Premeščanje mej v kriminologiji in kriminalitetni politiki

V kontekstu premeščanja mej v kriminologiji so specifične spremembe zameglile razlike med tem, katere oblike nasilja in prilaščanja so definirane kot kriminalne in katere so prepoznane kot »normalne« (zakonite). Poleg tega so postale bolj zamegljene tudi meje med kriminologijo in z njo povezanimi vedami, pri čemer je morda najbolj zanimivo naraščajoče opiranje na nevroznanost in genetiko pri ugotavljanju potencialne zločinskosti posameznika in njegove/njene zmožnosti, da razvije proti-družbeno vedenje. Na bolj praktični ravni je prišlo do premeščanja mej tudi med kazenskim pravom in drugimi pravnimi disciplinami, kar je pripeljalo do, med drugim, pretirane kriminalizacije, povečanja kazenskopravnega in tehničnega nadzora ter zniževanja procesnih standardov. Tako na primer povečana represivna reakcija povzroča mnoge spremembe na področju gospodarskega kazenskega prava. Na področju mednarodnega prava oboroženih spopadov pa se je premeščanje mej udejanilo prek re-konceptualizacije vojne in terorizma, ki je zameglila razliko med vojno in mirom ter med teroristi in civilisti. Nenazadnje, na področju kaznovanja lahko opazimo procese formalizacije in inflacijo inkriminacij in kazenskih sankcij, ki re-definirajo koncept tega kaj, koga, kje in kako kaznujemo.

In the context of shifting boundaries within criminology, specific changes have blurred the difference between what types of violent and acquisitive activities are deemed criminal and what are deemed “normal” (legal). Moreover, boundaries between criminology and related fields have become more blurred, and the potentially most intriguing could be the emergent (over) reliance on neuroscience and genetics in explaining the potential criminality of an individual or his/her tendency to develop anti-social behaviour. At the more practical level, boundaries between criminal law and other legal disciplines have shifted, leading to, among other things, over-criminalization, an omnipresence of criminal law and technical surveillance, and the lowering of procedural standards. In the field of economic criminal law, the more repressive stance creates a pressure to shift procedural and substantive law rules. Additionally, shifting boundaries in the field of laws of armed conflict have materialised in the re-conceptualization of war and terrorism, the line between war and peace, and between terrorists and civilians. Finally, in the field of punishment we can observe processes of formalization and an inflation of incriminations and criminal sanctions redefining the concept of what, who, where, and how to punish.