strong and fatal impact on the regime of humanity, human rights; similarly strong and dire can be the effects of counter terrorism, as the state is obliged to undertaken efficient steps towards dealing with terrorism. However such measures and safeguard of human rights are complementary needs for the state to fulfill. (OHCHR, 2007, p.19) Undoubtedly counter terrorism is necessary to stop the moving giant wheel of terrorism, but the measures should be followed with an eye opened to its consequences on the humanity; a government must make sure that its measures of counter terrorism is not destroyi Read More