Abstract
Following the trail blazed by Bill Chambliss in his 1988 Presidential Address to the American Society of Criminology, this article engages two interrelated issues concerning the concept of state-organized crime that he pioneered. First, the article develops Chambliss’s argument that criminologists should define state crime as behavior that violates international agreements and principles established in the courts and treaties of international bodies. Second, although Chambliss effectively argued that international law “on the books” provides a framework of substantive concepts and categories that allows criminologists to define certain state actions as a form of crime, “in action” international laws fail to provide legal accountability for states and protection for victims. This article demonstrates, however, that Chambliss’s structural contradictions theory of law can help to explain this paradox.
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.
