Social Defence. Uncovering the Transnational Epistemology of the Punitive Age

Introduction

The commonly accepted reason for the right to punish is the defence of society, or social defence. However, its meaning in Western criminal justice remains unclear. In an increasingly punitive age, punishments have become harsher, irrespective of the seriousness of the crime.

Need for Scrutiny

It is therefore necessary to scrutinise the episteme behind punishment. In fact, despite its profound impact on individuals’ lives, the penal system lacks an adequate normative foundation because social defence functions as an implicit paradigm without a clear elaboration.

Objectives of P-AGE

P-AGE’s objective is to analyse the long-term discourse on social defence and its current transnational relevance, with the ultimate goal of understanding how and why punishment came to be perceived as an adequate response to various societal issues.

Specific Focus

More specifically, P-AGE sheds light on the criminological legal debate on the concept of social defence, a debate that has been largely overlooked in scholarly literature.

Historical Context

Social defence was first theorised at the turn of the 20th century within the underexplored field of Positivist Criminology. This concept has persisted until today, due to the post-WWII emergence of the New Social Defence (NSD) movement, an association of criminal law reformers who worked in concert with the United Nations Social Defence Research Institute (UNSDRI), now called the United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute (UNICRI), in shaping current crime policy programmes.

Investigation and Methodology

P-AGE investigates this historical setting and development in order to understand what social defence means and to make the implicit paradigm of the punitive age explicit.

Methodological Approach

P-AGE’s methodology employs the epistemic community model to identify and analyse the transnational network of actors and ideas that substantiate social defence. The project blends critical criminology, intellectual legal history, and policy analysis to rewrite the history of punitive reason by foregrounding the key concept of social defence.