Judicial indifference in criminal sentencing: Explaining inequality of the Thai Fines

Thanyanuch Tantikul

The British Journal of Criminology, 2024, vol. 64, issue 2, 343-360

Abstract: Courts in many jurisdictions remain indifferent to criticisms for their overly harsh or unequal treatments. There has been a debate whether this is attributed to judges’ individual dispositions or rather their environments. This article contributes to this debate by offering evidence from Thai courts about their indifference to inequality generated by the wealth-insensitive fine and fine-default custody. It argues that judges are situationally driven to adopt rigid framing about justice when performing duties, as a result of which judges develop indifference to the ‘side-effects’ of their frame-influenced decisions. The findings imply the possibility that the same mechanisms may exist in other jurisdictions and underline the need to address indifference to prevent failure in reforming for a more egalitarian system.

Keywords: indifference; rigid framing; ethical blindness; sentencing; fines (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/bjc/azad033 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:crimin:v:64:y:2024:i:2:p:343-360.

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

The British Journal of Criminology is currently edited by Eamonn Carrabine

More articles in The British Journal of Criminology from Centre for Crime and Justice Studies Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().