On “epistemic injustice” and victimization in prisons
an empiric exploration into Chilean reality
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v9i1.803Palavras-chave:
prison violence; epistemic injustice; victims.Resumo
The article looks for reasons that explain the different results of criminal investigations conducted inside and outside prisons. We ask if and how the concept of epistemic injustice, as developed by Miranda Fricker, helps to understand those variations. The underlying hypothesis is that epistemic injustice is a symptom of a wider problem. The authors assume that the treatment of victims of violent crime inside prison has structural rather than interpersonal explanations. In a qualitative approach the study uses data from a series of semi-structured interviews with prisoners and prison officers (40 interviews in total). It explores the dynamics of the decision to report crime committed inside prisons and the role of different institutions involved in the investigation of these crimes from the perspective and experience of prisoners and prison officers. As result it is argued, that Fricker’s concept of epistemic injustice is not very helpful when it comes to understand epistemic injustice suffered by victims of violent crime inside prison. It can be better understood in the terms of epistemic oppression used by Dotson. Thus, it is not about assigning blame but how to change the underlying social relations and institutions that subordinate prisoners on epistemic grounds.
Downloads
Referências
BAILEY, Alison. The Unlevel Knowing Field: An Engagement with Dotson’s Third-Order Epistemic Oppression. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective. Available in: <https://ssrn.com/abstract=2798934>. Access in: 6 Jan. 23.
CELIKATES, Robin. Epistemische Ungerechtigkeit, Loopfingeffekte und Ideologiekritik. Eine sozialphilosphische Perspektive. WestEnd: Gefängnis und Armut: Neue Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung, n. 2, 2017.
COMISIONADO PARLAMENTARIO PENITENCIARIO. (2017). Informe especial sobre muertes en custodia en 2016. Uruguay. Available in: <https://parlamento.gub.uy/cpp/documentos/informes-al-parlamento/87935>. Access in: 6 Jan. 23.
DOAN, Michael. Epistemic Injustice and epistemic redlining. Ethics and Social Welfare, v. 11, n. 2, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/17496535.2017.1293120
DOAN, Michael. Resisting Structural Epistemic Injustice. Feminist Philosophy Quarterly, v. 4, n. 4, 2018. https://doi.org/10.5206/fpq/2018.4.6230
DOTSON, Kristie. A Cautionary Tale: On Limiting Epistemic Oppression. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, v. 33, n. 1, p. 24–47, 2012. https://doi.org/10.5250/fronjwomestud.33.1.0024
DUNTON, Creaig, SMITH, Hayden Patrick. The Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA): Snitching, Sexuality, and Normalizing Deviance. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. p. 1-18, 2022. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0306624X221113530
FRICKER, Miranda. Epistemic Injustice and The Preservation of Ignorance (2016). In: The Epistemic Dimensions of Ignorance, eds. Rik Peels & Martijn Blaauw (Cambridge University Press 2016). Available in: <https://www.academia.edu/34721235/Epistemic_Injustice_and_The_Preservation_of_Ignorance>. Access in: 5 January 23. https://doi.org/10.1017/9780511820076.010
FRICKER, Miranda. Epistemic Injustice: Power & the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2010.01098.x
GARCÍA, Mercedes, QUESADA, Lucía. Violación sexual e impunidad en el sistema carcelario en Costa Rica, Revista Humanitas, Moravia, v. 11, n. 11, pp. 29-46, 2014. Available in: <https://salutsexual.sidastudi.org/resources/inmagic-img/DD64374.pdf>. Access in: 6 Jan. 23
HANAN, M. Eve. "Invisible Prisons" (2020). Scholarly Works. 1325.
<https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/1325>. Access in: 05 Jan. 23
JUGOV, Tamara, Ypi, Lea. Structural Injustice, Epistemic Opacity and the Responsibilities of the Oppressed. Journal of Social Philosophy, London, v. 50, n. 1, p. 7-27, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/josp.12268
KUBIAK, Sheryl Pimlott; BRENNER, Hannah; BYBEE, Deborah; CAMPBELL, Rebecca Campbell; FEDOCK, Gina. Reporting Sexual Research Victimization During Incarceration: Using Ecological Theory as a Framework to Inform and Guide Future Research. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, v. 19, n. 1, 2018. Available in: < https://www.jstor.org/stable/27010963> Access in: 5 Jan. 23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838016637078
LACEY, Nicola. Criminal Justice and Social (In)Justice (2022). International Inequalities Institute Working Papers (84). London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK. <https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/116949/1/Lacey_criminal_justice.pdf>. Access in: 05 Jan. 23. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405177245.ch24
MASON, Rebecca. Two Types of Unknowing. Epistemic Justice, Ignorance, and Procedural Objectivity, v. 26, n. 2, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01175.x
MEDINA, José. Agential Epistemic Injustice and Collective Epistemic Resistance in the Criminal Justice System. Social Epistemology, v. 35, n. 2, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2020.1839594
MILLS, Charles W. The Racial Contract. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1997. Available in: <http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctt5hh1wj>
MILLS, Charles W. White Ignorance and Hermeneutical Injustice: A Comment on Medina and Fricker. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, v. 3, n. 1, 38-43, 2013. Available in: <https://social-epistemology.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/mills_reply_fricker_medina1.pdf> Access in: 5 Jan. 23.
PATTON, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (Fourth edition). SAGE Publications, Inc.
PÉREZ, Moira. Epistemic violence: reflections between the invisible and the ignorable. El lugar sin límites. Available in: < https://www.aacademica.org/moira.perez/84.pdf>. Access in: 6 Jan. 23.
RYAN, G. W., & BERNARD, H. R. (2003). Techniques to Identify Themes. Field Methods, 15(1), 85–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x02239569
SALDANA, Johnny. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Arizona State University, USA: SAGE Publications Ltd., 2015.
STIPPEL, Jörg, MEDINA, Paula. Discriminación en la persecución penal. Acerca de las diferencias entre delitos intracarcelarios y delitos cometidos fuera de prisión. Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal. Brazil, v. 8, n. 3, Pp.1607- 1656 2022. https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v8i3.679
STIPPEL, Jörg. Cárcel, derecho y política. Santiago: LOM, 2013.
TOMCZAK, Philippa, MCALLISTER, Sue. Prisoner death investigations: a means for improving safety in prisons and societies? Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, v. 43, n. 2, pp. 212-230, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2021.1917714
VERGARA, Luis. Aproximación al fenómeno de la militarización en la cultura organizacional de Gendarmería de Chile. In: STIPPEL, Jörg, MEDINA, Paula (org.) La No Ciudadanía. Sobre la exclusión legal y real de las personas en el sistema carcelario. Valencia: Tirant Humanidades, 2023.
VITAR, Jorge. El archivo provisional y su adecuada aplicación en el proceso penal chileno. In: FUENTES, Claudio (org.) Diez Años de la Reforma Procesal Penal en Chile. Santiago: Ediciones Universidad Diego Portales. Pp. 110-152, 2011. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2gz3wsm.7
YOUNG, Iris Marion. Five Faces of Oppression (Chapter 2). In: YOUNG, Iris Marion. Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012. p. 39-65. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429023019-8
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2023 Jörg Alfred Stippel, Paula Pérez, Marcelo Barrìa

Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Os direitos autorais dos artigos publicados são do autor, com direitos do periódico sobre a primeira publicação, impressa e/ou digital.
Os autores somente poderão utilizar os mesmos resultados em outras publicações indicando claramente este periódico como o meio da publicação original. Se não houver tal indicação, considerar-se-á situação de auto-plágio.
- Portanto, a reprodução, total ou parcial, dos artigos aqui publicados fica sujeita à expressa menção da procedência de sua publicação neste periódico, citando-se o volume e o número dessa publicação, além do link DOI para referência cruzada. Para efeitos legais, deve ser consignada a fonte de publicação original.
Por se tratar de periódico de acesso aberto, permite-se o uso gratuito dos artigos em aplicações educacionais e científicas desde que citada a fonte, conforme a licença da Creative Commons.
A partir de 2022, os artigos publicados na RDPP estão licenciados com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional. Os artigos puliicados até 2021 adotaram a Licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional.
---------------
Arquivamento e distribuição
Permite-se sem restrições o arquivamento do PDF final publicado, em qualquer servidor de acesso aberto, indexador, repositório ou site pessoal, como Academia.edu e ResearchGate.