Abolitionism: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen

In pre-modern times there was an institution called "abolitio". In Roman law, the ''abolitio publica'' (as opposed to the more technical and individual ''abolitio privata'') was comparable to a general amnesty: people who were subject to the criminal justice system were suddenly set free. Whereas an amnesty usually refers to convicts who already had been handed their verdicts, an abolition referred (and refers) to people who are accused of a crime, who are at some stage of the criminal process, but who have not yet been sentenced. In other words: an abolition is an irregular end of a criminal procedure at the will of an (absolute) ruler who exercises his sovereign right to clemency even before a judgment has been reached.  

To nullify, and that is also the meaning of the present-day English verb "to abolish" - and of its equivalents in today's Roman languages, like, e.g., abolir, abolire ...

 

There were two kinds of abolition in Roman law, the abolitio privata and the abolitio publica, the private and the public one. Whereas the abolitio privata had only limited relevance, the abolitio publica was comparable to an amnesty – with the difference that an amnesty usually concerns convicted delinquents, whereas an abolition stops the criminal procedure and thus prevents the judge from reaching a verdict. In Roman times, the birthday of the Emperor or the birth of a crown prince or similar joyful occasions could be cause for such an abolitio.

In later times, kings used to claim their right to inferfere with criminal procedures at their will. The king of France, e.g., would just write a letter of abolition (lettre d’abolition) to free any of his subjects from prosecution – the opposite being the more infamous lettre de cachet which would send anyone who had angered the king into the dungeon.