tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6959663745656332605.post1848575664962729542..comments2024-03-28T14:17:12.140+05:30Comments on The Proof of Guilt: A Dangerously Populist Practice? Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6959663745656332605.post-17595510435080738722015-12-22T11:05:04.774+05:302015-12-22T11:05:04.774+05:30Much needed - introspective and nuanced. Thank You...Much needed - introspective and nuanced. Thank You. Swastee Ranjanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06478605573075351973noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6959663745656332605.post-26856010616643054532015-12-22T06:20:43.128+05:302015-12-22T06:20:43.128+05:30henious crimes committed by matured women never le...henious crimes committed by matured women never led to any law change or any outage. Rather criminal women like Rohtak Sisters were given bravery awards and Jasleen Kaur raised to fame. This is how feminism has become shameless today. No, One Nirbhaya Case can't determine fate for all boys, that will be dangerous for our future -<br /><br />http://themalefactor.com/2015/12/19/no-one-nirbhaya-case-cant-change-our-juvenile-justice-system/Parthahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04248176232235957603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6959663745656332605.post-65826907026877198672015-12-21T10:56:22.067+05:302015-12-21T10:56:22.067+05:30Hi Pukul
Thank you for the appreciation, but I...Hi Pukul<br /><br />Thank you for the appreciation, but I'm saddened by the fact that you found only this post in need of a reply. I'd prefer comments on each post!<br /><br />You make two important points, (i) the interrelationships between law and society have no fixed leader and follower, and (ii) comparative arguments on penal policy will remain wanting due to every country's unique demographic. I agree with both fully.<br /><br />What I disagree with, is your equating populism in policy making with an approach that caters to society's apparent interests. A populist approach gives precedence to what representatives make us believe are society's demands. These sadly are often little more than views if sections placed into prominence. No actual survey of credibility is ever conducted. That is what is happening now, rather than implementation of a process which has some thought behind it.<br /><br />Prof. Fuller, and subsequent members of the legal moralist school, argue that morality must find a place in the criminalisation process. I agree, but that position cannot be one of first among equals. <br /><br />I hope you comment more frequently! Abhinav Sekhrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05636505529930634000noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6959663745656332605.post-36592037229613693932015-12-21T10:56:10.245+05:302015-12-21T10:56:10.245+05:30Hi Pukul
Thank you for the appreciation, but I...Hi Pukul<br /><br />Thank you for the appreciation, but I'm saddened by the fact that you found only this post in need of a reply. I'd prefer comments on each post!<br /><br />You make two important points, (i) the interrelationships between law and society have no fixed leader and follower, and (ii) comparative arguments on penal policy will remain wanting due to every country's unique demographic. I agree with both fully.<br /><br />What I disagree with, is your equating populism in policy making with an approach that caters to society's apparent interests. A populist approach gives precedence to what representatives make us believe are society's demands. These sadly are often little more than views if sections placed into prominence. No actual survey of credibility is ever conducted. That is what is happening now, rather than implementation of a process which has some thought behind it.<br /><br />Prof. Fuller, and subsequent members of the legal moralist school, argue that morality must find a place in the criminalisation process. I agree, but that position cannot be one of first among equals. <br /><br />I hope you comment more frequently! Abhinav Sekhrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05636505529930634000noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6959663745656332605.post-16891350404289067492015-12-21T10:14:42.319+05:302015-12-21T10:14:42.319+05:30Hi Abhinav,
firstly, I love your blog. its unique...Hi Abhinav,<br /><br />firstly, I love your blog. its unique and the arguments are well articulated. This entry of yours however, needs a reply.<br /><br /><br />What we need to understand is that law does not govern society. neither does society dictates law. <br /><br />Law, as we implement is, is not the laws of physics, that every thing we know must follow. <br /><br />The law that we have in our society is dynamic, and varies vastly from culture to culture and even within culture. <br /><br />Therefore, what we need to understand is society shapes the law. <br />Law does not shape society. <br /><br />And this is why I differ from you. <br /><br />in the present case, there is no precedent for a person to be retrospectively punished by a change in criminal law. <br /><br />If that happens, then it would (to my knowledge) be first, i.e. without precedent and second, maybe open a pandora's box.<br /><br />But that does not mean, that the protest or even appeals are "theatrics"<br /><br />India's culture is different. That is why, by law, there is reservation. That is why, in law, you have 498A. <br />Even without the law, a person is guilty till proven innocent, when a woman complains sexual violence. <br /><br />Any other country where cheque bouncing is a criminal/ quasi criminal offence ?<br /><br />All of the above are unique to India. And all developed as the laws of our society, due to the unjust nature/ unfair treatment to the victims.<br /><br />All these debates, "theatrics" that we see, shape the law. The juvenile is escaping a harsher punishment because, there is no exception. Unlike other countries, where a juvenile may be treated as an adult because of the nature of the crime committed. <br /><br />if the populism that you talk about, results in a change in the law, that reflects what the society wants, so be it. Who are you or me to question that. <br /><br />One can call it populism. someone else might call it giving legal a direction.<br /><br />Indian laws and the penalties are different from other countries, mostly because, there, the law is a process. From the actual commission of the crime, to investigation, to trial, to fair representation, to punishment. <br /><br />Indian legal system is vastly different. nothing compares. and therefore the end results (punishments) are also different.<br /><br />Laws that govern society are not always based on solid scientific basis. They are based on polulism. Look at immigrants laws in the west. Look at gun control laws in the US. <br /><br />Society makes the laws we live in. are they based on populism. yes. is it wrong ? no. <br /><br />If you start looking at law and society in two separate compartments, where one compartment (society) has to follow all the diktats coming from the other compartment (law), you would find it very difficult to understand the logic of law. <br /><br />I have not read the books, that you mentioned. but plan to. <br /><br />Let me suggest one. The morality of law, by prof. Lon L Fuller. <br /><br />He gives a fantastic interpretation of why some laws are strict, and others not. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com