The second was given by Sir Professor Antony Bottoms and Dr Justice Tankebe on 'Understanding Legitimacy: A Dialogic Relationship within Institutional Normative Order'. The abstract for this is below. The theory that they outlined really moves the debate about police legitimacy forward, by helping us to think about police legitimacy as a process and as something that changes over time.
I only wish I had the time to go to a third and a fourth lecture today, which are to be given by Professor Manuel Castells on (a) The Multidimensional Crisis of Informational Capitalism (b) Alternative Economic Cultures in a Context of Crisis
However, I actually have rather a lot of work to do. My main focus this week has been on my research on the overnight detention of juveniles in police custody, although with a few other bits and pieces being done simultaneously.
That the idea of legitimacy has become a key topic in criminal justice research is beyond question. Yet claims by criminal justice agencies and citizens’ responses to those claims. We legitimacy remains under-theorised. Our aim in this seminar is to try to correct this lacuna in legitimacy research within criminology. We argue, developing an insight by Max Weber, that legitimacy is dialogic, involving continuous further argue that the tension/conflict/consensus inherent in this claim–response dialogue reflects congruities and incongruities between law and morality in any ‘institutional normative order’ (an important concept developed by Neil MacCormick). It is argued that such an understanding of legitimacy moves attention quickly beyond its implications for legal compliance and cooperation with legal authorities (the principal focus of criminologists at present); instead, attention begins also to focus on the implications of legitimacy for the understanding of stability and change in criminal justice organizations, and their role within wider society.