TY - CHAP

T1 - Contradictions in German Penal Practices

T2 - The Long Goodbye from the Rehabilitation Principle

AU - Dollinger, Bernd

AU - Kretschmann, Andrea

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Drawing on Esping-Andersen's work on different types of welfare regimes (1990), penal systems are often grouped in accordance to their defining characteristics. For example, regarding the treatment of juvenile delinquency Winterdyk (2002) identifies six groups or models: participatory, welfare, corporatism, modified justice, justice, and crime control. For him, Germany belongs to the `justice' model whose defining features comprise adherence to the rule of law, the lawyer as a crucial actor, and the principle that punishment should also take into account educational aspects. The typology of Cavadino and Dignan (2006), on the other hand, distinguishes five models (welfare, justice, minimum intervention, restorative justice, and neo-correctionalist). Germany is seen as a case of `archetypical corporatism' (ibid.: 101), due to the crucial role played by professionals and traditional institutions, the emphasis on social rights, as well as the integration of the individual into corporatist structures. Despite recent changes in a more punitive direction, the German system still seems to be characterised by a `remarkably firm and stable attachment to a mildly welfarist approach' (ibid.: 260). Therefore, whereas Winterdyk focuses primarily on the country's adherence to the rule of law and the role of actors within the legal system, Cavadino and Dignan emphasise historically grown institutional structures and the importance of social policy objectives. There are good arguments in support of both approaches, although the philosophies underlying them differ considerably.

AB - Drawing on Esping-Andersen's work on different types of welfare regimes (1990), penal systems are often grouped in accordance to their defining characteristics. For example, regarding the treatment of juvenile delinquency Winterdyk (2002) identifies six groups or models: participatory, welfare, corporatism, modified justice, justice, and crime control. For him, Germany belongs to the `justice' model whose defining features comprise adherence to the rule of law, the lawyer as a crucial actor, and the principle that punishment should also take into account educational aspects. The typology of Cavadino and Dignan (2006), on the other hand, distinguishes five models (welfare, justice, minimum intervention, restorative justice, and neo-correctionalist). Germany is seen as a case of `archetypical corporatism' (ibid.: 101), due to the crucial role played by professionals and traditional institutions, the emphasis on social rights, as well as the integration of the individual into corporatist structures. Despite recent changes in a more punitive direction, the German system still seems to be characterised by a `remarkably firm and stable attachment to a mildly welfarist approach' (ibid.: 260). Therefore, whereas Winterdyk focuses primarily on the country's adherence to the rule of law and the role of actors within the legal system, Cavadino and Dignan emphasise historically grown institutional structures and the importance of social policy objectives. There are good arguments in support of both approaches, although the philosophies underlying them differ considerably.

KW - Sociology

KW - Sexual Offender

KW - Restorative Justice

KW - Prison Population

KW - Prison Sentence

KW - Young Offender

U2 - 10.1057/9781137028211_7

DO - 10.1057/9781137028211_7

M3 - Contributions to collected editions/anthologies

SN - 978-1-349-43996-6

SN - 978-1-137-02820-4

SN - 978-1-137-57242-4

SP - 132

EP - 156

BT - Punishment in Europe

A2 - Ruggiero, Vincenzo

A2 - Ryan, Mick

PB - Palgrave Macmillan

CY - London

ER -