Simon Bronitt – författare

Like medicine, law is replete with axioms of prevention. ‘Prevention is better than cure’ has a long pedigree in both fields. 17th century jurist Sir Edward Coke observed that ‘preventing justice excelleth punishing justice’. A century later, Sir William Blackstone similarly stated that ‘preventive justice is ...preferable in all respects to punishing justice’. This book evaluates the feasibility and legitimacy of state attempts to regulate prevention. Though prevention may be desirable as a matter of policy, questions are inevitably raised as to its limits and legitimacy, specifically, how society reconciles the desirability of averting risks of future harm with respect for the rule of law, procedural fairness and human rights. While these are not new questions for legal scholars, they have been brought into sharper relief in policy and academic circles in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks. Over the past 15 years, a body of legal scholarship has tracked the intensified preventive focus of anti-terrorism law and policy, observing how this focus has impacted negatively upon traditional legal frameworks. However, preventive law and policy in other contexts, such as environmental protection, mental health, immigration and corruption has not received sustained focus. This book extends that body of scholarship, through use of case studies from these diverse regulatory settings, in order to examine and critique the principles, policies and paradoxes of preventive justice."Whereas earlier scholars looked upon preventive justice as a source and means of regulation, the powerfully argued contributions to this volume provide forceful reasons to consider whether we would do better talk about regulating preventive justice."Professor Lucia Zedner, Oxford University

This innovative volume explores issues of law enforcement cooperation across borders from a variety of disciplinary perspectives. In doing so it adopts a comparative framework hitherto unexplored; namely the EU and the Australsian/Asia-Pacific region whose relative geopolitical remoteness from each other decreases with every incremental increase in globalisation. The borders under examination include both macro-level cooperation between nation-states, as well as micro-level cooperation between different Executive agencies within a nation-state. In terms of disciplinary borders the contributions demonstrate the breadth of academic insight that can be brought to bear on this topic. The volume contributes to the wider context for evidence-based policy-making and knowledge-based policing by bringing together leading academics, public policy-makers, legal practitioners and law enforcement officials from Europe, Australia and the Asian-Pacific region, to shed new light on the pressing problems impeding cross-border policing and law enforcement globally and regionally. Problems common to all jurisdictions are discussed and innovative ‘best practice’ solutions and models are considered.The book is structured in four parts: Police cooperation in the EU; in Australia; in the Asia-Pacific Region; and finally it considers issues of jurisdiction and due process/human rights issues, with a focus on regional cooperation strategies for countering human trafficking, organised crime and terrorism.The book will be of interest to both academic and practitioner communities in policing, criminology, international relations, and comparative Asia-Pacific and EU legal studies.

This innovative volume explores issues of law enforcement cooperation across borders from a variety of disciplinary perspectives. In doing so it adopts a comparative framework hitherto unexplored; namely the EU and the Australsian/Asia-Pacific region whose relative geopolitical remoteness from each other decreases with every incremental increase in globalisation. The borders under examination include both macro-level cooperation between nation-states, as well as micro-level cooperation between different Executive agencies within a nation-state. In terms of disciplinary borders the contributions demonstrate the breadth of academic insight that can be brought to bear on this topic. The volume contributes to the wider context for evidence-based policy-making and knowledge-based policing by bringing together leading academics, public policy-makers, legal practitioners and law enforcement officials from Europe, Australia and the Asian-Pacific region, to shed new light on the pressing problems impeding cross-border policing and law enforcement globally and regionally. Problems common to all jurisdictions are discussed and innovative ‘best practice’ solutions and models are considered.The book is structured in four parts: Police cooperation in the EU; in Australia; in the Asia-Pacific Region; and finally it considers issues of jurisdiction and due process/human rights issues, with a focus on regional cooperation strategies for countering human trafficking, organised crime and terrorism.The book will be of interest to both academic and practitioner communities in policing, criminology, international relations, and comparative Asia-Pacific and EU legal studies.

Like medicine, law is replete with axioms of prevention. ‘Prevention is better than cure’ has a long pedigree in both fields. 17th century jurist Sir Edward Coke observed that ‘preventing justice excelleth punishing justice’. A century later, Sir William Blackstone similarly stated that ‘preventive justice is ...preferable in all respects to punishing justice’. This book evaluates the feasibility and legitimacy of state attempts to regulate prevention. Though prevention may be desirable as a matter of policy, questions are inevitably raised as to its limits and legitimacy, specifically, how society reconciles the desirability of averting risks of future harm with respect for the rule of law, procedural fairness and human rights. While these are not new questions for legal scholars, they have been brought into sharper relief in policy and academic circles in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks. Over the past 15 years, a body of legal scholarship has tracked the intensified preventive focus of anti-terrorism law and policy, observing how this focus has impacted negatively upon traditional legal frameworks. However, preventive law and policy in other contexts, such as environmental protection, mental health, immigration and corruption has not received sustained focus. This book extends that body of scholarship, through use of case studies from these diverse regulatory settings, in order to examine and critique the principles, policies and paradoxes of preventive justice."Whereas earlier scholars looked upon preventive justice as a source and means of regulation, the powerfully argued contributions to this volume provide forceful reasons to consider whether we would do better talk about regulating preventive justice."Professor Lucia Zedner, Oxford University

The criminal attacks that occurred in the United States on 11 September 2001 have profoundly altered and reshaped the priorities of criminal justice systems around the world. Domestic criminal law has become a vehicle for criminalising 'new' terrorist offences and other transnational forms of criminality. 'Preventative' detention regimes have come to the fore, balancing the scales in favour of security rather than individual liberty. These moves complement already existing shifts in criminal justice policies and ideologies brought about by adjusting to globalisation, economic neo-liberalism and the shift away from the post-war liberal welfare settlement. This collection of essays by leading scholars in the fields of criminal law and procedure, criminology, legal history, law and psychology and the sociology of law, focuses on the future directions for the criminal law in the light of current concerns with state security and regulating 'deviant' behaviour.

The criminal attacks that occurred in the United States on 11 September 2001 have profoundly altered and reshaped the priorities of criminal justice systems around the world. Domestic criminal law has become a vehicle for criminalising 'new' terrorist offences and other transnational forms of criminality. 'Preventative' detention regimes have come to the fore, balancing the scales in favour of security rather than individual liberty. These moves complement already existing shifts in criminal justice policies and ideologies brought about by adjusting to globalisation, economic neo-liberalism and the shift away from the post-war liberal welfare settlement. This collection of essays by leading scholars in the fields of criminal law and procedure, criminology, legal history, law and psychology and the sociology of law, focuses on the future directions for the criminal law in the light of current concerns with state security and regulating 'deviant' behaviour.

The present book brings together perspectives from different disciplinary fields to examine the significant legal, moral and political issues which arise in relation to the use of lethal force in both domestic and international law. These issues have particular salience in the counter terrorism context following 9/11 (which brought with it the spectre of shooting down hijacked airplanes) and the use of force in Operation Kratos that led to the tragic shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes. Concerns about the use of excessive force, however, are not confined to the terrorist situation. The essays in this collection examine how the state sanctions the use of lethal force in varied ways: through the doctrines of public and private self-defence and the development of legislation and case law that excuses or justifies the use of lethal force in the course of executing an arrest, preventing crime or disorder or protecting private property. An important theme is how the domestic and international legal orders intersect and continually influence one another. While legal approaches to the use of lethal force share common features, the context within which force is deployed varies greatly. Key issues explored in this volume are the extent to which domestic and international law authorise pre-emptive use of force, and how necessity and reasonableness are legally constructed in this context.