IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/crimin/v64y2024i2p343-360..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Thanyanuch Tantikul

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Thanyanuch Tantikul, 2024. "Judicial indifference in criminal sentencing: Explaining inequality of the Thai Fines," The British Journal of Criminology, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, vol. 64(2), pages 343-360.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:64:y:2024:i:2:p:343-360.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/bjc/azad033
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:64:y:2024:i:2:p:343-360.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/bjc .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.