Jordi González Guzmán
  • Inicio
  • Cosas escritas
    • Prensa
    • Académicas
  • Cosas dichas
  • About me
  • Contact Me
Jordi González Guzmán

Afterthought

  • Inicio
  • Cosas escritas
    • Prensa
    • Académicas
  • Cosas dichas
  • About me
  • Contact Me
Category:

Criminologia

Toward a Criminological Understanding of Financialization
ArtículoCriminologia

Toward a Criminological Understanding of Financialization

by jordigonzalezguzman diciembre 9, 2021

Jordi González Guzmán, University of Leeds (UK)

Abstract

This article weaves together the ascendancy of financial markets and the field of critical criminology. It argues that critical perspectives such as crimes of the powerful and crimes of globalization may benefit from analyzing financialization as a key economic and cultural transformation in today’s capitalism. The analysis of financialization is made through the literature that addresses the economic transformations of capitalist accumulation, thus framing finance capital in the post-Fordist regime of production. By using this perspective, this article develops the argument that the cyclical speculative waves of finance are not a congenital pathology of capitalism but its very mode of governmentality. Overall, this article claims the analytic potential of financialization studies to deepen our understanding of the social and environmental harms produced by powerful corporations and financial institutions.

https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.1999

Guzmán, J. G. (2021). ‘Toward a Criminological Understanding of Criminology’. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, Vol. 10: 3.

diciembre 9, 2021 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
The Prohibition of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Criminologia

The Prohibition of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

by jordigonzalezguzman noviembre 10, 2021

Supervision mechanisms in the American and European prison conditions.

Introduction

The international prohibition of torture and ill-treatment is embedded in the most important declarations and conventions of human rights[i]. The American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR hereafter) and European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR hereafter) established the absolute prohibition of torture as one of the paramount right for a democratic society[ii]. However, prison conditions are in several cases a state of exception for the inmates into this matter. Which differences and similarities could be found between America and Europe in the supervision of prison conditions and the prohibition of torture? Two judgements—one of the American Court and one of the European Court—are considered to answer this question.

The prohibition of torture is a negative obligation as is identified as a moral absolute that represents the essence of universal human rights[iii]. This prohibition is absolute for the states, for there is no margin of appreciation and it therefore represents moral absolutes not subject of consequentialist’s analysis[iv]. International law is based on the premise that individuals should not be seen as objects[v]. States have a negative obligation to refrain from engaging in any torture or ill-treatment as well as the positive obligation to prevent, investigate, prosecute and punish such acts[vi]. Thus, the breaking of the prohibition of torture cannot be justified under any circumstances. The prohibition of torture cannot be derogated, having reached the status of jus cogens[vii].

Regional Conventions: America and Europe

The ACHR enshrines the prohibition of torture under the article 5, while ECHR encloses this right under article 3; no differences in regard both articles can be found. Moreover, these articles do not include provisions for exceptions and no derogation form it is permissible for them. The ACHR embedded two organs representing the competence with respect the matters of the Convention: The American Commission (IACHR) and the American Court (IACtHR), regulated under the chapter VII and VIII respectively. However, the Council of Europe (CoE hereafter) set up the European Court (ECtHR) in the article 19 of the ECHR, establishing “the Court” as the main judicial body to protect the convention, ruling his functions and norms from the article 20 until the 51[viii].

Nonetheless, the prohibition of torture is also protected in other treaties. On the one hand, in America we find the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture (IACPPT) as the main treaty at regional level, created by the OAS and is controlled by the IACHR[ix]. On the other hand, in Europe, the CoE elaborated in 1987 the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture (ECPT), which embody the main instrument of supervision: the Committee for the Prevention of Torture[x].

Among the (inter)national treaties (IACPPT, ECPT and UNCAT), there can be found the same structure, providing similar functions as well as processes to complain. Nonetheless, the main difference lays in the definition of torture. Only the IACPPT’s definition is broader as does not require neither that the harm (material element) has to be serious nor a dolus especialis (subjective element) for its realization[xi]. Moreover, IACPPT’s definition refers to ‘any purpose’, and ‘methods upon a person intended to wipe out the personality of the victim or to diminish his physical or mental capacities, even if they do not cause physical pain or mental anguish’[xii].

(Inter)national instruments of supervision

In America, the IACHR and IACtHR are the instruments to supervise and protect any violation of the ACHR and the IACPPT. No other element of supervision is enshrined, whereby the American context relies on the OPCAT in order to create different instruments of social control. Conversely, in the European context, we find the European Committee to Prevent Torture (CPT)[xiii]. The CPT consists of one expert from each member state. Its modus operandi is to make announced or unannounced inspections of a sample of custodial institutions[xiv] in each member state. The real thrust of the inspection is the formal report to the relevant government[xv]. In Europe, CPT inspection standards have given vitality to judicial intervention, and court decisions have in turn reinforced CPT reports and standards[xvi]. The most recent standards document was consolidated in 2006[xvii]. However, the CPT does not include an element of supervision under domestic law by standing autonomous and flexible agencies, and this is which OPCAT address to solve.

The UN approved the Optional Protocol for the Convention Against Torture (OPCAT) in 2002 in order to provide an instrument of supervision for those countries that had previously ratified the UNCAT. The OPCAT has a dual track regulatory system: the Subcommittee for the Prevention of Torture (SPT) and the National Preventive Mechanisms (NPMs)[xviii]. The SPT is modelled upon the CPT: its membership consists of experts from States Parties and carry out visit-based inspections of places of detections in selected states, with the same modus operandi and reporting arrangements like of those of the CPT[xix]. The States Parties are interpellated to set up a NPM’s, the second regulatory strand, under their own domestic law[xx]. An important point of the NPM’s is that different agencies may be created, taking into account juridical-political complexities that may arise from multi-governance arrangements[xxi].

The applications: admissibility, merits, judgment and remedies

We have chosen two cases of torture and ill-treatment, one of the American Court (Cantoral-Benavides v. Peru[xxii]) and the other of the European Court (Peers v. Greece[xxiii]), in order to compare how the prohibition of the torture is treated in regard to the custodial or detention for suspects under state authorities. The test applied under both Courts to decide the admissibility of application is practically the same:

  • Ratione personae: anyone claiming to be a victim of a violation of the IACHR or ECHR. It must not be anonymous and show that (s)he is directly affected[xxiv].
  • Ratione temporis: within a period of six months from the date on which the final decision was taken[xxv].
  • Ratione loci: must be under jurisdiction of the state party[xxvi].
  • Ratione materiae: an applicant must allege the violation of a right that falls within the scope of the ECHR or IACHR[xxvii].
  • Domestic law remedies: must be pursued and exhausted[xxviii].
  • Non-duplication of procedure: the application must not be similar to another procedure already submitted to international investigation[xxix].
  • Plausibility of facts: the application must be compatible with the provisions of both conventions and manifestly well-founded[xxx].

Once both cases have been found admissible, the Courts consider the merits to determine whether the rights of the applicants have been violated, i.e. if the allegations made are well founded and reveal a breach of the state party’s obligations[xxxi].

In Cantoral-Benavides v. Perú, the applicant claims a breach of the article 5 (1,2) for physical and psychological violence, incommunicado detention (para.81) and prison conditions. The latter includes strict isolation in a crowded cell, no ventilation nor light, availability of few visits and deficient medical attention (para.85). The Court stress that terrorism situation within a State cannot entail restrictions to the physical integrity of a suspect (para.96) The American Court follows the criteria applied by the ECtHR about the notion of torture and prison conditions in several statements[xxxii]. The merits also highlight the notion of psychological torture (para.102) and a double purpose against Mr. Cantoral: avoid any psychologic resistance in order to force him to waive his rights, and to subject him to additional punishment than the imprisonment[xxxiii].

In Peers v. Greece, the breach of the article 3 is focused on prison living conditions of the applicant. According to the Court and testimony, the applicant was placed in the segregation unit without his permission (para.64-69). The Court considers, in particular the applicant had to spend part of each 24-hour period confined to his bed in a cell with no ventilation nor windows, which also become sometimes unbearably hot temperatures. The applicant also had to use the toilet in presence of another inmate (para.75). The Court stress that the paramount fact remains that “the competent authorities took no steps to improve objectively unacceptable conditions of the applicant’s detention, and omission denotes lack of respect for the applicant” (para.75). The Court also relies his judgment in the CPT findings in its visits to Greece prisons (para.61). The ECtHR held that overcrowding of prisons could violate the ECPT, notwithstanding if prison authorities did not endorse or engineer the overcrowding.

Both courts declare that the State Party (Peru and Greece) violated, to the detriment of the applicants, the articles 3 (ECHR) and 5.1, 5.1 (ACHR).

The IACtHR requires the state to take all measure necessary to comply with the pending points of the reparations and costs (including payment of non-pecuniary damage to the applicant and familiars). The state must submit to the IACtHR, in a specific period of time, a detailed report on the steps taken to meet the outstanding obligations and the applicant has the right to submit comments to the State report. Moreover, the State has the obligation to continue to report the Commission every six months on the measures taken to ensure compliance with the orders given by the Court. However, the ECHR requires the State to pay the applicant in respect of non-pecuniary damage, but does not include other responsibility, as the CPT fulfil the supervision of the states and submit reports and recommendations.

Conclusion

  • The IACPPT is the regional instrument that entails a broader and more explicit definition of torture; however, it has no other supervision instrument than the IACHR.
  • The ECPT is paramount in Europe as an instrument of supervision to prevent torture, while the ECtHR is the judicial organ who protects any violation of the Convention.
  • OPCAT entails a value-added instrument of supervision (NPMs) for those countries that do not have one.
  • Prohibition of torture is an absolute right under any circumstance for both Courts, which interpretation is getting broader and does not require intent to violate it.

——-

[i] Articles 5 UDHR, 7 AND 10 ICCPR, 37 ICRC, 10 ICRMW, 15 CRPD, 3 ECHR, 5ACHR and 5 ACHPR (Bantekas and Oette, 2013:327).

[ii] Torture is considered an international crime subject to universal jurisdiction and constitutes an element of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Bantekas and Oette (2013:327) make reference about the articles 6(b), 7 (1) and 8(2) of the ICC Rome Statute.

[iii] The internal structure of international human rights convention includes two types of provisions: the first impose negative obligations on states while the second lay positive duties on states. Both types of provisions are legally binding under international law, however, the normative effect produced by them is quite different. Whereas negative obligations establish a clear standard for the states regarding the ‘focal case’ of the activities prohibited by them, positive obligations do not (Candia, 2014:2; Bantekas and Oette, 2013:223).

[iv] With consequentialist’s analysis, Candia (2014), the utilitarianism moral, that is, the theory in normative ethics holding that the best moral action is the one that maximizes utility. For example, state security services cannot torture a terrorist seeking to discover where a bomb has been placed (Candia, 2014).

[v] Bantekas and Oette, 2013:330.

[vi] Bantekas and Oette, 2013:334.

[vii] Bantekas and Oette, 2013:327

[viii] The European Commission of Human Rights did the same work that the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights until the entry into force of Protocol No. 11 to the European Convention of Human Rights.

[ix] Article 16 and 17 of IACPPT.

[x] Article 1 ECPT.

[xi] Espinoza Ramos, 2012.

[xii] The IACPPT institutionalize the right to personal integrity and makes explicit reference to respect for the psychological and moral integrity of the person (para. 101, Cantoral-Benavides v. Perú). See Bantekas and Oette (2013, p.330-331) for a further detailed definition of torture.

[xiii] The CPT has been the engine-room for the development of standards for avoidance torture throughout Europe (Harding, 2012:447).

[xiv] Custodial institutions include prisons, police cells, psychiatric wards, centre for detention of immigrants, juvenile and minor centres, etc.

[xv] Harding, 2012:448.

[xvi] Harding, 2012:449

[xvii] Council for the Prevention of Torture, 2006; Harding, 2012.

[xviii] Both mechanisms are regulated under articles 2 and 17 of the convention, respectively.

[xix] However, SPT’s international scale and its limited recourses entails a very limited capacity to influence (Harding, 2012:450).

[xx] Following Harding (2012), the NPM’s are the real driver of OPCAT system. In essence, the powers and modus operandi of these NPMs will mirror the Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Prisons (HMCIP), which is the key agency in England and Wales in the regulation of prison conditions: independent inquiry, public annual reports, power to carry out unannounced inspections, free and unfettered access to any prison, etc (Harding, 2012: p. 441-450).

[xxi] Three main paths have been taken in the creation of NPMs: building a structure around an existing national human rights institution (NHRI), building around an ombudsman office; or creating an entirely new agency (Harding, 2012:452).

[xxii] Peers v. Greece (App.no. 28524/95).

[xxiii] Cantoral-Benavides v. Perú, 18 August 2000.

[xxiv] Art. 35.2 (a) ECHR; art. 46(d) IACHR.

[xxv] Art. 35 ECHR and art. 46 (b) IACHR.

[xxvi] Art. 34 ECHR; art. 44 IACHR.

[xxvii] Art. 3 ECHR and art. 5 IACHR.

[xxviii] Art. 35.1 ECHR; art. 46.1(a) IACHR.

[xxix] Art. 25.2(b) ECHT, art.46.1(c) IACHR.

[xxx] Art. 35.3 ECHR; art.47 IACHR.

[xxxi] However, the Courts have the option to consider admissibility and merits separately or concurrently, but it must notify the Parties if it plans to consider admissibility and merits together (Bantekas and Oette, 2013:293).

[xxxii] See paragraph 95, 97, 99, 102 of Cantoral-Benavides v. Perú.

[xxxiii] The IACtHR found that the victim was tortured to “break down his psychological resistance and force him to incriminate himself or confess to certain illegal activities” (para. 132).

noviembre 10, 2021 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Universitat Pompeu Fabra
CriminologiaDocencia

Pensant les classes de Seguretat Pública i Urbanisme

by jordigonzalezguzman junio 22, 2021

El curs 2020-2021 del Grau de Criminologia i Polítiques Públiques de Prevenció ha resultat ser el primer curs que imparteixo classes com a professor associat a la universitat on em vaig graduar: la Universitat Pompeu Fabra. L’experiència ha estat immillorable. Sens dubte tot un repte acadèmic, car sumar-li al treball de camp de la tesi doctoral el fet d’impartir classes durant un trimestre, per primer cop, suposa un gran esforç. Un esforç, val a dir, només superable pel desig de dur-lo a terme i, sobretot, pels consells de moltes companyes que, des de l’anonimat, aprofito aquí per donar-los les gràcies. No són poques les lliçons que m’enduc d’aquestes darreres deu setmanes d’aprenentatges i ensenyances. Que serveixin les següents línies, per tant, per fer un balanç del fil conductor que recorre l’assignatura de Seguretat Pública i Urbanisme i per reflexionar sobre quina relació manté aquesta amb la criminologia del present.

Aquesta assignatura gravita entorn als significants que constitueixen el seu propi nom. Per un costat, les qüestions relatives a la ‘seguretat’ i a les transformacions d’aquest concepte al llarg de la història per adjectivar-lo d’una determinada manera (la seguretat pública, ciutadana, humana, jurídica, laboral, etc.). Des d’un punt de vista metodològic, la criminologia disposa d’indicadors, anuaris i estadístiques públiques per operacionalitzar la percepció d’inseguretat d’una determinada població; dades que els i les criminòlogues han de saber analitzar i interpretar per tal d’avaluar, i per tant poder millorar, el benestar de la ciutadania i la legitimitat de les institucions públiques i el sistema de justícia penal. Les ciències socials coneixen –gràcies a l’herència de l’estructuralisme i al gir lingüístic– de quina forma el llenguatge construeix la realitat social que vivim i els fenòmens que investiguem. En aquest sentit, la criminologia pot vindicar eines pròpies per explicar i interpretar la introducció de significants com “(in)seguretat”, “perillositat” i “(in)civisme” a l’opinió pública a través dels processos de modulació de l’estructura de sentiments de la societat (el pànic moral i el populisme punitiu). L’anàlisi dels fenòmens socials ha d’acompanyar l’anàlisi rigorós de les dades i de les estadístiques relatives a la percepció d’inseguretat.

Per un altra costat, la qüestió urbana, inseparable de com la criminologia aborda la seguretat. Els nous processos urbans que emergeixen a partir de la segona meitat del s. XX (la gentrificació, la turistificació i la financiarització de les ciutats) són transformacions claus per explicar la composició cultural, econòmica i social dels barris de ciutats globals com Barcelona. Resulta inevitable evocar i treballar a l’aula la revolució espacial que emergeix amb Henri Lefebvre i la geografia crítica –continuant de la mà de David Harvey, Neil Smith i altres geògrafs britànics– que ens porta a entendre l’espai i la ciutat com un bio-artefacte que produïm i ens produeix (un mediador actiu ple de tensions, antagonismes, identitats, posicions socials, etc.).

Una perspectiva sobre l’espai imprescindible per repensar les teories explicatives del delicte a l’espai, les estratègies en polítiques públiques de prevenció de la Environmental Criminology (place-based crime prevention) i les valuoses novetats crítiques que ens porta la nouvelle onada de recerques al voltant de la Green Criminology. En un intent de delimitar l’estudi del fenomen de la criminalitat dins del context de les ciutats globals, el darrer llibre de Rowland Atkinson i Garth Millington, Urban Criminology, posa el primer esglaó per inscriure la recerca criminològica dins d’aquestes transformacions urbanes: les polítiques d’habitatge, la sociologia econòmica en la formació de guetos, la governança i el control social en el terreny urbà, l’economia política de la seguretat urbana (les gated communities, l’augment de la seguretat privada, la prevenció situacional a través de l’immobiliari urbà i noves tecnologies, etc.). Molts estudiants, en els seus treballs de final de grau,  elaboren anàlisis empírics de la percepció de la seguretat i de la delinqüència als barris de Barcelona. Amb una comprensió adequada dels nous processos urbans, la correlació positiva que hi ha entre, per exemple, les variables d’inestabilitat residencial i de percepció d’inseguretat pren força explicativa, facilitant així el diagnòstic per pensar en termes de polítiques públiques.

Certament, més enllà d’analitzar la ciutat global des d’on pensa la criminologia, l’assignatura de Seguretat Pública i Urbanisme tracta d’analitzar les polítiques públiques que aborden actualment la qüestió de la “seguretat ciutadana” i el “civisme”. Ja al 1934, al clàssic llibre Principles of Criminology, E. H. Sutherland i D. R. Cressey posaven èmfasi en que la criminologia no només es dedicava a l’estudi de “making laws and breaking laws”, ans també s’havia d’incloure el procés pel qual la societat reacciona “toward the breaking of laws”. Estirant d’aquest fil i baixant al terreny de la reacció social envers l’incompliment de les lleis o les normatives, un tema central d’aquesta assignatura és introduir i tractar el mode de governança burocràtica, administrativa o sub-punitiva que sorgeix a les ciutats de l’Estat espanyol amb el fenomen de les ordenances cíviques. Per aquest motiu, a la sessió vuitena, vam tenir el plaer de comptar amb la participació d’una conferenciant excepcional, la Cristina Fernàndez-Bessa, ex-professora també de la UPF. La Cristina ens va parlar de l’anàlisi criminològic que va realitzar sobre l’Ordenança Cívica de Barcelona (2006) després d’una dècada en funcionament. Un anàlisi de l’Ordenança que va servir per conèixer quina metodologia de recerca es va utilitzar, quines conclusions es van extreure i quina és la rellevància criminològica d’aquests estudis. Una anàlisi, també, que ens va ajudar a posar en pràctica i entendre el concepte de burorrepressió, un concepte prèviament treballat a l’aula per referir-nos a l’arsenal de sancions administratives que estan disponibles en l’entramat de lleis, normes i ordenances –com a la Llei de Seguretat Ciutadana de 2015, a punt, per cert, de ser derogada per l’Executiu de Pedro Sánchez en alguns dels seus preceptes–, amb l’objectiu de criminalitzar, reprimir, penalitzar i, en definitiva, desactivar la protesta dels moviments socials, polítics i ciutadans.

Resulta igual d’imprescindible que la criminologia es faci càrrec dels Plans de Seguretat que elaboren els Ajuntaments i altres administracions públiques. En aquest sentit, els alumnes han treballat, malgrat que breument als seminaris, el Pla Directori de la Guardia Urbana de Barcelona, elaborat el 2016 a càrrec de l’anterior Regidor de Seguretat de l’Ajuntament de Barcelona, Amadeu Recasens. L’interès d’aquest Pla Directori és desenvolupar la policia de proximitat en les pràctiques de la GUB i altres agents de seguretat, un model que apunta a la co-producció de polítiques públiques (a diferència del community policing); és a dir, en la participació activa de la comunitat en el disseny i avaluació de les polítiques públiques. De la mateixa manera, el coneixement criminològic disposa d’eines per adreçar els protocols d’actuació policial de la BRIMO i ARRO a les manifestacions. En un altre ordre de coses, grans projectes urbans que estan en procés de finalitzar, com el nou parc de les Glòries, o encara pendents de realitzar-se, com la transformació de Les Rambles, són processos on no només tenen molt a dir els arquitectes i planificadors urbans, sinó també els i les criminòlogues que hauran de pensar i d’elaborar polítiques públiques de prevenció i plans de seguretat.

El curs 2020-2021 ha estat marcat per la presència minvant del Covid-19 i, per tant, les classes s’han desenvolupat de forma virtual. Un format al que costa adaptar-se, doncs el coneixement passa pels cossos des d’on s’enuncien les paraules i les classes virtuals es converteixen en tecnologies del llenguatge que, de fet, no es fan càrrec dels cossos que parlen. Malgrat l’experiència virtual, els seminaris han estat punts de trobada, breus però intensos, on hem pogut posar en comú i debatre els conceptes treballats a classe; on els estudiants han fet presentacions i han dinamitzat ells mateixos els debats que derivaven de les seves presentacions. Enguany, els seminaris s’han convertit en un espai d’excepció, des d’on hem pogut recuperar la normalitat acadèmica: la universitat com un lloc de trobada i generador d’idees i afectes.

En definitiva, la seguretat i la qüestió urbana són temes centrals per la criminologia del present. Aquesta assignatura ha intentat posar-ho en relleu, tant des d’un punt de vista teòric com pràctic, amb l’anàlisi de les noves eines conceptuals que prenem prestades de la geografia i la sociologia urbana amb l’objectiu d’entendre les recents transformacions a les metròpolis globals. També ho hem posat de manifest amb l’anàlisi de les polítiques públiques de seguretat que governen i regulen l’espai urbà, configurant així una nova governança securitària, a través del dret administratiu sancionador, que cal abordar críticament des de la criminologia. Heus aquí les tasques que té per endavant la criminologia. Només espero que aquesta assignatura serveixi, i així ho hagi fet en aquest primer any, com un punt de partida més per despertar interessos, generar discussions crítiques i coneixements útils als estudiants dins d’un Grau tan essencial com és el de Criminologia i Polítiques Públiques de Prevenció de la UPF.

junio 22, 2021 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

About Me

About Me

Researcher • Writer • Reader

Entradas recientes

  • Toward a Criminological Understanding of Financialization
  • The Prohibition of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
  • Informe: Impactes socials del mercat de lloguer
  • Pensant les classes de Seguretat Pública i Urbanisme
  • Pierre Clastres and the anthropological riddle

Comentarios recientes

  • Silvia en La encuesta inquilina: produciendo saberes autónomos desde Barcelona
  • Juan en Especulación en el mercado de alquiler: responsabilidad de las SOCIMI
  • Penci en Especulación en el mercado de alquiler: responsabilidad de las SOCIMI
  • Penci en La trama de las SOCIMIS

Archivos

  • diciembre 2021
  • noviembre 2021
  • julio 2021
  • junio 2021
  • abril 2021
  • enero 2021
  • diciembre 2020
  • julio 2020
  • junio 2020
  • febrero 2019
  • diciembre 2018
  • junio 2017

Categorías

  • Artículo
  • Criminologia
  • Docencia
  • Foucault
  • Historia
  • Investigación
  • SOCIMIs
  • Traducción
  • Uncategorized
  • Vivienda

Keep in touch

Facebook Twitter Instagram

Instagram

No images found!
Try some other hashtag or username

Recent Posts

  • Toward a Criminological Understanding of Financialization

    diciembre 9, 2021
  • The Prohibition of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

    noviembre 10, 2021
  • Informe: Impactes socials del mercat de lloguer

    julio 7, 2021
  • Pensant les classes de Seguretat Pública i Urbanisme

    junio 22, 2021
  • Pierre Clastres and the anthropological riddle

    abril 1, 2021

Categories

  • Artículo (2)
  • Criminologia (3)
  • Docencia (1)
  • Foucault (2)
  • Historia (1)
  • Investigación (8)
  • SOCIMIs (2)
  • Traducción (1)
  • Uncategorized (3)
  • Vivienda (2)

Popular Posts

  • 1

    A Genealogy of Militant Research

    julio 22, 2020
  • 2

    La trama de las SOCIMIS

    febrero 12, 2019

Quotes

Esto, desde 1966, no dejó de causar revuelo: (...) alors on peut bien parier que l'homme s'effacerait, comme à la limite de la mer un visage de sable.

marzo 2023
L M X J V S D
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  
« Dic    
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Email

2019 © Jordi González Guzmán


Back To Top