Theories of

Punishment
 What is Punishment
► Punishment is the implication of intended burden upon someone due to his or her
wrongdoing.
► It is intended as it is purposefully planned, and it is a burden as it has a sense of distress within
it.
► Theories of punishment is part of applied ethics. To be more specific it’s part of legal ethics.
► Legal ethics is the ethical notions of legal issues (concerning law and order/legislation).
► Theories of punishment tries to justify punishment. So they argue for the justification of
punishment.
► There are many theories of punishment. Among which Deterrent theory, Reformative theory
and Retributive theory are prominent.
 What is Punishment
► Punishment is the implication of intended burden upon someone due to his or her
wrongdoing.
► It is intended as it is purposefully planned, and it is a burden as it has a sense of distress within
it.
► Theories of punishment is part of applied ethics. To be more specific it’s part of legal ethics.
► Legal ethics is the ethical notions of legal issues (concerning law and order/legislation).
► Theories of punishment tries to justify punishment. So they argue for the justification of
punishment.
► There are many theories of punishment. Among which Deterrent theory, Reformative theory
and Retributive theory are prominent.
 Deterrent Theory
► Deterrent theory is a theory of punishment that aims to deter others from committing similar
offense

► It can also be said when the judge makes example of some offender.

► Thus it is also called the preventive theory of punishment or exemplary theory of punishment.

► So punishment is inflicted upon the criminal in order to deter or prevent similar offenses. It is
done as a preventive measure towards crimes. It is exemplary so that the others do not
commit similar crimes.

► It is forward-looking. It is focused on society.

 Deterrent Theory
► It is done as a preventive measure towards crimes. It is generally held that when a person commits a
crime he or she gets mental satisfaction by doing so. Pain and pleasure being natural feelings of
human beings, the satisfaction of a crime leads to more crime. In order to prevent that pain is given
to the offender so that he or she may have the dissatisfaction of the act and thus deter from doing
so.

► It is exemplary so that the others do not commit either the identical or the similar crimes.

► It will be exemplary towards the latent criminals, reframing them from committing the similar crime.

► It is forward-looking. This is because it tries to deter crimes in the future. For example, if a person is
found guilty of fraud and is punished for it then this act of punishment will deter future offense like
that. So it is “forward-looking.”
► It is focused on society. The aim of this theory is not towards the individual but towards the society.
This is because by exercising punishment it wants to deter or prevent crimes, not to mention set an
example of what would happen if the crime is committed. Thus it is focused on society.
 Supporters of Deterrent Theory
► Utilitarians or consequentialists are the main advocate of this theory. Utilitarians want a
system of punishments designed so that everyone can feel a maximum of security. This
means that the system of criminal justice should prevent people from committing crimes by
threatening them with those kinds of punishment that are best suited to the aim of
preventing further crime. At the same time, those who do not commit crimes should feel
reasonably certain that they will not be punished.

► The two versions of utilitarianism that is act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism think
deterrence as adequate. As act utilitarianism is a version of utilitarianism that holds that an
act is good if it results in greatest utility. It seems right, in general, to suppose that punishing
people for breaking the law is useful. And as rule utilitarianism is a version of utilitarianism
where the action is good if the resulted greatest utility is gained by following the rule.
 Limitations of Deterrent Theory
1. A major limitation of the theory is that it promotes the treatment of a person as a means in
order to benefit others.

1. It is also criticized that as the aim is only to prevent crimes, it does not matter if the punished
is actually guilty or not.

1. Furthermore, at times, the punishment may exceed the level of the crime. The criminal is
also treated as an outsider.

1. It can also be criticized by saying that it fails to deter crime.

1. Finally, it does not focus on reforming the criminal or retribution but only on the prevention
of crimes.
 Reformative Theory
► Reformative theory of punishment is one of the theories of punishment. As Lillie says the aim
of punishment is to reform the character of the offender himself. The aim of this punishment is
to educate or reform the offender himself.

► The goal is also referred to as to restore a convicted offender to a constructive place in

society through some combination of treatment, education, and training.

► Thus it is also called the educational or rehabilitation theory of punishment. Where it aims to
reform or educate or rehabilitate the offender.

► This theory of punishment reforms the character of the criminal by punishing him or her. It also
tries to educate the criminal by inflicting punishment. This theory subscribes to the prevalent
norms of contemporary humanism.
 Reformative Theory
► When this theory of punishment first arrived it had a diametrically opposed view towards the
deterrent theory of punishment and the retributive theory of punishment.

► It was especially enforced by the criminologists who did not want to treat the offenders as
criminals but as patients. But gradually the theory developed and at the present time there
are two general ways of rehabilitation.

► In any case, the rehabilitation is achieved when the criminal understands that what he or she
has done was wrong and deliberately chooses to refrain from doing those things again.
 Supporters of Reformative Theory
► This is/was very popular in the realm of criminology as it has humanistic elements within it as
this theory aims to reform the character of the offender.

► It is thought that by punishment the criminal will be educated and so he or she will be able to
live and contribute to society in a positive way.

► And some even claim that crime in general is the result of mental illness.
 Limitations of Reformative Theory

1. The critics of this theory state that all crimes cannot be attributed to mental disorder.

1. Furthermore, this theory cannot reform the hardcore criminals. It is also criticized that the
victim of the crime and his family are disregarded in this theory.

1. Furthermore, punishment and education not necessarily mean the same thing. It is
contended that it deems human dignity.

1. Finally, this theory disregards deterrence and retribution.

 Retributive Theory
► Retributive theory of punishment is one of the theories of punishment. And the aim of this
punishment is allowing a man’s deed to return to himself. It make the offender suffer like his
victim as Lillie describes. And it is also said that “offenders under a retributive philosophy
simply get what they deserve.
► So the aim of the punishment is to achieve retribution.
► It holds that when a criminal has done a crime then he or she has forfeited his or her rights of
equal value. It also says that the punishment should fit the crime. As a result, the criminal
should suffer just as the victim did. So it has a backward-looking approach. By this theory, the
criminal has forfeited his or her rights by committing the crime.
► This theory tries to achieve retribution, not vengeance. Thus for example, if a person steals
then he or she must be punished according to the crime, he will not be punished at the
degree of any severe or mild offense. That is why the punishment should fit the crime.
► The criminal should suffer just as the victim did. It is like an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth
approach.
► This theory is “backward looking.” Boonin explains that “committing an offense in the past is
sufficient to justify punishment now.
 Supporters of Retributive Theory
► Deontologists are mainly the advocates of this theory. The goal of the system of punishment
is very different, according to deontological ethics.

► When a person commits a crime this means, according to deontologists, that he or she
becomes afflicted with guilt. And a guilty person deserves to be punished. So this system is
backward looking. This is because here it tries to do retribution to the already committed
crime.
 Limitations of Retributive Theory
► Critics criticize this theory by saying that this uplifts revenge.

► Others say that there is always a possibility of crossing the line while punishing the criminal.
Opponents of this theory think that breaking the law must not always result in retribution by
punishment.

► It is criticized against forfeiting the rights of the offender.

► This also disregards, as others claim, other moral considerations such as deterrence and
reformation.

► Others criticized it by saying that it is not possible to have, and also we should not have the
same retributive punishment in all criminal cases.