Human Rights and the rehabilitative purpose of punishment: a critical legal perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15175/gq7hrf02Keywords:
Rehabilitation, Human Rights, Social Reintegration, Punishment, Transformative JusticeAbstract
This paper critically explores the relationship between human rights and the rehabilitative purpose of punishment within contemporary criminal justice systems. While international human rights instruments—such as the ICCPR and the Mandela Rules—emphasize the reintegration of offenders as a core objective of incarceration, the practical realization of this principle often remains elusive. Drawing on a critical legal perspective, this study interrogates the extent to which legal systems operationalize rehabilitation as a rights-based imperative, and how structural inequalities, political narratives, and penal ideologies shape its implementation. The paper examines the doctrinal evolution of rehabilitation in comparative jurisdictions and exposes the disjuncture between normative commitments and carceral realities—marked by overcrowding, inadequate support systems, and punitive sentencing regimes. Through engagement with Foucauldian theory, post-colonial critiques, and feminist legal scholarship, the research challenges the assumption that rehabilitation is inherently benevolent or universally accessible. It argues that rehabilitative frameworks, while ostensibly progressive, may reproduce disciplinary control and reinforce societal hierarchies. Ultimately, the study calls for a reimagining of penal reform grounded in dignity, equity, and transformative justice. By situating rehabilitation within a broader human rights discourse, this paper highlights its potential as a genuine vehicle for social reintegration and legal accountability.
Downloads
References
ALSCHULER, Albert W. The changing purposes of criminal punishment: a retrospective on the past century and some thoughts about the next. The University of Chicago Law Review, v. 70, n. 1, art. 1, 2003. Available at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclrev/vol70/iss1/1. Access on: Abr. 5, 2025.
BLEICH, Jeff. The politics of prison crowding. California Law Review, v. 77, n. 5, p. 1125-1180, 1989. https://doi.org/10.2307/3480644
FOUCAULT, Michel. Discipline and punish. Paris: Gallimard, 1975.
GAILEY, Timothy H. Healing circles and restorative justice: learning from non-anglo american traditions. Anthropology Now, v. 7, n. 2, p. 1-7, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1080/19428200.2015.1058116
HANEY, Lynne A. Feminist state theory: applications to jurisprudence, criminology, and the welfare state. Annual Review of Sociology, v. 26, n. 1, p. 641-666, 2000. http://www.jstor.org/stable/223460
HASS, Lawrence. Discipline and the constituted subject: Foucault’s social history. Symplokē, v. 4, n. 1/2, p. 61-72, 1996. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40550385
HUMPHREY, John P. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. International Journal, v. 4, n. 4, p. 351-361, 1949. https://doi.org/10.2307/40197502
KASEY, McCall-Smith. United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules). International Legal Materials, v. 55, n. 6, p. 1180-1205, 2016. https://doi.org/10.2307/40197502
NAGIN, Daniel S. Deterrence in the twenty-first century. Crime and Justice, v. 42, n. 1, p. 199-263, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1086/670398
PHELPS, Michelle S. Rehabilitation in the punitive era: the gap between rhetoric and reality in U.S. prison programs. Law & Society Review, v. 45, n. 1, p. 33-68, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5893.2011.00427.x
REDDY, K. Rama Krishna. Rehabilitation or re-exclusion? The Indian Journal of Political Science, v. 69, n. 3, p. 505-518, 2008. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41856443
STEINERT, Heinz, The development of ‘discipline’ according to Michel Foucault: discourse analysis vs. social history. Crime and Social Justice, n. 20, p. 83-98, 1983. http://www.jstor.org/stable/29766211
WALGRAVE, Lode. Restoration in youth justice. Crime and Justice, v. 31 p. 543-597, 2004. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3488354
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Passages: International Review of Political History and Legal Culture

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
A compromise transferring the copyright is requested, with the author’s signature, as the example below:
I / Us, ..................... , author(s) of the article/review: ................................, which
I/we have submitted to the appreciation of ‘Passagens: International Review of Political History and Legal Culture”, am/are aware of the publishing rules and
agree that the copyright related to it is transferred to the Publishing. I (we) take full responsibility for the content of this article; and is will contribute to the Editors to undertake the changes suggested by the evaluators and the review of bibliographic quotations.
__________________, ____/_____
Signature: ________________________________