The argument for retributive justice in cases of femicide in Turkey - study

With the rate of femicide, the murder of women for gender-specific reasons, rapidly increasing in Turkey new approaches and perspectives on the idea of justice have developed, a study that will be published in the October 2023 issue of Sociology Mind has found.

The study, which is awaiting peer review, attempted to gain an in-depth understanding of public perception of "retributive justice."

Retributive justice is defined as "a system of criminal justice based on the punishment of offenders rather than on rehabilitation," according to Oxford Languages dictionaries. 

The role of retributive justice

The authors claim that in Turkey, retributive justice has become a more commonly supported form of retribution since the 18th century. The authors state their belief that this controversial form of justice encourages the role of perpetrator and victim, which creates a future drive for criminality and victimhood. 

The authors argue that this form of justice is based on a moral perception of people receiving what they deserve, rather than receiving something that would prevent future crime. An example of this would be imprisoning shoplifters who steal food rather than provide job training so that people have enough income to purchase food. This comes from the criminological approach known as Right-Realism; whereby crime is prevented through making the punishment too severe for a rational mind to choose to commit the crime. Many theorists, including the authors of this paper, have drawn some comparisons between this model of justice and the Old Testament's "eye-for-an-eye" take on justice.

Women who feel failed by patriarchal formal systems of justice, are often forced to live with feelings of anger, helplessness, and fear. In response to this fear, many women have turned to social media where they can gain a new sense of power by voicing their experiences and drawing public condemnations.

The researchers, seeking to gain a more insightful perspective on public perceptions on the aforementioned issue, conducted a survey with 94 respondents and analyzed nearly 2000 “emotional tweets of angry individuals.”

Findings of the study

The survey and tweet analysis revealed that people felt the most intense feelings of anger towards lethal gender violence. In cases involving lethal gender violence, retributive justice, and negative feelings can often be directed toward official figures who defend the perpetrator. Thus, despite the defense having a legal responsibility to defend an accused perpetrator, they themselves risk being victims of retributive justice. In extreme cases, the family of the defense can also be targeted.

Until the 1970s, victims and accusers within Turkey were considered witnesses of the state and therefore had an official role within the criminal justice system. This ultimately led court cases to be perceived as the state vs. the accused/perpetrator, meaning that actions taken against the accused were seen as legitimate actions taken against an enemy of the state.

Fatal violence against women in Turkey

Among Twitter users and the survey respondents, the cause of fatal female violence was "Transformation of social values/ immorality/conscience (134 codes), distrust/disappointment in the general justice system (106), excuses for crime (103 codes); characteristics of the justice system in the country/injustice (34 codes); political power/regime (13 codes); status/ power/money (4 codes)." 

Additionally, it was expressed that some of the emotional reactions left by these reasons in the society are "anger/resentment (295 codes), disgust (156), despair (103 codes), hatred/grudge/revenge (74 codes)."

The theorists go on to suggest that state-sanctioned retributive justice should be applied because state-actioned retributive justice would happen “in a more organized way, the desired result can be achieved, and the masses can be deterred from private justice.” Meaning, that assuming the actions of the state punish only the perpetrators, fewer people suffer.

What kind of punishment is required for the perpetrator of lethal forms of violence?

In the Twitter and survey analysis, participants felt that, in cases of lethal violence, the punishment should be: "Silencing criminals/execution/killing (27 codes), individualized sentencing (13 codes), the imposition of deserved pain and serious penalties (16 codes), demanding justice to get out of the darkness (10 codes), aggravated life sentence (9 codes), tit for tit (10 codes), civil penalty sanction/confinement (6 codes) and castration (2 codes)."

The researchers also found a correlation between feelings of distrust and disappointment in the general justice system and questioning the mentality of the defense lawyer.

It was also stated by the researchers that retributive justice is most effective during times of anomie and instability, like in regime changes because that uncertainty can make people more willing to commit crimes against women. An example of this would be the use of rape as a weapon of war in the Congo. Congo is known as "the rape capital of the world," according to multiple articles including one published in the National Library of Medicine. 

The researchers cited a 2022 article by Aka who found that retributive justice was mostly practiced in favor of the perpetrator; prioritizing their safety over the feelings of the victim. In alignment with this, the researchers found correlations between anger/resentment and hatred/grudge/revenge (60 times.) 

Additionally, the authors found a link between excuses (like lifestyle) and the mentality of the defense (44 times).

Tweets addressing sounded like:

“A woman is raped and murdered, and it is judged on the basis of her not being a virgin, drinking beer, shaking hands with men.”

“It’s 2019, bigots are still trying to mitigate rape by saying ‘but she was not a virgin’.”

“What a disgrace it is that justice still defends murderers and rapists.”

The authors commented that this trend forgets the victim and causes secondary victimization.

"These data can be analyzed as follows: As an equal member of society, the perpetrator has both violated the law and committed a grave moral offense by killing his female victim. Thus, by violating the principle of equal citizenship, he gained superiority over both the law and the victim. The punitive authority (the prosecutor) must give the perpetrator the punishment he deserves (The principle of Responsibility)," the authors wrote.

Justice for the victim, the authors explained, is then restored to the victim once a proportionate punishment has occured.