Tom Daems, Dirk van Zyl Smit and Sonja Snacken (eds), European Penology?
| Author | Henrik Tham |
| DOI | 10.1177/1462474513505398 |
| Published date | 01 December 2013 |
| Date | 01 December 2013 |
| Subject Matter | Book reviews |
Kalhan A (forthcoming 2013) Immigration policing and federalism through the lens of
technology, surveillance, and privacy. Ohio State Law Journal 74(6).
Kanstroom D (2007) Deportation Nation: Outsiders in American History. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Kubrin CE and Ishizawa H (2012) Why some immigrant neighborhoods are safer than
others: Divergent findings from Los Angeles and Chicago. ANNALS of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science 641(1): 148–173.
Lee S (2013) De facto immigration courts. California Law Review 101(3): 553–608.
Lewis PG, Provine DM, Varsanyi MW and Decker SH (2013) Why do (some) city
police departments enforce federal immigration law? Political, demographic, and
organizational influences on local choices. Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory 23(1): 1–25.
Motomura H (forthcoming 2014) Immigration Outside the Law. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Sklansky DA (2012) Crime, immigration, and ad hoc instrumentalism. New Criminal
Law Review 15(2): 157–223.
Ingrid V Eagly
University of California—Los Angeles, School of Law, USA
Tom Daems, Dirk van Zyl Smit and Sonja Snacken (eds), European Penology?,On
˜ati International
Series in Law and Society, Hart Publishing: Oxford, 2013; ix + 370 pp. (including bibliographies and
index): 9781849462334, £60.00
European Penology? consists of 15 contributions by 18 authors. The background
of the anthology is the increasing importance of law and order in politics and the
expanding involvement of European institutions in the penal sphere. This back-
ground is further developed in the first chapter by Sonja Snacken and Dirk van
Zyl Smit stressing among other things the growth of prison and overcrowding,
the tension between preserving human rights for crime victims and for law-
breakers, the regulation of migration and the expansion of the European
Union (EU) into an area that was supposed to be reserved for sovereign
states. Tom Daems emphasizes the common values that unite European states
such as a liberal and cosmopolitan tradition and the absence of the death penalty.
Ian Loader and Richard Sparks follow a similar line in arguing for a specific
European public criminology and penology. Estella Baker analyses in more detail
the expansion of the EU as the most active actor in the penal field in protecting
its interests through treaties, data registers and penal legislation. Roland Miklau
points out how this expansion shows in tendencies towards co-ordinating sanc-
tions that tend to increase punitivity and how this contrasts with the ambitions of
the Council of Europe.
In one of several contributions addressing cross-cutting issues in European pen-
ology Dario Melossi analyses the criminalization of migrants where the strict
564 Punishment & Society 15(5)
To continue reading
Request your trial