Abstract
This paper considers Alan Brudner's theory of punishment and criminal law in the light of his renewal of a 'political' account which rests alongside the existing 'moral' and 'critical' accounts in the field. It supports the political account vis a vis the moral account but finds it wanting vis a vis the critical. It discusses the problems of a tripartite account of freedom (formal, real and communal) in Brudner's work in the light of the cases of DPP v Morgan and R v Steane, and in particular the difficulty in holding the three parts apart. From a critical perspective, it suggest that Brudner may not have achieved a synthesis but simply managed to reformulate the existing tensions in the law. The paper ends with consideration of the old problem of 'just deserts in an unjust society'.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
