Comparative Criminology and Global Legal Systems
Comparative criminology seeks to identify global and cross-cultural principles in contemporary academic research and apply them to the study of legislative systems across various countries worldwide. Comparison of legal systems, as another important human science, raises questions about the uneven distribution of knowledge and power at various global poles. A separate branch of this science is aimed at “southernizing” criminology to overcome the problems of racist and prejudicial perception of peripheral and non-Western cultural signs and law-making systems.
Cultural traditions often play a formative role in the basis of the structure and semantic meaning of a country’s legislative activity. For example, in countries of the British Empire, the tradition of common law is based on precedent, whereas in European countries, courts operate based on civil law. A religiously based system of laws exists in Muslim countries, utilizing the Islamic religious system as the foundation for social regulation. Given that all these systems, with all their differences, determine the same thing, that is, how and by what rules people live, their differences and totality should not be underestimated.
The Thai Legal System in Comparative Perspective
The Thai criminal justice system was selected for analysis in the research paper. This country’s peculiarities, rooted in its cultural history and legislative system, align well with the post-colonial research tradition that is so prevalent in modern global legal knowledge. The new school of modern criminology is largely committed to the decentralization of science and an awareness of individual cultural contexts as the basis of a comparative science that would be truly tolerant. Inclusiveness implies awareness of the judicial system not only in comparison but also as a unique socio-cultural phenomenon that cannot be fully integrated into a foreign culture, and at the same time does not require intervention and change.
The legal situation in Thailand is quite situational for a peripheral country, i.e., one that is usually marginalized in discussions about legal systems. The Western orientation of the legal sciences is due to the primary achievements in the academic description of these disciplines, which does not mean that more isolated and individually developed systems of social regulation do not deserve equal attention and understanding. The Thai system of laws exhibits sharp discrepancies with the fundamental concepts and structural features of American law, which is valuable for overcoming the dominant principles in understanding the law-making sciences.
The main difference between the Thai judicial system and that in the United States is the lack of a rule of precedent. In Thailand, there is no concept that is common in many countries, which is the principle of maintaining reliance on the previous tradition. Referring to the precedent in the United States, a large number of court decisions are settled, and the indexing of precedents with the ability to refer to them allows you to quickly resolve court cases.
Moreover, in this way, reliance is made on the experience of previous judges, which allows us to speak of some observance of accuracy and predetermination in the legislative system. However, it cannot be said that the system does not suffer from certain ceremonies or mandatory regulations that exist solely as a tribute to tradition without logic or meaning. Thailand’s legal system is not based on precedent and always examines cases from a fresh perspective, which leaves litigation outcomes unpredictable. Thus, it very much depends on the context surrounding the proceedings in each case.
Annotated Bibliography
Carrington, K., Hogg, R., Scott, J., Sozzo, M., & Walters, R. (2018). Southern criminology. New York: Routledge.
This book traces the history of criminology, encompassing a wide range of contexts that comprise it. It challenges the irrelevance of the truths postulated by science. Principles that seemed universal within the Western-centric scientific system are examined from the perspective of historical circumstances. The book explores the history of persecution and violence in the Global South, pointing out the colonialist aspects of American law and the racial and masculine prejudice at its core (Carrington et al., 2018). The book is valuable for current research as it underlines the relativity of implied objective truths within the law center.
Chitov, A. (2022). Criminology in criminal justice: From a comparative law perspective. Chiang Mai University Press.
The book is a valuable introductory guide to the current state of criminological sciences. A theoretical connection is made between criminology and comparative sciences, allowing for a more subjective definition of punishments, which echoes the principles of the lack of precedent in the Thai legal system.
Daems, T., & Pleysier, S. (2021). Criminology and democratic politics. Routledge.
This publication is a collection of essays on various issues of the democratic political system and criminological sciences. Aspects such as the epistemological politics of punishment in Europe and the problems of evidence-based policing are considered (Daems & Pleysier, 2021). The revealed vulnerabilities in democratically based criminology highlight the imperfection of any legal system, even at its core, which is beneficial for the decentralizing scientific principle underlying the research being conducted.
Stasi, A. (2021). General principles of Thai criminal law. Springer.
The book is devoted to the basic principles and features of the Thai legal system. This scientific manual, written in English, presents the parameters of the country’s criminal law, including historical changes since the beginning of the 20th century (Stasi, 2021). The book is not limited to the description of laws and proceeds from the principles of doctrine and case that are fundamental to Thailand.