• Admin Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Faculty of Social Sciences
    • Faculty of Social Sciences
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Faculty of Social Sciences
    • Faculty of Social Sciences
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of WIRECommunitiesTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsTypesJournalDepartmentPublisherThis CollectionTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsTypesJournalDepartmentPublisher

    Administrators

    Admin Login

    Local Links

    AboutThe University LibraryOpen Access Publications PolicyDeposit LicenceCOREWIRE Copyright and Reuse Information

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    Confronting the “fraud bottleneck”: private sanctions for fraud and their implications for justice

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    fraudbootleneck.pdf
    Size:
    300.0Kb
    Format:
    PDF
    Download
    Authors
    Button, Mark
    Wakefield, Alison
    Brooks, Graham
    Lewis, Chris
    Shepherd, David
    Issue Date
    2015-09-21
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the ways in which contemporary organisations are imposing their own private sanctions on fraudsters. Design/methodology/approach – The research draws on primary data from interviews with counter fraud practitioners in the UK, secondary sources and case examples. Findings – Such developments have been stimulated, at least in part, by the broader limitations of the criminal justice system and in particular a “fraud bottleneck”. Alongside criminal sanctions, many examples are provided of organisations employing private prosecutions innovative forms of civil sanction and “pseudo state” sanctions, most commonly civil penalties comparable to fines. Research limitations/implications – Such changes could mark the beginning of the “rebirth of private prosecution” and the further expansion of private punishment. Growing private involvement in state sanctions and the development of private sanctions represents a risk to traditional guarantees of justice. There are differences in which comparable frauds are dealt with by corporate bodies and thus considerable inconsistency in sanctions imposed. In contrast with criminal justice measures, there is no rehabilitative element to private sanctions. More research is needed to assess the extent of such measures, and establish what is happening, the wider social implications, and whether greater state regulation is needed. Practical implications – Private sanctions for fraud are likely to continue to grow, as organisations pursue their own measures rather than relying on increasingly over-stretched criminal justice systems. Their emergence, extent and implications are not fully understood by researchers and therefore need much more research, consideration and debate. These private measures need to be more actively recognised by criminal justice policy-makers and analysts alongside the already substantial formal involvement of the private sector in punishment through prisons, electronic tagging and probation, for example. Such measures lack the checks and balances, and greater degree of consistency as laid out in sentencing guidelines, of the criminal justice system. In light of this, consideration needs to be given to greater state regulation of private sanctions for fraud. More also needs to be done to help fraudsters suffering problems such as debt or addiction to rebuild their lives. There is a strong case for measures beyond the criminal justice system to support such fraudsters to be created and publicly promoted. Originality/value – The findings are of relevance to criminal justice policy-makers, academics and counter fraud practitioners in the public and private sectors.
    Citation
    Confronting the “fraud bottleneck”: private sanctions for fraud and their implications for justice 2015, 1 (3):159 Journal of Criminological Research, Policy and Practice
    Journal
    Journal of Criminological Research, Policy and Practice
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/2436/620697
    DOI
    10.1108/JCRPP-04-2015-0006
    Additional Links
    http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/10.1108/JCRPP-04-2015-0006
    Type
    Journal article
    Language
    en
    ISSN
    2056-3841
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    10.1108/JCRPP-04-2015-0006
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    Faculty of Social Sciences

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.