Constitutive Criminology and Crime Investigation - Essay Example

? Criminology Task: Criminologists should develop concern over non-human victims. Constitutive criminology requires crime investigation in human subjects, the law and social disorder. Environmental crimes, for example, fail to hit the mark in gaining prompt response from entities as governments and the public. Constitutive criminology views human as interconnected and responsible for creating the society with other subjects, non-human victims inclusive. Concern for non-human victims of crime, therefore, should be part of criminologists’ investigations. Constitutive criminology accommodates diverse range of harms. Considering non-human victims of harm in criminology involves victims as animals and victims of environmental crime. The international centre for criminal law reform and criminal justice policy supports considerations given to non-human victims of crimes. Criminal law protects vulnerable victims, the ostensible purpose of the law. Animals, however, do not enjoy the protection fully in the current set up of the law. A significant number of legal systems offer protection to people and their assets. Few laws are there that protect the rights of animals. Animals independently deserve a set of animal rights, different from their generalization as properties. This implies that animals have no set position in the legal system that addresses their grievances and afflictions. In several cases that involve animal rights, the case set involves the human guardians of the animals, who speak for animals. Currently, there exists no full protection of animals in the criminal law. To achieve full protection of animals’ rights in the legal system, their representation should change from their status as property. Instead, they should have full representation in the legal system and clear mechanisms set to address the grievances of animals. They should speak for themselves and their recognition as sentient. The members are to pay full regard to animal welfare. Criminology should show concern to harm to animals. There should be mechanisms to address green criminology. This involves crimes against the environment. Animals’ rights to sustainable utilization are fundamental. In doing this, such criminology attempts to confront harm against animals and crimes against the environment. Cases of mistreatment of animals and violation of their rights that brings harm to the animals should receive appropriate treatment. Green criminology is a topic that continues to draw attention to many organizations that lobby for animals’ rights. The UK was notably the first country to implement the law on animal rights. The Act abolishing improper treatment of cattle, with cruelty, came to law in 1822. The UK government recognizes animals as sentient beings. Its devotion aims to the protection of animals welfare is high. In1911, a law passed in the UK channeled for the protection of animals. International laws recognize animal rights. In 1997, there was a law by the European Union that officially acknowledged animals as sentiment beings. The EU requires its member countries to conform to the law set and recognize animals as sentiment beings. There are in existence, multilateral environmental agreements that recognize the need to protect biodiversity including animals. The United Nations crime commissions and congresses acknowledge environmental crimes and crimes to animals. International laws, therefore, are sufficiently concerned with animal rights. Environmental victimization is the state where the environment gets subjected to unhealthy practices, which lead to its pollution, and leaves it in worse states that it should be. Environmental victimization takes several means, whereby, the environment is misused and wasted with its resources being depleted, while some become dormant. According to Beck et a l., 1994 environmental problems arise from social factors like reflexive modernization, globalization, as well as individualism. Becks position about mass media is incredibly transparent; however, according to her argument mass media forms a major part of reflexive modernization, which assist in environmental victimization. In a comparison of risk and the society Beck, relate attached environmental problems to social contestation, construction and social criticism. In a support of her point of view that smog is democratic, she has demonstrated several factors for instance the antagonism, which develop between people affected by environmental risk and those who make profit from the risk caused by the problem. In her view, bad things are democratically distributed all over the world with media playing an elusive role in encouraging the environmental problems. According to her, the spreading of environmental factors in a democratic way has signs that include environmental smog hence agreeing with her that smog is democratic in all aspects, which leave the environment a victim. Environmental victimization gets greatly influenced by an individual position in the society with a major patch of the problem coming from individuals. In the process of seeking more land for settlement and agriculture, not forgetting the daily activities environmental harm becomes is the product. The individualism enigma according to Steiner 1981, is a great problem associated to the environment, which gets majorly caused by man. The rationality and intelligence of man is imperfect and generally, man is entitled to errors that result to environmental victimization. Not forgetting is the fact about the conflicting interest of people gears competition towards exploitation of and use of environment extensively resulting to environmental harm. Environmental victimization, therefore, gets influenced by a person’s political, economic, social as well a religious position in any society. Environmental racism is a becoming trend, which often lead to environmental victimization. It is a state where the use of environmental resources is limited to specific individuals and groups who misuse it and leaves the environment a victim of the circumstance. According to Galbraith 1967, industrially developed states are the leaders of environmental racism. They use the environment at their advantage while releasing pollutants into the atmosphere. Through this, they dominate environment use while at the same time leaving the environment the victim. This is a point that helps in understanding the various environmental dominance and suppressors who cause harm to the environment according to UNEP 2004. In addition, environmental racism according to the World Bank 2007, stagnates environmental development as it degenerates all the environmental resources. An individual’s socio-economic status plays an exceptionally imperative role towards the contribution of environmental harm. The extent of agricultural activities of an individual for instance dictates the rate of environmental harm since a highly active individual uses and misuses more environmental resources as compared to less active individuals subjecting the environment to harm. Read More