Kin punishment is the practice of punishing the family members of someone who is accused of committing a crime, either in place of or in addition to the perpetrator of the crime. It refers to the principle in which a family shares responsibility for a crime which is committed by one of its members, and it is a form of collective punishment. Kin punishment has been used as a form of extortion, harassment, and persecution by authoritarian and totalitarian states. Kin punishment has been practiced historically in Nazi Germany, China, Japan and South Korea, and presently in North Korea.

Traditional examples

Europe

Traditional Irish law required the payment of a tribute (Éraic) in reparation for murder or other major crimes. In the case of homicide, if the attacker fled, the fine had to be paid by the tribe to which he belonged.[1]

In medieval Welsh law, the kin of an offender was liable to make compensation for his wrongful act. This penalty (called Galanas) was generally limited to murder.[2]

The medieval Polish Główszczyzna fine functioned similarly to the Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian weregild.

Arabic states

Traditional Arab society, which is clan-based, strongly adheres to the concept of collective responsibility. Bedouins recognize two main forms of penalty for a crime against a member. These are blood revenge, referred to as Qisas (قصا, "revenge") and blood money, Diyya (دية, "blood money"/"ransom"). In cases of severe crimes such as murder and rape, blood revenge is the prescribed punishment. If a murder occurs, clansmen of the victim have the right to kill the murderer or one of his male clansmen with impunity. Certain crimes justify multiple acts of revenge, for example, the murder of women and children is avenged fourfold. Crimes considered treacherous, such as the murder of a guest, are also avenged fourfold.

Alternatively, a crime punishable by blood revenge can be commuted to a severe fine if the family of the offended party agrees to it. Blood money is paid jointly by the clan of the offending member to the clan of the victimized member. Bedouins differentiate between crimes in which the group must pay as a standing obligation without reimbursement from the perpetrator of the offense, and crimes where the latter must reimburse them. Crimes where the clan is obligated to pay a joint fee without any reimbursement are murder, violent assault, or insults and other offenses committed during a violent conflict. The collective payment of fines for such crimes is viewed as a justified contribution to the welfare of the injured party rather than a penalty to the perpetrator. Other offenses given a blood-price are crimes against property and crimes against honor.[3] Concepts based on the Arabian laws of blood revenge and blood money are found in Islamic Sharia law, and are thus variously adhered to in Islamic states.

China

China historically adhered to the concept of liability among blood relatives. During the Qin and Han dynasties, families were subject to various punishments according to the punishment of the offending member. When the offense was punishable by death by severing the body at the waist, the offender's parents, siblings, spouse, and children were executed. When the offense was punishable by death and public display of the body, the offender's family was subject to imprisonment with hard labor. When the offender's sentence was exile, their kin was exiled along with them.[4] The most severe punishment, given for capital offenses, was the Nine familial exterminations (zú zhū (族誅), literally "family execution", and miè zú (灭族/滅族)), implemented by tyrannical rulers. This punishment entailed the execution of all the close and extended kin of the individual, categorized into nine groups: four generations of the paternal line, three from the maternal line, and two from the wife's. In the case of Confucian scholar Fang Xiaoru, his students and peers were uniquely included as a tenth group.

During the Ming dynasty of China (1368–1644), 16 palace women attempted to assassinate the Jiajing Emperor. All were sentenced to death by slow slicing. Ten members of the women's families were also beheaded, while a further 20 were enslaved and gifted to ministers. Collective punishment was officially repealed by the government of the Qing dynasty (1644–1912) in 1905.[5]

Modern examples

Nazi Germany

In traditional Germanic law, the law of Germanic peoples (before the widespread adoption of Roman canon law) accepted that the clan of a criminal was liable for offenses committed by one of its members. In Nazi Germany, this concept was revived so that the relatives of persons accused of crimes against the state, including desertion, were held responsible for those crimes.[6][7]

North Korea

Numerous testimonies of North Korean defectors confirm the practice of kin punishment (연좌제, yeonjwaje literally "association system") in North Korea, under which three generations of a political offender's family can be summarily imprisoned or executed.[8] Such punishment is based on internal Workers' Party protocols and lies outside of the formal legal system.[9] The association system was introduced with the North Korean state's founding in 1948, having previously existed under the Joseon kingdom.[8] A yeonjwaje system in South Korea, which oppressed and sometimes tortured relatives of defectors and abductees to the north, was abolished in the 1990s following the June Democratic Struggle.[10]

Israel

The Israeli government's use of home demolition within territories occupied in 1967 was condemned as collective punishment on account that the homes of militants are often family homes. As a result of internal and international pressure against the practice an appeals process against demolition was established in 1989, and consequently the number of demolitions declined. However, in subsequent periods of violence the house demolition policy has been frequently employed as a deterrent against Palestinians.[11][12] In an effort to stop suicide bombings during the Second Intifada, the Supreme Court of Israel in July 2002 accepted the legality of expelling family members of suspected terrorists from the West Bank to the Gaza Strip if they were found to have abetted their activities. They argued that it was not a general deterrent because it limited the use of expulsion to cases where "that person, by his own deeds, constitutes a danger to security of the state."[13] Expulsion to Gaza was discontinued after Israel's unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip.

Venezuela

The Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela concluded in a September 2021 report that Venezuelan security and intelligence agents reportedly applied the principle of Sippenhaftung, using methods including and kidnapping and detention of relatives of critics, real or perceived, to accomplish arrests.[14][15][16][17][18]

See also

References

  1. ↑ Wake, Charles Staniland (1 January 1878). The Evolution of Morality. Trübner & Company. p. 363 – via Internet Archive.
  2. ↑ "Welsh tribal law" (PDF).
  3. ↑ Bailey, Clinton (14 May 2014). Bedouin Law from Sinai and the Negev: Justice Without Government. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0300153255 – via Google Books.
  4. ↑ Historians, National Committee of Japanese (1 January 1990). Historical Studies in Japan (VII): 1983-1987. BRILL. ISBN 9004092927 – via Google Books.
  5. ↑ History Office, ed. (1620s). 明實錄：明世宗實錄 [Veritable Records of the Ming: Veritable Records of Shizong of Ming] (in Chinese). Vol. 267. Ctext. Archived from the original on August 30, 2017. Retrieved August 30, 2017.
  6. ↑ Loeffel, Robert (2012). Family Punishment in Nazi Germany, Sippenhaft, Terror and Myth. Palgrave. pp. 53–88. ISBN 9780230343054.
  7. ↑ Fest, Joachim (1996). Plotting Hitler's Death. New York: Henry Holt. p. 303. ISBN 0080504213.
  8. 1 2 Hawk, David (2012). The Hidden Gulag (PDF) (Report) (2nd ed.). Human Rights in North Korea. Retrieved 2022-07-03.
  9. ↑ Kim, Joonho (March 24, 2015). "North Korean officials, businessmen bankroll poor flight-risk relatives". Radio Free Asia. Retrieved 2022-07-03.
  10. ↑ Arrington, Celeste L. (2016). Accidental Activists. p. 150.
  11. ↑ ""Israel Destroys Homes to Deter Terrorists", ABC News, January 6, 2006". ABC News. September 30, 2002. Retrieved February 23, 2016.
  12. ↑ ""Oppression wird um Sippenhaft angereichert", Süddeutsche Zeitung, November 20, 2014". Süddeutsche Zeitung. November 20, 2014. Retrieved January 6, 2016.
  13. ↑ ""Court Says Israel Can Expel 2 of Militant's Kin to Gaza", New York Times, September 4, 2002". New York Times. September 4, 2002. Retrieved February 23, 2016.
  14. ↑ Casanova, Mayreth (2022-10-02). "Sippenhaft, el patrón alemán con el que torturan a presos políticos en Venezuela". El Pitazo (in Spanish). Retrieved 2022-11-07. Un acusado de participar en la Operación Gedeón dijo al Tribunal de Control en su audiencia preliminar que agentes de la Dgcim lo torturaron y le dijeron que aplicarían el 'Sippenhaft', una táctica de castigo colectivo utilizada por los nazis.
  15. ↑ "Qué es el Sippenhaft, el método de persecución nazi usado por la dictadura chavista que denunció la ONU". infobae (in Spanish). 16 September 2021. Retrieved 2021-09-17. En el caso de un acusado de participar en la Operación Gedeón (una incursión marítima en mayo de 2020), relató que en su audiencia preliminar, agentes de la Dirección General de Contrainteligencia Militar (DGCIM) "lo torturaron y le dijeron que aplicarían el Sippenhaft (una táctica de castigo colectivo utilizada por los nazis)".
  16. ↑ García, Eileen (2021-09-17). "¿Qué es el Sippenhaft, el método de persecución nazi usado por las fuerzas de Maduro?". El Nacional (in Spanish). Retrieved 2022-11-07. Además, dijo al Tribunal de Control que, tras negarse a hacer las declaraciones que le plantearon, los funcionarios le dijeron que aplicarían el Sippenhaft.
  17. ↑ Itriago, Andreína (2021-09-16). "El Sippenhaft, la táctica nazi que según ONU usan agentes venezolanos". Bloomberg Línea (in Spanish). Retrieved 2022-11-07. Un acusado de participar en la Operación Gedeón dijo al Tribunal de Control en su audiencia preliminar que agentes de la DGCIM lo torturaron y le dijeron que aplicarían el 'Sippenhaft'. Detuvieron posteriormente a sus hermanas y a su cuñado
  18. ↑ Detailed findings of the independent international factfinding mission on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (PDF). United Nations. 16 September 2021. p. 109. He told the Control Court that after refusing to make declarations posed to him during the interrogation session, the DGCIM members told him they would apply 'Sippenhaft' (a collective punishment tactic used by the Nazis), involving the imprisonment of his relatives as a form of pressure.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.