This thesis has analyzed the relationship between the punitive turn and the crime policies of the Green party (Miljöpartiet de Gröna) and the Sweden democrats (Sverigedemokraterna) to answer the research question; what influence the punitive turn has had on the parties policies. The choice of method has fallen on a quantitative content-analysis with a qualitative complementarity and qualitative facilitation. From an account of the punitive turn has a word-list with recording units been created, of those recording units has a computer-search been made of the two parties most recent official documents which accounts for the parties holistic politics; MP´s Partyprogramme from 2013, and SD´s Principleprogramme from 2011. The result of the qualitative complementarity shows; a greater frequency of recording units for MP than for SD. The analysis of the qualitative facilitation-result shows; a lesser direct influence of the punitive turn for MP than for SD. The result and analysis are discussed regarding whether the research question has been answered, and no such conclusion is considered to be made by the researcher, instead are the result and analysis open for interpretation of the reader.

La circulation des normes juridiques est un phénomène étudié par un courant international de recherche nommé policy transfer 
studies qui s'intéresse néanmoins peu aux normes pénales. Pourtant, les processus de globalisation ont rendu la circulation de ces normes plus rapide, plus intense et plus complexe durant les dernières décennies. A partir de trois études de cas, notre travail montre comment la circulation des normes pénales est largement influencée par l’harmonisation européenne, par la diffusion de l’idéologie néolibérale ayant accompagné un tournant punitif dans les politiques criminelles de la plupart des pays européens ainsi que par l’émergence de crimes transnationaux qui exigent des solutions similaires. Nous caractérisons les limites de ces convergences et les analysons dans plusieurs cadres théoriques empruntés à la sociologie de la déviance afin de comprendre ce qu'elles impliquent pour ceux qui veulent comprendre le processus législatif au niveau national / The circulation of legal norms is a phenomenon studied by an international research current named policy transfer studies which has however little interest in criminal norms. Nevertheless, during the last several decades, the globalization processes have made the circulation of these norms faster, more intense and more complex. Based on three case studies, our work shows how the circulation of criminal norms is widely influenced by European harmonization processes, by the diffusion of the neoliberal ideology that accompanied a punitive turn in the criminal policies of most European countries and by the emergence of transnational crimes that require similar solutions. We will characterize the limits of these convergences and analyze them in several theoretical frameworks borrowed from the sociology of deviance in order to understand their implications for those who want to grasp the legislative process on the national level

Au Canada, les discours politiques entourant la question des politiques pénales ont parfois été favorables à la répression, et parfois favorables à la réhabilitation et la littérature démontre qu’au cours des années, nous avons toujours nuancé notre approche à l’aide d’une philosophie pénale dichotomique, favorisant le juste équilibre entre ces deux rationalités pénales. Depuis l’arrivée du gouvernement conservateur en 2006 et malgré une baisse de l’activité criminelle enregistrée, l’activité législative en matière criminelle et pénale s’est intensifiée. En 2011, le gouvernement a ainsi déposé le projet de loi C-10, une loi omnibus comprenant 5 volets distincts, chacun mettant en place des changements important sur différentes dimensions du processus criminel ou pénal. L’objet de notre étude consiste, à partir de l’analyse des débats entourant l’adoption de ce projet de loi C-10, à comprendre les représentations du crime, du criminel et de la sanction pénale, et ce à partir de l’analyse documentaire thématique. Le corpus utilisé dans ce mémoire est formé de débats parlementaires ayant eu lieu à la Chambre des communes entre le 20 septembre 2011 et le 6 décembre 2011. Il ressort de notre analyse que la perspective dualiste d’autrefois a disparu au détriment d’une perspective pénale axée sur la protection en favorisant la rétribution, réprobation et la neutralisation. Nos résultats soulignent l’importance de l’émotion et du sensationnel dans les débats, ainsi que l’arrivée d’une pénalité politisée. / In Canada, the rhetoric surrounding penal policy has sometimes been favorable to a more punitive approach, sometimes to a more rehabilitative approach and the literature shows that we have always mitigated our approach with a dichotomous penal philosophy that promotes the balance between retributive punishment and rehabilitation. Since the arrival of a minority conservative government in 2006, and despite a drop in reported criminal activity and in the severity of crime, the legislative activity in criminal and penal matters has intensified. In 2011, the government proposed Bill C-10, an omnibus retributive crime bill comprised of 5 distinct parts, each implementing important changes to various sections of the criminal and penal processes. The purpose of our study is to understand the social representations of crime, the criminal and the criminal sanction, that led to the adoption of Bill C-10 using a document analysis of the political debates on C-10 that took place in the House of Commons from September 20th 2011 to December 6th 2011. We used a thematic analysis. Our findings reveal that dualistic speeches have disappeared to the detriment of a penal perspective centered on the notion of protection by means of retribution, denunciation and neutralization. Our analysis also reveals the importance of emotion and sensationalism in the debates, as well as the arrival of a politicized penal realm.

A tese discute a transformação dos discursos político-criminais sobre a pena de prisão no Brasil, no período que compreende os debates para a elaboração da Parte Geral do Código Penal e da Lei de Execução Penal, que reformaram o sistema penal em 1984, e os dispositivos penais e processuais penais discutidos na Assembleia Nacional Constituinte e contemplados na Constituição de 1988. Utilizando conceitos da literatura político-criminal anglo-saxã, as teorias tradicionais da pena e analisando os debates legislativos dos principais marcos legais do período escolhido, pretendeu-se verificar se o processo de superencarceramento brasileiro está inserido no contexto ocidental de valorização da prisão no final do século XX, ou se as peculiaridades do caso nacional indicam tratar-se de um fenômeno com causas endógenas. O trabalho parte da hipótese de que a virada punitiva brasileira está ligada ao processo de redemocratização, que atribuiu ao sistema de justiça criminal o papel de instrumento de resolução de problemas sociais complexos. Em um curto período, partiu-se de uma concepção de pena criminal como ultima ratio, instrumento de um sistema mais amplo de ressocialização e inclusão social, para um direito penal essencialmente punitivo. Nesse processo, a pena criminal foi revalorizada tanto por setores conservadores que se aproveitaram da utilidade eleitoral da política criminal para construir a narrativa da pena como instrumento de exclusão dos indesejáveis, em detrimento dos direitos humanos dos condenados quanto por setores progressistas que viram no potencial simbólico da prisão uma forma de assegurar pautas e de buscar direitos sociais. Assim, de maneira paradoxal, a pena de prisão assumiu o papel de síntese das demandas contraditórias que se apresentaram durante as disputas políticas nos anos 1980. Ao final, conclui-se que a prática contemporânea do sistema penal brasileiro está ligada à função atribuída à pena de prisão a partir da abertura política. O recurso a penas cada vez mais altas, o perene apelo a restrições processuais penais e a indiferença quanto à situação dos cárceres (agora concebidos como meros instrumentos de exclusão) refletem a lógica de colonização do sistema de justiça pelo aparato de segurança pública, característica constitutiva do antimodernismo penal no país. / The thesis presents a discussion about the transformation of criminal policy discourses on imprisonment in Brazil, from the 1984 criminal justice reform laws to the debates on the constitutional framework of the criminal justice system during the National Constituent Assembly, in 1988. Using concepts developed in the Anglo-Saxon criminology and the traditional justifications for criminal sanctions, the work analyses the legislative debates in order to verify if Brazilian overincarceration is part of the punitive turn wave which took place in the Western world in the late 20th century, or if its peculiarities should rather be explained by endogenous causes. It goes to illustrate how, in few years, Brazilian punitive turn departed from a welfare penal agenda to one essentially based on punitive sanctions. The hypothesis investigated along the work is that this phenomenon has direct links to the democratization process which attributed to the criminal justice system the role of solving complex social problems. Both conservatives, who discovered the electoral potential of penal populism, and new social movements, who relied on the symbolic nature of criminal law to support and organize civil rights demands, reinvigorated imprisonment. Paradoxically, prison became a synthesis of contradictory political forces and demands raised at the decline of military regime. The work concludes that contemporary practices of Brazilian criminal justice system are determined by the role assigned to imprisonment since democratization. Ever-higher prison sentences, limits on procedural rights for the accused and indifference towards inhumane prisons (now merely defined as a neutralization tool) reflects colonization of the criminal justice system by crime control apparatus, which is a constitutive feature of penal late modernism in Brazil.

A tese discute a transformação dos discursos político-criminais sobre a pena de prisão no Brasil, no período que compreende os debates para a elaboração da Parte Geral do Código Penal e da Lei de Execução Penal, que reformaram o sistema penal em 1984, e os dispositivos penais e processuais penais discutidos na Assembleia Nacional Constituinte e contemplados na Constituição de 1988. Utilizando conceitos da literatura político-criminal anglo-saxã, as teorias tradicionais da pena e analisando os debates legislativos dos principais marcos legais do período escolhido, pretendeu-se verificar se o processo de superencarceramento brasileiro está inserido no contexto ocidental de valorização da prisão no final do século XX, ou se as peculiaridades do caso nacional indicam tratar-se de um fenômeno com causas endógenas. O trabalho parte da hipótese de que a virada punitiva brasileira está ligada ao processo de redemocratização, que atribuiu ao sistema de justiça criminal o papel de instrumento de resolução de problemas sociais complexos. Em um curto período, partiu-se de uma concepção de pena criminal como ultima ratio, instrumento de um sistema mais amplo de ressocialização e inclusão social, para um direito penal essencialmente punitivo. Nesse processo, a pena criminal foi revalorizada tanto por setores conservadores que se aproveitaram da utilidade eleitoral da política criminal para construir a narrativa da pena como instrumento de exclusão dos indesejáveis, em detrimento dos direitos humanos dos condenados quanto por setores progressistas que viram no potencial simbólico da prisão uma forma de assegurar pautas e de buscar direitos sociais. Assim, de maneira paradoxal, a pena de prisão assumiu o papel de síntese das demandas contraditórias que se apresentaram durante as disputas políticas nos anos 1980. Ao final, conclui-se que a prática contemporânea do sistema penal brasileiro está ligada à função atribuída à pena de prisão a partir da abertura política. O recurso a penas cada vez mais altas, o perene apelo a restrições processuais penais e a indiferença quanto à situação dos cárceres (agora concebidos como meros instrumentos de exclusão) refletem a lógica de colonização do sistema de justiça pelo aparato de segurança pública, característica constitutiva do antimodernismo penal no país. / The thesis presents a discussion about the transformation of criminal policy discourses on imprisonment in Brazil, from the 1984 criminal justice reform laws to the debates on the constitutional framework of the criminal justice system during the National Constituent Assembly, in 1988. Using concepts developed in the Anglo-Saxon criminology and the traditional justifications for criminal sanctions, the work analyses the legislative debates in order to verify if Brazilian overincarceration is part of the punitive turn wave which took place in the Western world in the late 20th century, or if its peculiarities should rather be explained by endogenous causes. It goes to illustrate how, in few years, Brazilian punitive turn departed from a welfare penal agenda to one essentially based on punitive sanctions. The hypothesis investigated along the work is that this phenomenon has direct links to the democratization process which attributed to the criminal justice system the role of solving complex social problems. Both conservatives, who discovered the electoral potential of penal populism, and new social movements, who relied on the symbolic nature of criminal law to support and organize civil rights demands, reinvigorated imprisonment. Paradoxically, prison became a synthesis of contradictory political forces and demands raised at the decline of military regime. The work concludes that contemporary practices of Brazilian criminal justice system are determined by the role assigned to imprisonment since democratization. Ever-higher prison sentences, limits on procedural rights for the accused and indifference towards inhumane prisons (now merely defined as a neutralization tool) reflects colonization of the criminal justice system by crime control apparatus, which is a constitutive feature of penal late modernism in Brazil.

La législation actuelle permet la prise en compte du temps de détention présentencielle dans la détermination de la peine. Le paragraphe 719(3) du Code criminel encadre la comptabilisation du crédit sur la peine de ce type de détention. Depuis l’entrée en vigueur de la Loi sur l’adéquation de la peine et du crime en 2010, le Code criminel stipule que le juge doit appliquer un crédit de un jour sur le temps de la peine pour chaque jour passé en détention présentencielle. Un maximum d’un jour et demi pour chaque jour de détention présentencielle peut être accordé lorsque les circonstances le justifient. Cette loi, qui s’inscrit dans un durcissement des politiques pénales, apporta un resserrement législatif en circonscrivant le pouvoir judiciaire quand au calcul du crédit pour le temps déjà passé sous garde. L’objectif de l’étude est de comprendre l’application et l’interprétation de la Loi sur l’adéquation de la peine et du crime par les acteurs judiciaires entre 2010 et 2016. Pour ce faire, une analyse d’arrêts de la Cour du Québec et de l’arrêt Summers (2014) de la Cour Suprême du Canada a été réalisée. Les motifs évoqués par les juges quant au calcul du crédit ont été mis en lumière. Il ressort que les conditions de vie en détention présentencielle et que le comportement de l’accusé appuient les décisions des juges. En effet, les résultats de l’étude indiquent que la difficulté des conditions de détention est un motif qui contribue à l’octroi d’un crédit majoré. Ce motif repris par les juges fait appel à un argument de la jurisprudence antérieure aux changements législatifs de 2010. De plus, le « mauvais comportement » de l’accusé peut amener les juges à calculer le crédit à la baisse. Nous concluons que les acteurs judicaires ont résisté face à la politique pénale de 2010, mais aussi qu’une sévérité pénale teinte le calcul du crédit. / Current legislation allows for pre-sentence detention time to be taken into account in sentencing. Subsection 719 (3) of the Criminal Code regulates the accounting of the credit for the penalty for this type of detention. Since the Truth in Sentencing Act came into force in 2010, the Criminal Code stipulates that the judge must apply on the sentence a one-day credit for each day spent in pre-sentence detention. A maximum of one and a half days for each day of pre-sentence detention may be granted when the circumstances warrant. This law, which would be part of a punitive turn of criminal policies, brought in legislative tightening by circumscribing the judicial power when calculating the credit for the time already spent in custody. The objective of this study is to understand the application and interpretation of the Truth in Sentencing Act by judicial actors between 2010 and 2016. To do so, an analysis of judgments of the Court of Quebec and R.v. Summers (2014) of the Supreme Court of Canada has been carried out. The reasons given by the judges for the calculation of the credit have been highlighted. It appears that the living conditions in pre-sentence detention and that the behavior of the accused support the judges' decisions. Indeed, the results of the study indicate that the difficulty of the remand conditions is a reason which contributes to the granting of increased credit. This reason taken up by the judges draws on an argument from the case law prior to the legislative changes of 2010. In addition, the “bad behavior” of the accused may lead the judges to calculate the credit downwards. From this, we conclude that the judicial actors partly resisted the penal policy of 2010, but also that a penal severity tints the calculation of the credit.