The Consent Solution to Punishment and the Explicit Denial Objection

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Published 16-06-2010
Miroslav Imbrisevic

Abstract

Recently, David Boonin has put forward several objections to Carlos S. Nino's 'Consensual Theory of Punishment'. In this paper I will defend Nino against the 'explicit denial objection'. I will discuss whether Boonin's interpretation of Nino as a tacit consent theorist is right. I will argue that the offender's consent is neither tacit nor express, but a special category of implicit consent. Further, for Nino the legal-normative consequences of an act (of crime) are 'irrevocable', i.e. one cannot (expressly and successfully) deny liability to them. I will suggest an explanation for Nino's irrevocability claim.

How to Cite

Imbrisevic, M. (2010). The Consent Solution to Punishment and the Explicit Denial Objection. THEORIA, 25(2), 211–224. https://doi.org/10.1387/theoria.636
Abstract 740 | PDF Downloads 386

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

Carlos S. Nino, consensual theory of punishment, explicit denial objection, tacit consent, irrevocability

Section
MONOGRAPHIC SECTION