Mob Justice: Is It Just?
Posted by Jenny Stefanotti on Monday, June 29, 2009
Under: Institutions
I missed a raging ethical debate during the drive this morning (I was home sick). Our driver told my housemates that his community caught a thief last night. And then they cut off one of his hands.
This isn’t the first I’ve heard of something like this happening in Liberia. Another friend was at a graduation party recently when people started yelling “ROOGGGUEEE!!!,” which was immediately met by everyone running out, chasing down the culprit, and beating him. Then hoisting him in the air, throwing him in the trunk of a car, and speeding off. The Liberian people are justifiably sick and tired of having not just their livelihood but also indeed their lives stolen from them.
There are signs around Monrovia urging against mob justice, but it’s not as if there is much of an alternative, at least not yet. It’s not just that police force in Liberia is nearly nonexistent, but the chances of being convicted of a crime are next to zero given the inadequate justice system, so there is little formal deterrent to crime. Mob justice is an informal institution that has arisen due to the lack of formal institutions in Liberia.
The question is: what should the government do, if anything, to stop it?
Clearly it is a problem if crime becomes rampant due to the lack of consequence (and I understand this actually happening, which is particularly concerning given the numbers of ex-combatants), but is it okay for communities to be cutting off someone’s hand if they are caught stealing? Should angry mobs be determining and carrying out criminal punishment?
I see the government’s response as balancing two concerns: without the informal institution you risk the establishment of criminal norms and networks, but with it, you are risking the establishment of tensions within communities and norms accepting violence and brutality.
I’m inclined to argue that the government should take a stand against mob justice, despite the fact that it is playing a critical role the government does not yet have the capacity to. Down the line when the capacity does exist, I think it will be easier to take on criminal networks than to remove the societal tensions and shift the unhealthy norms that will inevitably arise from current behavior.
In reality of course, a government without the capacity to stop theft doesn’t have the capacity to stop mob justice either. It will still play an important role deterring theft. But I don’t think the Liberian government should indirectly condone such violence by not taking a stand against it.
Though, that’s my thinking on a policy response considering the imminent formal institutional capacity and the history of this country. What’s the theoretical answer? In the total absence of formal institutions of justice, is mob justice just? Or is it just compounding violence upon violence? Without it though, what deterrent to crime is there? If a society collectively condones mob justice as an informal justice system, and losing a hand as the right punishment to theft, who am I to say it’s wrong?
This isn’t the first I’ve heard of something like this happening in Liberia. Another friend was at a graduation party recently when people started yelling “ROOGGGUEEE!!!,” which was immediately met by everyone running out, chasing down the culprit, and beating him. Then hoisting him in the air, throwing him in the trunk of a car, and speeding off. The Liberian people are justifiably sick and tired of having not just their livelihood but also indeed their lives stolen from them.
There are signs around Monrovia urging against mob justice, but it’s not as if there is much of an alternative, at least not yet. It’s not just that police force in Liberia is nearly nonexistent, but the chances of being convicted of a crime are next to zero given the inadequate justice system, so there is little formal deterrent to crime. Mob justice is an informal institution that has arisen due to the lack of formal institutions in Liberia.
The question is: what should the government do, if anything, to stop it?
Clearly it is a problem if crime becomes rampant due to the lack of consequence (and I understand this actually happening, which is particularly concerning given the numbers of ex-combatants), but is it okay for communities to be cutting off someone’s hand if they are caught stealing? Should angry mobs be determining and carrying out criminal punishment?
I see the government’s response as balancing two concerns: without the informal institution you risk the establishment of criminal norms and networks, but with it, you are risking the establishment of tensions within communities and norms accepting violence and brutality.
I’m inclined to argue that the government should take a stand against mob justice, despite the fact that it is playing a critical role the government does not yet have the capacity to. Down the line when the capacity does exist, I think it will be easier to take on criminal networks than to remove the societal tensions and shift the unhealthy norms that will inevitably arise from current behavior.
In reality of course, a government without the capacity to stop theft doesn’t have the capacity to stop mob justice either. It will still play an important role deterring theft. But I don’t think the Liberian government should indirectly condone such violence by not taking a stand against it.
Though, that’s my thinking on a policy response considering the imminent formal institutional capacity and the history of this country. What’s the theoretical answer? In the total absence of formal institutions of justice, is mob justice just? Or is it just compounding violence upon violence? Without it though, what deterrent to crime is there? If a society collectively condones mob justice as an informal justice system, and losing a hand as the right punishment to theft, who am I to say it’s wrong?
In : Institutions
Tags: justice institutions liberia
blog comments powered by Disqus
