Source: (2006) .â€ In, Erik Claes, Antony Duff, and Serge Gutwirth. , eds., Privacy and the Criminal Law. Antwerpen-Oxford: Intersentia. PP. 137-161.
“There are many questions that could — and certainly should — be raised in a discussion of punishment and a right to privacy, in relation to both imprisonment and to community punishment. Following on from my acceptance at the start of this paper of punishment as necessarily being a suspension of rights rather than an assault on bodily integrity (with the corollary that any rights suspension should be conscious and rule-governed), the paper is concerned with one particular form of rights-curtailment, a form that, in my view at least, seems to be unconscious, unexamined, and receiving far too little attention from penal professionals. I want to reflect on the upsurge of consequentialist, future-oriented, community-focused penal modes in relation to a culture of rights. While many of the new penal practices impinge on family relationships, privacy of correspondence etc., and these are of course important issues, here I want to concentrate in particular on privacy in the sense of being able to keep one’s beliefs, attitudes and motivations to oneself. I think that this kind of privacy is very much undermined by some of the latest penal trends and innovations, which require offenders to reveal secrets of the self.” (excerpt)
Your donation helps Prison Fellowship International repair the harm caused by crime by emphasizing accountability, forgiveness, and making amends for prisoners and those affected by their actions. When victims, offenders, and community members meet to decide how to do that, the results are transformational.Donate Now