Book Review: Punishment and citizenship: A theory of criminal disenfranchisement by M. Tripkovic

• Published date: 01 March 2022
• Author: Lynnea Davis
• DOI: 10.1177/1057567720908045
• Date: 01 March 2022
• Subject Matter: Book Reviews

Demystifying the Big House: Exploring Prison Experience and Media Representations provides

an important contribution to the field by examining the role that the media plays in our constructions

of life behind bars. The strength of this volume centers on its accessibility and ability to connect with

diverse audiences, as prior knowledge of the prison system is not required for reading. Undergraduate

and graduate students and researchers studying crime and media, as well as consumers of crime pro-

gramming will find this book informative and eye-opening, as it allows readers to reimagine prison

life through a different, more critical lens.

Tripkovic, M. (2019).

Punishment and citizenship: A theory of criminal disenfranchisement. Oxford University Press. 155 pp. $59.49,

ISBN: 9780190848620.

Reviewed by: Lynnea Davis ,George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA

DOI: 10.1177/1057567720908045

With over 10 million people incarcerated around the world, criminal disenfranchisement has signifi-

cant implications. This is especially true for the United States, which imprisons and disenfranchises

at a higher rate than any other contemporary democracy. Many arguments for and against the disen-

franchisement of criminals exist, with the constitutionality of disenfranchisement at the forefront of

the discussion.

In her book Punishment and Citizenship: A Theory of Criminal Disenfranchisement, Milena

Tripkovic, a lecturer in the Birmingham Law School at the University of Birmingham, presents vir-

tually all sides of the argument and logically and eloquently combs through each one to reach her

ultimate conclusion. Tripkovic lays strong foundations for each argument and considers counterar-

guments when applicable to inform her well-defended theory of criminal disenfranchisement.

The book serves to answer the age-old question of whether the disenfranchisement of criminal

offenders has legitimate grounds in democratic countries by examining its empirical and normative

aspects. Chapter 1 serves as an introduction to the empirical and normative issues associated with

disenfranchisement, which is foundational for the proceeding chapters. From an empirical perspec-

tive, Tripkovic discusses how electoral restrictions undermine democracy and disproportionately

affect racial minorities, further compromising the premise of democracy. To inform the normative

aspect, Tripkovic relies on both penal and citizen theories. First, she determines that although elec-

toral restrictions are applied to serve penal functions, disenfranchisement is separate from punish-

ment since its primary purpose is to target rights directly. As such, she adds a fresh lens to the

discussion by viewing disenfranchisement as a sanction on citizenship.

To expand the current understanding of disenfranchisement, which is primarily informed by U.S.

practices, Tripkovic presents her results from her original research comparing the suffrage restric-

tions in 43 European countries. She argues that disenfranchisement is a widespread practice that

targets specific offenders to varying degrees. With the existence of a variety of disenfranchisement

laws, Tripkovic sets out to determine which, if any, can be normatively justified. The author argues

that the common understanding of criminal disenfranchisement as a form of punishment is incorrect.

Based on the definitions, aims, and principles of punishment, Tripkovic makes it clear that disenfran-

chisement is a stand-alone sanction, distinct from punishment.

One limitation of Tripkovic’s analysis of punishment is that she refers to the intent of laws that

sanction criminal offenses as securing the conditions for nondomination, which is a characteristic

of freedom. However, although the nondomination of the victim is protected, is not the offender

now dominated by a higher power? Thus, it may be better to emphasize that the victim’s

Book Reviews 111