‘One cannot legislate kindness’: ambiguities in European legal instruments on non-custodial sanctions
Non-custodial sanctions, particularly those that are implemented in the community, have different historical roots in common and civil law jurisdictions. Nevertheless, various European instruments seek to shape the imposition and implementation of such sanctions uniformly across the continent. These...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Sage
2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/3610/ |
| _version_ | 1848791031744561152 |
|---|---|
| author | Van Zyl Smit, Dirk Snacken, Sonja Hayes, David J. |
| author_facet | Van Zyl Smit, Dirk Snacken, Sonja Hayes, David J. |
| author_sort | Van Zyl Smit, Dirk |
| building | Nottingham Research Data Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | Non-custodial sanctions, particularly those that are implemented in the community, have different historical roots in common and civil law jurisdictions. Nevertheless, various European instruments seek to shape the imposition and implementation of such sanctions uniformly across the continent. These instruments reflect an apparent consensus about penal values, culminating in 1992 with the adoption of the European Rules on Community Sanctions and Measures and of the Recommendation on Consistency in Sentencing. In spite of the apparent pan-European consensus, some tensions remained as a result of underlying doctrinal differences and of the compromises that were required to accommodate them.
In the 21st century further European initiatives have sought to go beyond the 1992 instruments and focus on ‘what works’ and on the development of probation services. In the process, the central objective of penal reductionism, so important in 1992, has become somewhat marginalised. This shortcoming can be addressed by reconsidering the approaches that had been rejected in the earlier search for consensus and by developing a more comprehensive understanding of the human rights safeguards to which all penal sanctions should be subject. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T18:22:03Z |
| format | Article |
| id | nottingham-3610 |
| institution | University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T18:22:03Z |
| publishDate | 2014 |
| publisher | Sage |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | nottingham-36102020-05-04T20:17:55Z https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/3610/ ‘One cannot legislate kindness’: ambiguities in European legal instruments on non-custodial sanctions Van Zyl Smit, Dirk Snacken, Sonja Hayes, David J. Non-custodial sanctions, particularly those that are implemented in the community, have different historical roots in common and civil law jurisdictions. Nevertheless, various European instruments seek to shape the imposition and implementation of such sanctions uniformly across the continent. These instruments reflect an apparent consensus about penal values, culminating in 1992 with the adoption of the European Rules on Community Sanctions and Measures and of the Recommendation on Consistency in Sentencing. In spite of the apparent pan-European consensus, some tensions remained as a result of underlying doctrinal differences and of the compromises that were required to accommodate them. In the 21st century further European initiatives have sought to go beyond the 1992 instruments and focus on ‘what works’ and on the development of probation services. In the process, the central objective of penal reductionism, so important in 1992, has become somewhat marginalised. This shortcoming can be addressed by reconsidering the approaches that had been rejected in the earlier search for consensus and by developing a more comprehensive understanding of the human rights safeguards to which all penal sanctions should be subject. Sage 2014 Article PeerReviewed Van Zyl Smit, Dirk, Snacken, Sonja and Hayes, David J. (2014) ‘One cannot legislate kindness’: ambiguities in European legal instruments on non-custodial sanctions. Punishment and Society . ISSN 1462-4745 (In Press) community sanctions and measures probation Europe suspended sentences international standards human rights social control rehabilitation http://www.uk.sagepub.com/journals/Journal200845 |
| spellingShingle | community sanctions and measures probation Europe suspended sentences international standards human rights social control rehabilitation Van Zyl Smit, Dirk Snacken, Sonja Hayes, David J. ‘One cannot legislate kindness’: ambiguities in European legal instruments on non-custodial sanctions |
| title | ‘One cannot legislate kindness’: ambiguities in European legal instruments on non-custodial sanctions |
| title_full | ‘One cannot legislate kindness’: ambiguities in European legal instruments on non-custodial sanctions |
| title_fullStr | ‘One cannot legislate kindness’: ambiguities in European legal instruments on non-custodial sanctions |
| title_full_unstemmed | ‘One cannot legislate kindness’: ambiguities in European legal instruments on non-custodial sanctions |
| title_short | ‘One cannot legislate kindness’: ambiguities in European legal instruments on non-custodial sanctions |
| title_sort | ‘one cannot legislate kindness’: ambiguities in european legal instruments on non-custodial sanctions |
| topic | community sanctions and measures probation Europe suspended sentences international standards human rights social control rehabilitation |
| url | https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/3610/ https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/3610/ |