Abstract
There has been consensus, for over a decade, in pointing to the acute crisis of rationality that criminal legislation is experiencing. Although we will look at this concept in greater depth later on, in the meantime, by lack of rationality, I fundamentally wish to flag up two factors. In the first place, the progressive distance in the most recent reforms from the model of criminal law emanating from the welfare state. In second place, the loss of quality of the law in all of its dimensions, from the renouncement of efficacy, through to aspects such as symbolic legislation, to the presence of very slight levels of formal technical quality or of “motorized” legislation, which puts an end to one of the inherent values of legislative rationality: legal certainty.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
The bibliography describing the crisis of the rationality of criminal law is very extensive, so I shall limit myself to listing the most general and basic works. The classic work for the USA is Garland (2005); Stunz (2001); Husak (2013). In Spain, the analyses of Díez Ripollés (2003a); Díez Ripollés (2004); Díez Ripollés (2012), the correct citations of Diez Ripolles are:
-
Díez Ripollés, El Derecho penal simbólico y los efectos de la pena, in Arroyo/Nieto/Neumann, Crítica y justificación del derecho penal en el cambio de siglo…2003.
-
Díez Ripollés, El nuevo modelo penal de seguridad ciudadana, en Revista electrónica de ciencia penal y criminología, 2004.
-
Díez Ripollés, A Diagnosis and Some Remedies for Spanish Crimnal Justice Policy, European Criminal Law Review, num 2., vol. 2012.
-
Diez Ripollés/Prieto del Pino/Soto Navarro, La política legislativa en occidente. Una perspectiva comparada. Valencia. Tirant lo Blanch. 2005 are all fundamental. Equally deserving of recognition is Arroyo Zapatero (2014), p. 15 ff. In what concerns the matter of legislative hypertrophy, Menéndez Menéndez (2004). A summary of various national experiences may also be consulted in Díez Ripollés (2005). On the situation in Germany: Area de Derecho penal UPF (2000).
-
- 2.
In Spain, the GRETEL group was a pioneer, as is well know GRETEL (1989).
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
On Habermas, from the point of view of interest here, see Díez Ripollés (2003b), p. 183 ff.; Nino (1997), p. 171 ff.; Marcilla Córdoba (2005), p. 322 ff., and likewise, with reference to criminal law, with a critical vision on the possible contributions to the theory of discourse, Portilla Contreras (2003), p. 99 ff.
- 7.
See Ortíz de Urbina Gimeno, Chap. 3, in this volume.
- 8.
Also, fundamentally on this point and on what follows Marcilla Córdoba (2005), p. 79 ff.
- 9.
In this context, the attempts to link the contents of criminal Law with the Constitution should, of course, be read, since the pioneering work of Bricola (1973), p. 7 ff., for its impact in Italy Donini (2001a), p. 29; Donini (2001b), p. 24. In Spain, to mention only the first contributions on this matter, Arroyo Zapatero (1987), p. 103 ff.; Mir Puig (1982).
- 10.
From the point of view of criminal law, but also from the point of view of any other sector, it means that the Science of legislation in this broad understanding also covers criminal policy or any type of legal policy. However, distinguishing between both, see Vogel (2003), p. 252.
- 11.
- 12.
Broadly, on ethical rationality Díez Ripollés (2003b), p. 109 ff.
- 13.
This type of rationality basically follows The Manifesto on European Criminal Policy, available at http://www.crimpol.eu/manifesto/ (02/02/2016).
- 14.
On the different models on which to base legislative procedure Stächelin (1998), p. 322 ff.
- 15.
The lack of technical and systematic rationality is immensely greater in the North-American order, in comparison with the Europeans, is discussed by Muñoz de Morales, Chap. 7, in this volume.
- 16.
See, for example, references to the idea of a coherent legislation in The Manifesto on European Criminal Policy: “The invasive character of criminal law makes it especially important to ensure that every criminal law system is a coherent system. Such inherent coherence is a necessary condition if criminal law is to be able to reflect the values held to be important by society collectively and by individuals and their understanding of justice. Inner coherence is, furthermore, necessary in order to ensure acceptance of criminal law. When enacting instruments which affect criminal law, the European legislator should pay special attention to the coherence of the national criminal law systems, which constitute part of the identities of the Member States, and which are protected under Article 4 (2) of the (new) Treaty on European Union (vertical coherence). This means, first and foremost, that the minimum-maximum penalties provided for in different EU instruments must not create a need for increasing the maximum penalties in a way which would conflict with the existing systems. In addition, the European legislator must pay regard to the framework provided for in different EU-instruments (horizontal coherence, cf. Art. 11 (3) [new] Treaty on European Union)”. See the Manifesto for examples of lack of coherence or systematic rationality. On this principle, Asp (2012), p. 206 ff. Nevertheless, as this principle is conceived and linked to national identity, it also contains elements of ethical rationality.
- 17.
The different works on this matter that are contained in Menéndez Menéndez (2004), especially Martín Casals (2004), p. 243 ff. In Spain, as in other countries of the EU, a series of directives on legislative technique was published (Resolución de 28 de julio de 2005, de la Subsecretaría, por la que se da publicidad al Acuerdo del Consejo de Ministros, de 22 de julio de 2005, por el que se aprueban las Directrices de técnica normativa), which are however solely centred on the formal structure of laws, but which overlook other aspects such as legal language and the analysis of its coherence.
- 18.
Cf. Pau Pedrón (2004), p. 457 ff. In Spain, there is a General Committee on Codification that centres its work on the area of private law.
- 19.
- 20.
On the relations between the Science of criminal law and scientific method, see Donini (2003), p. 69 ff.
- 21.
White paper on European Governance, the improvements in normative quality, together with improvements in participation and global governance represent one of the central aspects of the White paper, p. 21 ff. The White Paper is at the origin of concerns over normative quality in the EU and the starting point of the other initiatives.
- 22.
For years, the fundamental reference has been Mader (1985). Up until now, a distinction has usually been drawn between ex-ante evaluation (centred on impact evaluations) and ex-post, see, for example, accepting this division Montoro Chiner (2001), p. 109 ff.; Muñoz de Morales Romero (2011), p. 588 ff.; Galiana Saura (2008), p. 300 ff.; on legislative evaluation in Spain, accepting this approach see Rodríguez Ferrández, Chap. 4, in this volume.
- 23.
In fact, the group that forms the European Criminal Law Policy Initiative founded on the principles that the Manifesto pronounces have been systematically evaluating the proposals of the Commission for harmonization in criminal matters. These evaluations are available from the web-page of the group, http://www.crimpol.eu/other-publications/evaluations/ (last access 02/02/2016).
- 24.
Pioneering Vogel (2003), p. 249 ff.; although with a lesser presence of the ideas of Habermas, but underlining the importance of finding solutions of a procedural type to the present irrationality and lack of legitimization of criminal law, see also Voß (1989); Stächelin (1998), p. 322 ff. In the Spanish doctrine, in relation to the EU harmonization of criminal law, Muñoz de Morales Romero (2011), p. 556 ff. In other proposals on the reformulation of legislative procedures in criminal matters, the influence of Habermas is somewhat less, see, for example, Becerra Muñoz (2013).
- 25.
A clear exposition of the theory of Habermas may be found in Muñoz de Morales Romero (2011), p. 556 ff.
- 26.
Especially the Manifesto for a European criminal policy (Satzger et al. 2012), has formulated the duties of reasoning as an additional requirement to each of the basic guarantees of criminal law.
- 27.
On the pre-legislative phase both from the perspective of be and should be and subsequent references, see Rodríguez Ferrández, Chap. 4, in this volume.
- 28.
On the concept of evaluation see Muñoz Arenas, Chap. 1, in this volume.
- 29.
See Muñoz Arenas, Chap. 1, in this volume.
- 30.
- 31.
In this sense, see for example the study on criminal murders that the Institute of Investigations of the Supreme Court of Argentina, under the direction of Matias Bailone, http://www.csjn.gov.ar/investigaciones/ (last access 02/02/2016).
- 32.
Rossi et al. 2004, p. 117.
- 33.
- 34.
Distinguishing between direct and indirect costs and benefits, tangible and intangible, fixed and marginal and so-called opportunity cost Mears (2010), p. 215.
- 35.
Without of course denying that the implications can even be greater. For example, the development of legislative technique can contribute to strengthening the principle of criminal determination, which in most constitutional jurisprudence is hardly of relevance. So, for example, the norms without elemental aspects of legislative technique should be considered contrary to the principle of legality. When there is clearly a possibility of formulating a criminal definition in a more certain or precise way or when the legislator by carelessness has not set the boundaries between two types of criminal behaviour, creating notable problems of interpretation, it should give rise to a declaration of unconstitutionality. The technical quality of the law, in the expression of the ECtHR, should be the object of constitutional control at least in the framework of criminal law.
- 36.
Another road is proposed by Cruz Villalón (2004), p. 119.
- 37.
See, in what follows Grandi (2010), p. 188 ff.
- 38.
- 39.
Broadly, see Prieto del Pino, Chap. 11, in this volume.
- 40.
A weighting criterion that adapts itself, in my understanding, to this last section, as proposed by Sánchez Lázaro, Chap. 9, in this volume.
- 41.
One of the first evaluations carried out in Europe was completed in 1966, in Norway, with a view to measuring the effectiveness of a new legal text that enlarges the rights of domestic employees. The evaluation highlighted that the principal drawback in its application was that, given their different social status, the employees were unable to have their rights respected. This example shows us how the effects of a law depend enormously on the social conditions in which they are applied, on this point Haarhuis and Niemeijer Synthesizing (2009), p. 403 ss.
- 42.
See, for example, Veléz Rodríguez, Chap. 13, in this volume.
- 43.
See the Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment: In the USA experiments took place in the case of gender violence to test the extent to which distancing orders were effective, see Mears (2010), p. 153.
References
Área de Derecho penal de la Universidad Pompeu Fabra (2000). La insostenible situación del Derecho penal. Biblioteca Comares de ciencia jurídica, 15.
Arellano Gault, D., Sanchez Cetina, S., & Retana Soto, B. (2014). ¿Uno o varios tipos de gobernanza? Más allá de la gobernanza como moda: la prueba del tránsito organizacional. Cuadernos de Gobierno y Administración Pública, 1(2).
Arroyo Zapatero, L. (1987). Fundamento y función del sistema penal: el programa penal de la Constitución. Revista Jurídica de Castilla-La Mancha, 1.
Arroyo Zapatero, L. (2014). Opinión pública y castigo en España. La manipulación de la política criminal y sus costes sociales. Derecho penal y criminología, 5.
Asp, P. (2012). The substantive criminal law competence of the EU (Vol. 74). Estocolmo: Juridiska fakultaten Skiftserie.
Atienza, M. (1997). Contribución a una teoría de la legislación. Civitas.
Beccaria, C. (1974). De los delitos y las penas. Madrid: Aguilar.
Becerra Muñoz, J. (2013). La toma de decisiones en Política criminal.
Bricola, F. (1973). Teoría generale del reato. Nov. Dig. It. XIV.
Bueno Suarez, C., & Osuna Llaneza, J. L. (2012). La evaluación de políticas públicas en las ciencias sociales: entre el ser y el deber ser. Prisma Social, 9.
Bussmann, W. (2010). Evaluation of legislation: Skating on thin ice, evaluation. Evaluation, 16(3).
Cerezo Dominguez, A. I. (2010). El protagonismo de las víctimas en la elaboración de las leyes penales. Tirant lo blanc.
Cruz Villalón, P. (2004). Control de calidad de la Ley. In A. Menéndez Menéndez (Ed.), La proliferación legislative: un desafío para el Estado de Derecho. Madrid: Civitas.
García de Enterría, E. (1985). Revolución Francesa Administración contemporánea. Madrid: Civitas.
Muñoz de Morales Romero, M. (2011). El legislador penal europeo: legitimidad y racionalidad. Civitas.
Delmas Marty, M., Sieber, U., & Pieth, M. (2009). Los caminos de la armonización penal. Tirant lo blanch.
Díez Ripollés, J. L. (2003a). El derecho penal simbólico y los efectos de la pena. In L. Arroyo, A. Nieto & U. Neumann (Eds.), Crítica y justificación del derecho penal en el cambio de siglo. Análisis críticos de la escuela de Frankfurt. UCLM.
Díez Ripollés, J. L. (2003b). La racionalidad de las leyes. Trotta.
Díez Ripollés, J. L. (2003c). El derecho penal simbólico y los efectos de la pena. In L. Arroyo, A. Nieto & U. Neumann (Eds.), Crítica y justificación del derecho penal en el cambio de siglo. Análisis críticos de la escuela de Frankfurt. UCLM.
Díez Ripollés, J. L. (2004). El nuevo modelo penal de la seguridad ciudadana. Revista electrónica de ciencia penal y criminología, 06.
Díez Ripollés, J. L. (2005). El control de la constitucionalidad de las leyes penales. Revista española de derecho constitucional, 75.
Díez Ripollés, J. L. (2012). A diagnosis and some remedies for spanish criminal justice policy. European Criminal Law Review, 2(2).
Doménech Pascual, G. (2004). Los experimentos jurídicos. Revista de Administración Pública, 164.
Donini, M. (2001). Ragioni e limiti della fondazione del diritto penale sulla Carta costituzionale. Il significato dell’esperienza italiana. Foro italiano, 5.
Donini, M. (2001). Un Derecho Penal fundado en la carta constitucional: razones y límites. La experiencia italiana. Revista Penal, 8.
Donini, M. (2003). La relación entre derecho penal y política: método democrático y método científico. In L. Arroyo, A. Nieto & U. Neumann (Eds.), Crítica y justificación del derecho penal en el cambio de siglo. Análisis críticos de la escuela de Frankfurt. UCLM.
European Governance (2001). A White Paper, [COM (2001) 428 final].
European Commission (2004). Regulatory fitness and performance programme (REFIT): State of play and outlook, Brussels [COM(2014) 368 final]
Ferreres Comella, V. (2010). El control judicial de la constitucionalidad de la ley. El problema de la legitimidad democrática. In M. Carbonell & L. García Jaramillo (Eds.), El canon neoconstitucional. Madrid: Trotta.
Galiana Saura, A. (2008). La ley: entre la razón y la experimentación. Tirant lo blanch.
Garland, D. (2005). La cultura del control (translated by Maximo Sozzo). Barcelona.
Grandi, C. (2010). Nullum crimen sine lege parlamentaria y derecho penal europeo. In L. M. Díez Picazo & A. Nieto Martín (Eds.), Los derechos fundamentales en el derecho penal europeo. Civitas.
GRETEL (1986). La reforma de las leyes (10 estudios de técnica legislativa). Barcelona: Bosch.
GRETEL (1989). Curso de técnica legislativa. Serie de técnica legislativa I.
Haarhuis, C. M. K., & Niemeijer, E. (2009). Synthesizing legislative evaluations. Evaluation, 15(4).
Habermas, H. (1998). Facticidad y Validez. Trotta.
Husak, S. (2013). Sobrecriminalización. Los límites del derecho. Marcial Pons.
Laporta, F. (2004). Teoría y realidad de la legislación: una introducción general. In A. Menéndez Menéndez (Ed.), La proliferación legislative: un desafío para el Estado de Derecho. Madrid: Civitas.
Lascuraín, J. A., & Rusconi, M. (2014). El principio de proporcionalidad penal. Buenos Aires Ad-Hoc.
Mader, L. (1985). L’evaluation législative. Pour une analyse empirique des effects de la législation. Collection juridique romande.
Marcilla Córdoba, G. (2005). Racionalidad legislativa. Crisis de la ley y nueva Ciencia de la legislación. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Constitucionales.
Martín Casals, M. (2004). La estructura básica de un manual de técnica legislative. In A. Menéndez Menéndez (Ed.), La proliferación legislativa: Un desafío para el Estado de Derecho. Civitas.
Matinson, R. (1974). What works? Questions and answers about prison reform. Public Interest, 35, 22 pp.
Martinson, R. (1979). New findings, new views: A note of caution regarding sentencing reform. Hofstra Law Review, 7, 24.
Mears, D. P. (2010). American criminal justice policy: An evaluation approach to increasing accountability and effectiveness. Cambridge University Press.
Menéndez Menéndez, A. (Ed.). (2004). La proliferación legislativa: Un desafío para el Estado de Derecho. Civitas.
Mir Puig, S. (1982). Función de la pena y teoría del delito en el Estado social y democrático de derecho. Barcelona: Bosch.
Montoro Chiner, M. J. (2001) La evaluación de las normas. Racionalidad y eficiencia. Barcelona: Atelier.
Morand, C. A. (dir) (1993). Évaluation legislative et lois expérimentales. Aix-en-Provence: Presse Universitaires d’Aix-Marseille.
Myers, R. E. (2008). Responding to the time based failures of the criminal law through a criminal sunset amendment. 40 Boston College Law Review.
Nino, C. S. (1997). La construcción de la democracia deliberativa. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Pau Pedrón, A. (2004). La recodificación como remedio. In A. Menéndez Menéndez (Ed.), La proliferación legislative: un desafío para el Estado de Derecho. Madrid: Civitas.
Popper, K. (1995). La lógica de la investigación científica (trad. Sánchez de Zavala). Tecnos.
Portilla Contreras, G. (2003). La influencia de las Ciencias Sociales en el Derecho penal: La defensa del modelo ideológico neoliberal en las teorías funcionalistas y el discurso ético de Habermas sobre selección de los intereses penales. In L. Arroyo, A. Nieto & U. Neumann (Eds.), Crítica y justificación del derecho penal en el cambio de siglo. Análisis críticos de la escuela de Frankfurt. UCLM.
Prieto Sanchís, L. (1998). Ley, principios y Derechos. Dykinson.
Rossi, P. H., Lypsey, W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7 ed.).
Satzger, H. et al. (2012). The Manifesto on European Criminal Policy. Available at http://www.crimpol.eu/manifesto/. Last access 02/02/2016.
Schünemann, B. (2003). Die parlamentarische Gesetzgebung als Lakai von Brüssel? Zum Entwurf des Europäischen Haftbefehlsgesetzes. StV.
Soto Navarro, S. (2003). La protección penal de los bienes jurídicos colectivos. Comares.
Stächelin, G. (1998). Strafgesetzgebung im Verfassungsstaat. Abhandlungen: Neue Folge.
Stunz, W. J. (2001). The pathological politics of criminal law. 100 Michigan Law Review.
The Papers of James Madison Digital Edition (2010). J. C. A. Stagg (Ed.), Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, Rotunda.
Villoria Mendieta, M. (2011). La rendición de cuentas en la democracia. Temas para el debate, 204.
Vogel, J. (2003). Legislación penal y Ciencia del Derecho penal (Reflexiones sobre una doctrina teórico-discursiva de la legislación penal). Revista de Derecho Penal y Criminología, 11.
Voß, M. (1989). Symbolische Gesetzgebung: Fragen zur Rationalität von Strafgesetzgebungsakten. Gremer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Martín, A.N. (2016). A Necessary Triangle: The Science of Legislation, the Constitutional Control of Criminal Laws and Experimental Legislation. In: Nieto Martín, A., Muñoz de Morales Romero, M. (eds) Towards a Rational Legislative Evaluation in Criminal Law. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32895-9_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32895-9_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-32894-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-32895-9
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)