The United States of Exception: Securitization and Law as a Vehicle to Disenfranchisement
Author
Ayoub, Daniela Silvestre Jorge
Term
4. term
Education
Publication year
2018
Submitted on
2018-08-15
Pages
67
Abstract
Denne afhandling undersøger samspillet mellem sekuritisering og jura for at belyse, hvordan staten former forholdet mellem borgere, institutioner og social kontrol. Sekuritisering betyder her at fremstille et emne som en sikkerhedstrussel, ofte forbundet med nationale værdier og identitet, så ekstraordinære tiltag fremstår nødvendige. Denne trusselsgørelse afhænger af, hvordan et problem opfattes, og hvem der anses for at være ophav til truslen. I praksis sker sekuritisering gennem regulative og administrative juridiske systemer i samspil med penologiske redskaber. Afhandlingen stiller følgende hovedspørgsmål: Hvordan og i hvilket omfang bliver tilståelsesaftaler (plea bargaining), i en historik præget af sekuritisering, et redskab til at fratage minoriteter rettigheder? Analysen fokuserer på USA, som er kendt for udbredt brug af tilståelsesaftaler og hurtige domsafgørelser. Set i et historisk perspektiv viser afhandlingen, hvordan lovgivning påvirkes af taktikker, der både retter sig mod at kontrollere bestemte grupper og på forhånd at legitimere indgribende strategier. Jeg viser også, hvordan tilståelsesaftaler fungerer som en mekanisme, der operationaliserer sekuritisering ved at få anholdelse, tilbageholdelse og domfældelse til at fremstå rationelle og lovlige. Samtidig anvendes retten til at skabe undtagelsestilstande, der varigt omdefinerer strafferettens institutioner og praksis. For at vurdere konsekvenserne for minoriteter anvender afhandlingen Foucaults begreb om det 'karcerale arkipelag' til at beskrive, hvordan straf og sanktionslignende følger fortsætter uden for fængselssystemet og ind i offentlige og private institutioner.
This thesis examines how securitization and law interact to shape the relationships between citizens, institutions, and social control. Here, securitization means framing an issue as a security threat—often tied to national values and identity—so that extraordinary measures appear necessary. This process of constructing and performing ‘threat’ depends on how a problem is perceived and who is seen as the source of danger. In practice, securitization is carried out through regulatory and administrative legal tools alongside penal instruments. The central question is: How, and to what extent, does plea bargaining, within a history of securitization, become a vehicle for disenfranchising minorities? The analysis focuses on the United States, which is widely known for fast‑tracked convictions through the mass use of plea bargaining. From a historical perspective, the thesis shows how tactics have influenced the making of law to control specific groups and to preemptively justify invasive strategies. It also illustrates how plea bargaining operationalizes securitization by making arrest, detention, and conviction appear rational and legitimate. At the same time, law is used to produce states of exception that permanently reshape how the criminal justice system works. To assess the disenfranchisement of minorities, the thesis adopts Foucault’s notion of the ‘carceral archipelago’ to describe how punitive consequences extend beyond the formal penal system and into public and private institutions.
[This abstract was generated with the help of AI]
Keywords
Documents