Nr XLVII/2 (2025)
Artykuły

The normative weight of individual sensitivity to punishment

Normatywne znaczenie indywidualnej wrażliwości na karę

Matjaž Ambrož
University of Ljubljana
Bio

Opublikowane 2026-06-03

Słowa kluczowe

  • punishment theories,
  • individual sensitivity,
  • proportionality,
  • sentencing,
  • hard treatment,
  • teorie kary,
  • indywidualna wrażliwość,
  • proporcjonalność,
  • wymiar kary,
  • dolegliwość kary
  • ...Więcej
    Less

Jak cytować

“The normative weight of individual sensitivity to punishment: Normatywne znaczenie indywidualnej wrażliwości na karę” (2026) Archiwum Kryminologii, (XLVII/2), pp. 65–81. doi:10.7420/AK2025.16.

Abstrakt

This article examines the normative relevance of individual sensitivity to punishment, focussing on prison sentences. While financial penalties are widely accepted as requiring adjustment to individual means, there is significantly less normative consensus on whether custodial sentences should reflect differences in personal vulnerability. The author explores whether considerations of fairness and proportionality justify a more systematic inclusion of the subjective experience of suffering. The discussion addresses both practical and principled objections, paying particular attention to the risk of introducing class justice: differential treatment based on socioeconomic background. The article concludes that heightened sensitivity may justifiably be treated as a mitigating factor, where it is important that the court addresses the issue openly rather than disguising it by embedding it within a network of other, presumably less controversial factors.

 

Artykuł poświęcony jest analizie normatywnego znaczenia indywidualnej wrażliwości na karę i skupia się na karze pozbawienia wolności. Podczas gdy w przypadku sankcji finansowych powszechnie akceptuje się konieczność ich dostosowania do sytuacji majątkowej sprawcy, znacznie mniejszy jest konsensus co do tego, czy kary izolacyjne powinny uwzględniać różnice w osobistej podatności na dolegliwość. Autor rozważa, czy względy sprawiedliwości i proporcjonalności uzasadniają bardziej systematyczne uwzględnianie subiektywnego doświadczenia cierpienia. Dyskusja obejmuje zarówno argumenty praktyczne, jak i główne zastrzeżenia, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem ryzyka wprowadzenia sprawiedliwości klasowej, czyli zróżnicowanego traktowania ze względu na pochodzenie społeczno-ekonomiczne. W konkluzjach autor stwierdza, że zwiększona wrażliwość może być słusznie traktowana jako okoliczność łagodząca, pod warunkiem że sąd odniesie się do tej kwestii wprost, a nie będzie ukrywał jej wśród innych, rzekomo mniej kontrowersyjnych czynników.

Bibliografia

  1. Ambrož M. (2018). ‘Legitimnost kazni v razmerju do storilcaʼ [Legitimacy of punishment in relation to the offender]. Revija za kriminalistiko in kriminologijo 69(1), pp. 7–14.
  2. Armas S.A., Spicknall V., and Sheehan L. (2025). ʻIncarceration trauma from the perspective of individuals with mental illness: Therapeutic implications.ʼ International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology [online first]. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X251386468
  3. BGH (Bundesgerichtshof) (1998). Judgement of 15 July 1998 – case no. 2 StR 106/98.
  4. Cohen S. (2007). Paris Hilton Going to Jail for 45 Days, Washingtonpost.com. Available online: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/04/AR2007050400489.html [24.04.2025].
  5. Crewe B. (2011). ‘Depth, weight, tightness: Revisiting the pains of imprisonment.’ Punishment & Society 13(5), pp. 509–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474511422172
  6. Durkheim E. (2013). ‘The division of labour in society.’ In S. Lukes and A. Scull (eds.) Durkheim and the Law. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 105–118.
  7. Eriksson L. and Goodin R.E. (2007). ‘The measuring rod of time: Egalitarianism and equal division of time.’ The Journal of Political Philosophy 24(2), pp. 74–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5930.2007.00376.x
  8. Feinberg J. (1995). ‘The expressive function of punishment.’ In A. Duff and D. Garland (eds.) A Reader on Punishment. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 73–91.
  9. Günther K. (2014). Criminal Law, Crime and Punishment as Communication. Frankfurt am Main: Institut für Kriminalwissenschaften und Rechtsphilosophie.
  10. Hanna N. (2008). ‘Say what? A critique of expressive retributivism.’ Law and Philosophy 27(2), pp. 123–150. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10982-007-9014-6
  11. Hörnle T. (2011). Straftheorien [Theories of punishment]. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
  12. Hörnle T. (2019). ‘The role of victims’ rights in punishment theory.ʼ In A. du Bois-Pedain and A.E. Bottoms (eds.) Penal Censure: Engagements within and beyond Desert Theory. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 207–226.
  13. Kolber A.J. (2009). ‘The subjective experience of punishment.’ Columbia Law Review 109, pp. 182–236.
  14. Kolber A.J. (2019). ‘The subjectivist critique of proportionality.’ In L. Alexander and K.K. Ferzan (eds.) The Palgrave Handbook of Applied Ethics and the Criminal Law. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 571–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22811-8_24
  15. Logan M.W., Morgan M.A., Benson M.L., and Cullen F.T. (2019). ʻCoping with imprisonment: Testing the special sensitivity hypothesis for white collar offenders.ʼ Justice Quarterly 36(2), pp. 225–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2017.1396488
  16. Markel D. and Flanders C. (2010). ‘Bentham on stilts: The bare relevance of subjectivity to retributive justice.’ California Law Review 98(3), pp. 907–988.
  17. McLennan S., Meyer L., Wangmo T., Gaab J., Elger B., and Seaward H. (2025). ʻPsychological stressors of imprisonment and coping of older incarcerated persons: A qualitative interview study.ʼ BMC Public Health 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-21452-w
  18. Meier B.-D. (2006). Strafrechtliche Sanktionen [Penal sanctions]. Berlin: Springer.
  19. Montag J. and Sobek T. (2014). ‘Should Paris Hilton receive a lighter prison sentence because she’s rich? An experimental study.ʼ Kentucky Law Journal 103(1), pp. 95–125. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2499618
  20. Moore M.S. (2016). ‘Stephen Morse on the fundamental psycho-legal error.’ Criminal Law and Philosophy 10(1), pp. 45–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-014-9299-0
  21. Nerat B. (2021). ‘Odmera kazni’ [Sentencing]. In M. Šepec (ed.) Kazenski zakonik s komentarjem: Splošni del [Criminal Code with commentary: General part]. Ljubljana: GV Založba, pp. 721–738.
  22. Pallin F. (1982). Die Strafzumessung in rechtlicher Sicht: Mit einer tabellarischen auszugsweisen Kriminalstatistik 1976–1978 [Sentencing from a legal perspective: With a tabulated excerpt of criminal statistics, 1976–1978]. Vienna: Manz.
  23. Streng F. (2012). Strafrechtliche Sanktionen: Systematische Darstellung, Analyse und Kritik der Sanktionsregelungen im Strafrecht, Strafverfahrensrecht und Nebenstrafrecht [Criminal sanctions: A systematic presentation, analysis, and critique of the sanctioning provisions in substantive criminal law, criminal procedure law, and special criminal legislation]. Heidelberg: C.F. Müller.
  24. Sykes G.M. (2007). The Society of Captives: A Study of a Maximum Security Prison. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv14164hw
  25. Uhl A. (2020). ʻPunishing white-collar offenders: Theory and function.ʼ Archiwum Kryminologii 42(2), pp. 27–47. https://doi.org/10.7420/AK2020Y
  26. Uhl A. (2023). ʻCarceral experiences of white-collar offenders: Qualitative research design utilising the offender-based definition and Pierre Bourdieu’s capital theory.ʼ Crime, Law and Social Change 79, pp. 129–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-022-10038-x
  27. Uhl A. (2024). ʻWhy study the imprisoned middle class?.ʼ Archiwum Kryminologii 24(2), pp. 181–196. https://doi.org/10.7420/AK2024.07
  28. van den Berg C.J.W., Beijersbergen K.A., Nieuwbeerta P., and Dirkzwager A.J.E. (2018). ʻSex offenders in prison: Are they socially isolated?.ʼ Sexual Abuse 30(7), pp. 828–845. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063217700884
  29. von Hirsch A. (2019). ‘Censure and hard treatment in the general justification for punishment: A reconceptualisation of desert-oriented penal theory.’ In A. du Bois-Pedain and A.E. Bottoms (eds.) Penal Censure: Engagements within and Beyond Desert Theory. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 87–92.
  30. Walen A. (2021). ‘Retributive justice.’ In E.N. Zalta (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford: Metaphysics Research Lab. Available online: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2021/entries/justice-retributive/ [24.04.2025].
  31. Whitman J.Q. (2005). Harsh Justice: Criminal Punishment and the Widening Divide between America and Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  32. Wildeman C., Turney K., and Schnittker J. (2014). ‘The hedonic consequences of punishment revisited.’ Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 104, pp. 133–163.