Editorial
By Thomas Gilly, ERCES
This first issue of the
second Volume of our journal, in al regards, is a critical one. The five papers
we have collected provide altogether for a critical perspective on actual
criminal justice issues.
Law
enforcement has relied more and more frequently on the practice of profiling to
help identify criminal perpetrators.
More recently, it has been used in attempts to identify possible
terrorists. Errors in prediction cause consequences for both the individual and
the profiling agency. These consequences
can be economic, political, and ethical.
Despite of its
importance and impact on the quality and efficiency of crime prevention
strategies, this problem has not received sufficiently consideration. .
“Consequences
Of Predicting for Crime/Terrorism: Ethical Dilemmas”,
by David Patterson concentrate on errors in prediction and the consequences of
those errors from two ethical perspectives, the deontological approach and the
utilitarian approach.
“Problems of
investigation of crimes relating to money laundering in
That what is specific to the Russian
Federation is (i) the extend, but also the impact of organized crime and money
laundering on economy and finance of the Russian Federation; ‘(ii) the
discrepancy between the importance of the danger and the lateness of
appropriated legal means to fight and counteract money laundering and organized
crime; (iii) structural deficiencies associate to inexperience and
misunderstanding of the actors that are involved in the fight.
By virtue of
this reasoning Vasily Davydov’s paper provides us with
in-depth information about the “Russian case”. But is must be also thought as
the matrix of an in-depth comparative international study of money-laundering
investigation problems. Such a research program can start with and focus on
Davidov’s advocacy for more “opportunity of criminal liability for persons
guilty of legalization of unlawful (but not only criminal) proceeds, in the
case of use of laundered money in the interest of terrorist organizations”
“Racial Bias Within the Criminal Justice System Contributes to the
Overrepresentation of African-American Males in Correctionnal Facilities”, by
Dianne Williams is aimed to identify the correlation between race, rate of
incarceration, and severity of sentencing for drug related crimes.
The
statistical review reveals (i) a substantial, but disproportionate increase in
the rate of incarceration of African-American males for drug related crimes,
(ii) disparate handling of African-American and compared to Anglo-Americans
throughout the process of arrest to incarceration; (iii) legislative policy as
a supporter for economic, geographic and cultural biases; (iv)
overrepresentation of African- Americans in correctional facilities.
The author advocates
stricter guidelines are needed to ensure that arresting and sentencing policies
are applied across the board regardless of race.
Even if this
very critical approach to racial disparity in the criminal justice system .is
supported by a statistical review that refer to data collected during the
1990’s, it is worthy to note that racial disparity is one of the discussed, but
also one of the most controversial and highly polemical issues in the
US-American public debate. The time of the Afro-American riots is over. But we
should not forget they came up as a means to protest against racial disparity.
In late -_modern society
the virtual interferes with reality and produces reel effects. Why this scheme
should not be relevant to conflicts? After all conflicts are inherent parts of
social, political and economical life. Suppose that such a scheme is applied to
conflicts, it becomes then possible to think the antagonistic structure of
conflicts – the opposition between rivals – as of a virtual dimension of reality
that produces its effects, but in the same time masks the real nature of
conflict, by supplanting its artificial reality to that of conflict reality.
This is
exactly the purpose of “Rethinking asymmetric conflicts: beyond the ‘clash of
civilizations’ by Valentin Golbert. The paper is an innovative approach to
conflict study and theory. The departure point of the analysis is a neat
classification of asymmetric (degenerated, post-modern, postclassical)
conflicts by Stefan Mair (2003). The author’s central thesis is that the
inherent interpretation schemes in traditional conflict studies can no longer
be applied to post-modern conflicts. Instead of interpreting these conflicts as
a war between different cultural, ethnical or religious communities, the author
highlights the need to interpret these conflicts as of a superficial
construction of contradictions between means and goals. In sum the author
highlights the need to think these conflicts as of common interests rather than
with reference to differences and antagonisms. The paper addresses the
discrepancy between the official and very prominent, but superficial conflict -
vision that is largely the tributary of a classical (modern) war scheme where
the official rivals are supposed to be willing to win, on the one hand, and the
reality of post-modern conflict where the principal actors are rather
interested in infinitively continue the low intensity war.
In a context
that is characteristic of the continuing and post-continuing phase of
conflicts,
“Civilization clash” is an issue that has come
to the fore of the public debate. It is a controversial issue. In the first
issue of the first volume of our journal we have already published a paper by
Simon Cottee that, by provided for a critical approach to the paradigm,
illustrated the intensity of the controversy.
Insofar Valentin
Golbert’s article holds for the continuity of the critical debate; it innovates
in this that the conflict study’s focal centre is shifted from cultural , religious and ethnic differences and antagonisms
to economical convergence.
As far as economic
convergence involves determinism, Golbert’s approach is somewhat a post-modern
version of materialism. Such an approach is likely to provoke mainstream
conflict study. Thus it triggers off discussion
“Anti-Semitism during
the 19th Century: At the crossroad among Criminal Justice / Criminology,
History and Political Sciences” is the first part of my essay that is committed
to demonstrate the need to study 19th Century anti-Semitism and to highlight
the relevance and actuality of such study In this first part of my essay I
attempt to show that the issue is relevant to criminology, history and
political social theory.
We conclude our issue
with Jukka Kekkonen’s comment on Arnold Binder’s
“Early Development of
Arrest As A Concept And Process”( ERCES Vol 1 no 4)