Jeremy Bentham and Enoch Wines Discuss the Privatization of Corrections

Abstract

Editor's note: Jeremy Bentham wrote the letters which constitute the Panopticon Papers while in Russia in 1787. The penitentiary model described in these letters provided the basis of a proposal for which he vigorously lobbied in England. He committed significant amounts of his own effort and money to the panopticon plan, although ultimately without success in his native country. The material reproduced below comes from letters 9, 10, and 12, and addresses a number of issues that are at the heart of the modern privatization debate. Enoch Wines was appointed secretary of the New York Prison Associa tion in 1862. Although initially not as experienced as many of his co-workers in the Association, he soon became an important figure in American penal reform. His national prison tour with Theodore Dwight in the 1860s produced the most important correctional assessment since John Howard's E uropean survey in the 1770s. The observations included in this article thus derived from his wide-ranging examination of the nation's prison system.

A sustainable governance model to prevent corporate corruption: Integrating anticorruption practices, corporate strategy and business processes

“…Thus, anticorruption tools are intended as legitimacy‐seeking tools by stakeholders instead of effective tools for change (Schwartz & Tilling, ). The concept of legitimacy has been deeply discussed by Bentham and Wines () and Gilley (), revealing its multidimensional complexity from the State perspective. According to Bentham and Wines (, p. 43), “Legitimacy is a composite of different elements: rules, appropriate beliefs and relevant actions,” requiring three necessary components represented by legality, normative justifiability and express consent.…”

“…The concept of legitimacy has been deeply discussed by Bentham and Wines () and Gilley (), revealing its multidimensional complexity from the State perspective. According to Bentham and Wines (, p. 43), “Legitimacy is a composite of different elements: rules, appropriate beliefs and relevant actions,” requiring three necessary components represented by legality, normative justifiability and express consent. More recently, Gilley (, p. 501) has conceptualised legitimacy as “the ability of citizens to make autonomous judgements, the separability of political power from other types of social power and the validity of subjective views as the basis of legitimacy.” At the corporate level, however, the legitimacy perspective for anticorruption has been adopted more formally, not considering its multidimensional value (Schwartz & Tilling, ).…”