Fengsel eller frihet: Noe om reaksjonsvalg i norsk strafferett
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/ntfk.v103i1.97727Abstract
The grounds for a given society's punishment of offenders has a long history of discussion. In Norway, deterrence is seen as the basis for the criminal justice system - both in general and as a guide in choosing between types of punishment in concrete cases. General deterrence theory suggests that people might abstain from crime either because of an assessment of its potential risks or because the use of punishment leads to a general habit of obeying the law - and that people rest assured that justice is done, leading to a sense of safety in society.
If a person charged has made a complete confession, the court shall take this into account when passing sentence. The rule is designed to encourage the guilty to confess, but it is possible that innocent defendants are sometimes tempted to confess in order to avoid harsher punishments.
When a fine is imposed, a sentence of imprisonment is executed if the fine is not paid on time. The authorities begin by trying to get the money from the defendant's legal assets. Seventy-seven percent of the defendants who are supposed to go to prison pay the fine. Does the money come from friends and relatives or from crime?
In 2010, the punishments for several types of crime were increased. Given the theory of deterrence, it would be reasonable to assume that legislators hoped that longer sentences would lead to less crime. Yet when assessing the need for more prisons, there is no discussion of the value of deterrence.
The theory of general deterrence is also applied in concerete cases. In certain types of cases there are established guidelines for when to apply prison. Nonetheless, general deterrence has been given different weight in comparable areas, e.g. fraud against insurance companies versus fraud against the social services. Certain rules concerning the rights of the convict are based on the kind of punishment (prison or not) that was meted out, e.g. the right to inheritance or insurance. Since a defendant's personal situation can have a considerable bearing on punishment, I question whether the rules should be more flexible.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 Nordisk Tidsskrift for Kriminalvidenskab
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Forfattere, der publicerer deres værker via dette tidsskrift, accepterer følgende vilkår:
Forfattere, der publicerer deres artikler i NTfK, accepterer som udgangspunkt følgende vilkår:
Artikler der er publiceret fra 1/1 2024 og fremefter, er tildelt en CC-By 4.0 Licens. Dette indebærer, at
forfattere bevarer ophavsretten til deres artikler og giver tidsskriftet ret til første publicering. Endvidere gives andre ret til at dele artiklen med en anerkendelse af forfatteren og første publicering i NTfK. Forfattere, der ikke ønsker denne licens, skal give tidsskriftets redaktør besked herom senest i forbindelse med at de læser korrektur på artiklen.
Artikler udgivet i perioden fra 1/1 2021 til 31/12 2023 er udgivet under en CC-BY-NC Licens.
Artikler, der er publicerede i NTfK før 1/1 2021 er underlagt dansk ophavsret. Dette indebærer, at artiklerne må citeres, der må linkes til dem på tidsskrift.dk og de må downloades. Artiklerne må ikke genudgives uden aftale med redaktøren.
Forfattere kan indgå flere separate kontraktlige aftaler om ikke-eksklusiv distribution af tidsskriftets publicerede version af værket (f.eks. sende det til et institutionslager eller udgive det i en bog), med en anerkendelse af værkets første publicering i nærværende tidsskrift.
Forfattere har ret til og opfordres til at publicere deres værker online (f.eks. i institutionslagre eller på deres websted) forud for og under manuskriptprocessen, da dette kan føre til produktive udvekslinger, samt tidligere og større citater fra publicerede værker. Initiative for Open Citations.
