Architecture of Power: The Power of Architecture and its effective Use in Law Abstract This thesis is concerned with the relationship between law and architecture and their mutual effects. It is focused on the subject of the prison system where these two fields intertwine, and concludes that the prison system should react to the changing conception of punishment and adapt the appearance of prison buildings. The thesis is divided into six parts which are further subdivided into chapters and subchapters. The first part introduces generally architecture and its mission. First, it deals with the concept itself then with the circumstances under which architecture arises, and also the functions that architecture has in society. It also deals with the impact of a space on humans, with the interconnection of architecture and power or with the representative role of some buildings. This part is a general introduction and it illustrates the nature of the chosen topic of this thesis. The second part deals with the relationship between law and architecture, i.e. how architecture projects into law. The first chapter focuses on architectural works representing law and its symbolism, the second chapter on the criminological approach CPTED which is directly based on architecture and urbanism. The main part of this thesis...

Face au recours croissant à la prison soit au titre des peines, soit comme lieu de garde des personnes en attente de jugement, il convient de s’interroger sur les effets de l’incarcération sur la condition juridique des personnes détenues. Longtemps considérée comme étrangère au droit, la prison s’est progressivement dotée d’un corpus de règles que l’on désigne sous le vocable de droit pénitentiaire. Cette recherche vise à interroger les rapports qu’entretiennent le droit de l’institution pénitentiaire et le droit de la société libre afin de préciser les conséquences de l’incarcération sur la vie civile du détenu.De construction récente, le droit pénitentiaire s’est progressivement autonomisé, à tel point qu’il doit être considéré aujourd’hui comme une véritable branche du droit. En cela, il révèle que la prison constitue une microsociété avec ses propres logiques et son propre droit. Véritable décalque de la société civile, la prison évolue dans une orientation toujours plus intrusive dans la vie des personnes qu’elle a sous sa garde.Pourtant, la société civile semble manifester un intérêt croissant pour ses prisons. L’entrée du secteur privé dans la sphère pénitentiaire conjuguée à un contrôle accru du juge a abouti à d’importants changements du système pénitentiaire, notamment au regard du respect des droits fondamentaux du détenu. Toutefois, la réconciliation de la société carcérale et de la société civile n’apparaît possible qu’à la condition d’un alignement du droit pénitentiaire sur le droit privé / In recent decades, it seems important to focus on the effects of incarceration on detainees, as The Criminal Justice System increasingly resort to prison sentences, as well as pre-sentence detentions. After a tradition of lawlessness, penitentiaries have known a phase in of new policies, which are now referred to as Penitentiary law. This research addresses the impact of incarceration on detainees forced to abide by Penitentiary law, the ladder being harsher from the free world law.Thus, developing specific rules, Penitentiary law can now be considered a new type of law, with its own purposes. In the same way, penitentiaries form a micro society following its own rules.Although the trend shows increasingly harsh policies and conditions of confinement, the Criminal Justice System, as to reassure public opinion, seems more and more willing to resort to prison.However, the detainees now afford elaborate constitutional protections, due to private facility management and judicial scrutiny, and the challenge is develop these protections, as to bring Penitentiary law into the line with civil law

C’est un adage bien connu, la peine privative de liberté n’est, théoriquement, que la privation de la liberté d’aller et venir. La France s’est ainsi dotée, le 24 novembre 2009, d’une loi pénitentiaire régissant les droits et les devoirs des personnes incarcérées. Son article 26 précise que : « les personnes détenues ont droit à la liberté d'opinion, de conscience et de religion ». Ce droit implique en substance celui de rechercher des informations, de construire son opinion, puis de l’extérioriser, soit, de pouvoir librement s’exprimer. Or, la réclusion physique d’un individu entraîne inévitablement des restrictions à l’usage de sa liberté deparole, entendue au sens large. S’il ne fait nul doute que les individus incarcérés sont titulaires de droits subjectifs, dans quelles conditions peuvent-ils être exercés ? Les droits des personnes détenues sont contraints par les limites inhérentes à la détention, la sécurité et le bon ordre. Cela implique une censure des autorités pénitentiaires, tant sur la parole que sur les écrits des personnes placées sous sa garde. A ces limitations générales, il faut aussi ajouter lescontraintes liées à la surpopulation carcérale et le poids du contexte sécuritaire actuel. Il entraîne un durcissement des politiques pénales qui peut fragiliser la liberté d’expression des personnes incarcérées. / It is a well-known saying, the sentence depriving of liberty is, in theory, only the deprivation of the freedom of movement. France has established, on November 24th, 2009, a prison law regulating the incarcerated persons rights and duties. Article 26 of said law indicates : “incarcerated persons have the right to freedom of opinion, conscience and religion”. This right implies the right to search information, build an opinion and carry it out, therefore to be able to speak freely. Yet, the physical imprisonment of an individual inevitably triggers restrictions to the use of his broader freedom of speech. If there is no doubt thatincarcerated persons have subjective rights, in what conditions can they be asserted? The inmate’s rights are compelled by the limits inherent in detention, security and order, which lead the prison administration to censor speech and writing of the individuals placed in custody. In addition to these general restrictions, be added all the constraints related to prison overcrowding but also the weight of the current security context. It leads to the strengthening of criminal policies which can weaken the prisoners’s freedom of expression.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:19:58Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Celia Regina Nilander Mauricio.pdf: 775295 bytes, checksum: 1fc6793dd0c6a634300c2df55b57e210 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-05-03 / The prison sentence that resists time and governments, and the whole society criticism, that empirically transcends a desolation scenario imprisoning human beings and treating them cruelly and inhumanely, behind concrete and iron walls in a place where the concept of resocialization is practically inexistent. It is still one of the biggest problems currently faced by the State, which does not comply with some criminalization orders contained in Brazilian Constitution, namely: citizenship principle, equality principle and, essentially, human being dignity principle. However, on contemporary globalized world, many services that were performed by the State exclusively are also performed by particular now and, more recently, such phenomenon reached prison management bringing us an innovative and promising concept on prison law scope, by means of public private partnerships. This study shows us how such new prison management proposal is occurring on other countries, as well as Brazilian experiments results and the problem involving that issue on legal, ethical, and political scope / A pena de prisão que resiste ao tempo, aos governos, e as críticas de toda a sociedade, que empiricamente transcende um cenário de desolação trancafiando seres humanos e tratando-os de forma desumana e cruel, em meio a paredes de concreto e ferro onde a idéia da ressocialização passa muito longe, continua sendo um dos maiores problemas enfrentados atualmente pelo Estado, o qual não respeita alguns Princípios de direitos fundamentais, contidos na nossa Constituição Federal, quais sejam: o principio da cidadania, o princípio da igualdade e, precipuamente, o princípio da dignidade da pessoa humana. Entretanto, no mundo contemporâneo globalizado, muitos serviços desempenhados exclusivamente pelo Estado passaram a sê-lo também pelo particular e, mais recentemente, tal fenômeno chegou até a gestão penitenciária nos trazendo uma idéia inovadora e promissora no âmbito da execução penal, através das parcerias público-privadas. O presente estudo nos mostra como esta nova proposta de gestão penitenciária está ocorrendo em outros países, bem como os resultados das experiências brasileiras e a problemática que envolve tal questão no âmbito jurídico, ético e político

En France, en prison, les enfants de femmes incarcérées peuvent séjourner auprès d'elles durant leurs dix-huit premiers mois. L'enfant n'est pas détenu mais il évolue au sein du milieu fermé. Pourtant, son statut et son régime juridique n'ont jamais été conceptualisés. Seuls cinq articles dans la partie réglementaire du Code de procédure pénale et une circulaire d'application de la Direction de l'administration pénitentiaire déterminent les conditions de son séjour en détention. Par opposition, en Angleterre et au pays de Galles, la protection juridique de cet enfant se révèle considérablement développée Les modèles anglais et français se rejoignent cependant sur un point : l'appréhension pénitentiaire de l'enfant en prison. Comment le droit pénitentiaire dont l'objectif est de réguler le comportement des personnes incarcérées, peut-il appréhender une personne non-juridiquement détenue? Le droit peut-il définir la non-détention? En marge des règles pénitentiaires, la conceptualisation d'un cadre juridique pour l'enfant en prison nécessite de confronter les règles de droit écrites aux pratiques émergentes en prison. Dans les deux systèmes, les pratiques constituent des sources normatives fondamentales en matière pénitentiaire, en particulier s'agissant de l'élaboration d'un droit idoine pour l'enfant en détention. Les pratiques émergentes en prison peuvent-elles dépasser les obstacles auxquels se heurtent les règles pénitentiaires? Est-il possible de fonder le cadre juridique de l'enfant en prison sur un autre référentiel normatif plus adapté à sa spécificité? Autant d'enjeux théoriques et pragmatiques auxquels cette thèse de droit s'efforce de répondre. / In France, children can live in prison with their detained mothers until they reach eighteen months of age. These children are not detained, yet they evolve inside prisons. Nevertheless, their status and regime have never been conceptualised. Their stay in custody is only regulated by five articles in the Code de procedure pénale and an out dated minimal prison instruction. Conversely, in Englru1d and Wales, various legal tools have developed to protect these children. In spite of those differences, there are similarities between the English and the French model as far as prison rules for children in custody are concerned. Considering that Prison Law and Penal policies aim at regulating the conduct of detainees, how may they relate to non-legally detained persons? Further, may the concept of non-detention be defined in law? The conceptualisation of a legal framework for children in custody requires a confrontation of black letter law and the set of practices that are emerging in prison. In both legal systems, practices represent fundamental norms in the prison field, and this is particularly true of the construction of a specific legal framework for children in custody. May those emerging practices manage to overcome the hurdles that prison rules usually face? Is it possible to establish a legal framework for children in custody on a different, better-equipped normative basis, which could encompass children's specificities? This PhD thesis attempts to address these issues, whose stakes are theoretical as well as pragmatic.