Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Topic 8- State Crime - Coggle Diagram
Topic 8- State Crime
Defining State crime
1) Domestic Law
Chambliss defines state crime as acts defined by law as criminal and committed by state officials in pursuit of their jobs as representatives of the state. However using states own domestic law to define state crime is inadequate and ignores the fact that states have the power to make laws to prevent criminalisation of their own actions. Furthermore they make laws that allows them to carry out harmful acts
-
-
4) International law
Some sociologists bas their definition of state crime on international law. For example Rothe and Mulins define state crime as any action by or no behalf of a state threat violates international law and/or domestic law
An advantage of this is that it doesn't depend on the sociologists own personal definition of harm or who the relevant audience is. Instead is uses globally agreed definition of state crime
However, international law is a social construction involving the use of power and they focus largely on war crimes and crimes against humanity rather than other state crimes such as coruption
War Crimes
-
-
Illegal wars
Under international law in all cases other than self defence, war can only be declared by the UN security council. On this basis, many see the war of terror as illegal. Kramer and Michalowski argue that to justify their invasion in Iraq in 2003 as self defence, the US and the UK made false claims that Iraq possessed weapons of mass distruction.
Explaining state crime
-
2) Crime of obedience
State crimes are crimes of conformity since they require obedience to a higher authority. Research suggests that many people are willing to obey authority even when this involves harming others. Sociologists argue that such actions are part of their socialisation. Green and Ward found that in order to overcome norms against the use of cruelty individuals had to be re-socialised, trained and exposed to propaganda about the enemy
Kelman and Hamilton identifies 3 general features that produced crimes of obedience.
Authorisation- When acts are ordered or approved by those in authority
Routinisation- Once the crime has been committed, there is strong pressure to turn act into a routine
Dehumanisation- When the enemy is portrayed as sub-human, normal principles don't apply
3) Modernity
Zygmut and Bauman argue that there were certain key features in modern society that made the holocaust possible.
1) Division of labour meaning no one felt personally responsible as each person had a small task
2) Science and technology from the railways transporting victims to death camps to the production of gas used to kill them
Evaluation: Not all genocides occurs through a highly organised division of labour that allow participates to distance themselves from the killing. for example the Rwanda genocide was carried out by large marauding groups
-
Culture of denial
Alvarez: In recent years there has been the growing impact of the international human rights movement. As a result Cohen argues that the state have to make a greater effort to justify their human right crimes or to relabel them as not criminal. There justification follows a 3 stage spiral
1) It didn't happen eg state claims that there was nothing there however human right organisations show evidence
2) If it did happen its something else eg the state says it was self defence
3) Even if its what you say it is it's justified eg to fight the war of terrorism
Sykes and Matza identify 5 neutralisation techniques that delinquents use to justify their deviant behaviour. Cohen shows how state uses the same techniques to justify human right violations
1) Denial of Victim- They exaggerate they are terrorists and they are used to violence
2) Denial of injury- We are the victims not them
3) Denial of responsibility- I was only obeying orders and doing my duty
State-corporate crime
State crimes are often conjunction with corporate crimes. For example the challenger space shuttle disaster in 1986. This is an example of a state-initiated crime which occurs when the state direct or approve corporate crime. In the case of the challenger, risky, negligent and cross cutting decisions by the state agency NASA and corporation Morton Thiokol led to the explosion that killed 7 astronauts, 7 seconds after blast off.
Green and ward define state crime as illegal or deviant activities perpetrated by or with the company of state agencies. Includes all forms or crimes that are committed by or on behalf of the states or governments in order to further policies