Wouter Owain Wegkamp

PhD thesis: Punishing Attempts

When we think of a criminal offence, we tend to think of completed offences such as theft and murder: cases in which tangible harm has been caused. Virtually all jurisdictions, however, criminalise not only completed offence but also incomplete versions of them. My doctoral thesis examines this second category, focusing on the most common type of such offences: the attempt. It addresses fundamental questions about the law of attempts, such as whether and why this form of liability is justified, what the proper scope of liability should be, and how attempts should be punished compared to complete offences. The research is primarily theoretical, drawing on (doctrinal) legal and (legal) philosophical sources from several jurisdictions.

Who or what inspired you to pursue your research interests?

The criminal law is one of the state's most invasive instruments: by criminalising conduct, the state becomes able to punish its own citizens for breaches of those prohibitions. We argue amongst ourselves about whether certain sentences are appropriate for certain breaches of criminal norms, but the institution of the criminal law is largely accepted as a given without further questions. However, when the institution is fundamentally questioned, it is far less clear whether punishment and systems of criminal law are justified at all, or justified in their current form. I am drawn to legal philosophy, and criminal law theory in particular, because of the field's critical investigation of our criminal legal practices. By questioning the fundamental assumptions that criminal justice systems make, the justifications offered for them, and the consistency with which those justifications are applied across the criminal law, I hope to contribute to making our criminal law practices more defensible.