The Consent Solution to Punishment and the Explicit Denial Objection
<span lang="EN-GB"><p>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 interpr...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University of the Basque Country
2010-06-01
|
| Series: | THEORIA : an International Journal for Theory, History and Fundations of Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.ehu.es/ojs/index.php/THEORIA/article/view/636 |
| Summary: | <span lang="EN-GB"><p>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.</p></span> |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0495-4548 2171-679X |