Source: (2007) Marquette Law Review. 91(1): 263-294.
An individual’s right to exchange his property by mutual agreement with others is considered a first principle of
libertarianism and the basis for the creation of wealth and the achievement of social prosperity. … How could a supporter
of free markets object to a voluntary exchange like this, with the defendant trading his constitutional rights for the
dismissal of charges or a reduced sentence? Assuming that the resulting punishment conforms with its espoused justification
of punishment – supposedly retribution, or maybe compensation – the values of libertarianism would seem to be
served in full. … Does it all necessarily devolve into punishment anarchy? I think not, given libertarianism’s conception
of individual rights and a minimal state, supplemented by a few modest assumptions. … And that is why libertarianism
should find it illegitimate for the state to impose its justification of punishment in opposition to the views of the victim
and other affected individuals. … Does this mean that the victim may demand any sanction, or none at all, applying his
own justification of punishment to the rights violation at hand? That doesn’t seem correct – the offender has rights, too,
which have been forfeited only to the extent of his crime. … Instead, a libertarian approach to punishment might find
disconcerting several other aspects of plea bargaining in action. … To be clear, restorative justice programs like family
group conferencing and victim-offender mediation do have conceptual limitations. (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