State Monopoly of the Right to Punish and Private Security Companies
Open accessAbstract
Today, political philosophers see the social contract as a symbol ofpopular satisfaction and the basis of the legitimacy of a democraticgovernment. In political philosophy, it is believed that by entering into a socialcontract, individuals are deprived of the right to punish offenders and consentto the government to prosecute perpetrators on behalf of them. However, thequestion is whether this right is an exclusive right of the state, or if the personswho are a party to the social contract transfer it to another person, whether realor legal, that person also has the right to punish. In this regard, two majorviews of the "instrumental nature of the state" and "the inherent right of thestate" have been raised in the practice of punishment. According to the firstpoint, while the people have given satisfaction to the punishment imposed bythe government, the government has the right to determine and enforce thesentence, " it is supposed that carry out punishment justice by state is betterthan any other person. In the second view, however, the state has a role inpunitive acts, and acts outside of the state, although are not punishable.The present paper addresses the issue of monopoly on punishment by thegovernment, what are the limits this right and concludes the monopoly of theright to punish is belongs to the State, but it may authorize certain powers tothe privat security companies to execute on its behalf.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This conceptual and legal-doctrinal article examines whether the right to punish is an exclusive prerogative of the state, concluding that the monopoly of the right to punish belongs to the state but that the state may delegate certain powers to private security companies to execute on its behalf. It traces the idea of the state monopoly of violence from Bodin and Hobbes through Weber, and assesses the legal limits of outsourcing security tasks.
Key findings
- The monopoly of the right to punish belongs to the state, but the state "may authorize certain powers to the privat security companies to execute on its behalf" (abstract).
- The state monopoly of violence does not mean the exclusive *exercise* of violence but "the exclusive monopoly of the ability to prescribe it and, consequently, to prohibit any private employment or misuse of it."
- The core area of the state monopoly on the use of force — the guarantee of security as a manifestation of the state's purpose — "is not disposable and must remain in the hands of the state"; it is "inaccessible to privatization."
- Private security personnel may only exercise rights transferable to any private individual — self-defense, emergency, self-help and similar private emergency rights — and have no police powers; protection of property in administrative use (e.g., museums) is permitted, while rights over public-use items (e.g., pedestrian areas) cannot be transferred because this is a non-transferable core police task.
Methods
- Design: conceptual/normative legal and political-philosophical analysis; no empirical data collection or statistical analysis.
- Sources: canonical political philosophy (Bodin, Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Weber) and German-language legal scholarship and official documents (e.g., Deutscher Bundestag WD 3-3000-236/12; Stober; Peilert; Saipa/Wahlers/Germer).
- Analysis: doctrinal assessment of the lawfulness of private security activity against criteria of public property law, distinguishing administrative use from public use.
Limitations
- Not stated in the paper: the article contains no explicit limitations section.
- Evident from the text: the argument is entirely conceptual with no empirical or comparative case evidence; it relies heavily on German-language legal sources and German doctrinal categories, which may limit the transferability of its conclusions to other jurisdictions.
- Evident from the text: the abstract frames two competing views ("instrumental nature of the state" and "the inherent right of the state"), but the body does not systematically develop or test this dichotomy, and Chapter III ("Limits of the State Monopoly of Violence") is brief and largely descriptive.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
0 of 28 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
- Interpretationreasoning
The monopoly of the right to punish belongs to the State.
“concludes the monopoly of the right to punish is belongs to the State”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The right to punish can be separated from the execution of punishment, such that the state retains the former while delegating the latter.
- Premisecitation
The admissibility of commercial security in the private sector does not preclude the state monopoly on force.
“The admissibility of commercial security in the private sector does not preclude the state monopoly on force.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [37]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
In almost all the societies of the capitalist Western world, penal reform emerged as a requirement for modernization in the first half of the nineteenth century.
“In almost all the societies of the capitalist Western world, penal reform emerged as a requirement for modernization in the first half of the nineteenth century.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [44]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
Crucial to the legality of security by private security companies in this context is that the persons employed have no police powers, so that a sovereign action is excluded.
“Crucial to the legality of the security by private security companies in this context is that the persons employed have no police powers, so that a sovereign action is excluded.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [38]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
The penal reform provided for State control of the territory.
“(b) State control of the territory, in the terms proposed by Max Weber;”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [44]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
No rights can be transferred to public use items (e.g., pedestrian areas), as this is a non-transferable core police task.
“no rights can be transferred to public use items (e.g., pedestrian areas), as this is a non-transferable core police task.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [36]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
The monopoly of force is an essential feature of the sovereign state.
“The monopoly of force is an essential feature of the sovereign state.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [15]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
Protection of property by private security services in administration (home-based institutions, such as museums) is permitted.
“While the protection of property is permitted by private security services in the administration (home-based institutions, such as museums)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [36]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
Private security company personnel are limited in the protection of individual rights to the rights that individuals have to protect their legal interests.
“Personal security company personnel are limited in the protection of individual rights to the rights that individuals have to protect their legal interests.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [38]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationreasoning
The State may authorize certain powers to private security companies to execute punishment on its behalf.
“but it may authorize certain powers to the privat security companies to execute on its behalf”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The right to punish can be separated from the execution of punishment, such that the state retains the former while delegating the latter.
- Rests on an assumption: The core area of the state monopoly on the use of force is identifiable and distinct from non-core tasks that can be delegated to private security companies.
- Premisereasoning
Private security services are entitled only to the private emergency rights of self-defense, emergency, self-help and similar rights.
“Thus, the private security services are entitled only to the private emergency rights of self-defense, emergency, self-help and similar rights.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [38]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
Criminal monopoly of state is gradually being eroded by the privatization of judicial coercion and public order missions.
“Criminal monopoly of state is gradually being eroded by the privatization of judicial coercion and public order missions.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [33]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- May combine two claims. 10
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 16
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationCountries' constitutions have not expressly regulated the monopoly of power of the state, but constitutionally it could be derived from the rule of law and some other articles.
“Countries constitutions have not expressly regulated the monopoly of power of the state.But Constitutionally, it could be derived from the rule of law and some other articles.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [11]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationThe penal reform provided for the constitution and organization of police forces with the aim of preventing and repressing crimes committed, as well as proving the criminal responsibility of the accused within the limits of a given territory.
“(c) the constitution and organization of police forces with the aim of preventing and repressing crimes committed, as well as proving the criminal responsibility of the accused within the limits of a given territory;”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [44]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisereasoningOne of the first tasks attributed to the modern state is to centralize power to avoid having in society multiple centers of power in tenacious rivalry by way of arms and bloodshed.
“One of the first tasks attributed to the modern state is to centralize power to avoid having in society multiple centers of power in tenacious rivalry by way of arms and bloodshed.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisereasoningLegitimacy is identified with legality.
“Legitimacy is therefore identified with legality.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [6]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationThe State may grant another actor the right to resort to violence without losing its monopoly, as long as it remains the sole source of the right to resort to violence.
“The State may grant another actor the right to resort to violence without losing its monopoly, as long as it remains the sole source of the right to resort to violence.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [13]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationThe core area of the state monopoly on the use of force-the guarantee of security as a manifestation of the purpose of the state-is not disposable and must remain in the hands of the state.
“However, it should be noted that the core area of the state monopoly on the use of force, ie the guarantee of security as a manifestation of the purpose of the state, is not disposable and must remain in the hands of the state.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [32]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.
Premisenone givenThe provision on military means is reserved to the central power, which would have the power to use violence against individuals as a means to combat what they exercise and ensure a certain social order.
“The provision on military means is reserved to the central power, which would have the power to use violence against individuals as a means to combat what they exercise and ensure a certain social order.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationThe state alone has the power to exercise physical force.
“According to this, the state alone has the power to exercise physical force.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [14]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationThe privatization of prisons is becoming widespread in the United States but also in France.
“while the privatization of prisons is becoming widespread in the United States but also in France.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [33]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationThe state monopoly of violence does not mean the exclusive exercise of violence, but the exclusive monopoly of the ability to prescribe it and to prohibit any private employment or misuse of it.
“In this way, the state monopoly of violence does not mean the exclusive exercise of violence, but the exclusive monopoly of the ability to prescribe it and, consequently, to prohibit any private employment or misuse of it.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [6]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationThe penal reform provided for the state monopoly of legislative production and equality before the law.
“(a) the state monopoly of legislative production and equality before the law;”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [44]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
PremisecitationThe state monopoly on the use of force means the state is the only actor that can legitimately authorize the use of violence, not that it is the only actor who actually uses violence.
“The concept does not imply that the state is the only actor who actually uses violence, but rather that it is the only actor that can legitimately authorize its use.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [13]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationThe state tends to create a society free from violence, and this purification is realized by the use of the state's sovereign authority.
“The state tends to creat a society free from violence.This purification is realizing by the use of state's sovereign authority.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [28]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationThe penal reform provided for the organization of a judicial system capable of taking into account the responsibility for crimes as an individual responsibility, and imposing sanctions, in accordance with all legal requirements and criminal processes, according to the Aristotelian principle.
“(c) The organization of a judicial system capable of taking into account the responsibility for crimes as an individual responsibility, and imposing sanctions, in accordance with all legal requirements and criminal processes, according to the Aristotelian principle”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [44]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationThe state monopoly on power serves to safeguard public security and order and is a recognized state task of constitutional rank.
“The state monopoly on power serves to safeguard public security and order and is a recognized state task of constitutional rank.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [15]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
PremisecitationIn its core substance, the security purpose of the state is inviolable and inaccessible to privatization.
“In its core substance, the security purpose of the state is inviolable and, because of its peacekeeping function, inaccessible to privatization.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [32]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).
Premisenone givenThe Weberian concept of state implies at least three essential components: the territory, the legitimate monopoly of violence and domination.
“The Weberian concept of state implies, at least, three essential components: the territory, the legitimate monopoly of violence and domination.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationThe fundamental task of the state is the maintenance of internal and external security.
“So the fundamental task of the state is the maintenance of internal and external security.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [28]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
InterpretationcitationIn certain political and social contexts, the privatization of the sovereign tasks of the state can only be liberticidal.
“In certain political and social contexts, this privatization of the sovereign tasks of the state can only be liberticidal.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [34]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
InterpretationcitationCriminal ethics is not compatible with private interests.
“Criminal ethics is not compatible with private interests.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [34]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
InterpretationcitationThe tasks of property and personal protection can hardly be achieved on their own, so the demand for private security benefits will increase.
“However, the tasks of property and personal protection can hardly be achieved on their own, so that the demand for private security benefits will increase.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [30]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
The paper relies on this without support.
The right to punish can be separated from the execution of punishment, such that the state retains the former while delegating the latter.
“concludes the monopoly of the right to punish is belongs to the State, but it may authorize certain powers to the privat security companies to execute on its behalf”
The paper relies on this without support.
The core area of the state monopoly on the use of force is identifiable and distinct from non-core tasks that can be delegated to private security companies.
“the core area of the state monopoly on the use of force, ie the guarantee of security as a manifestation of the purpose of the state, is not disposable and must remain in the hands of the state”
“no rights can be transferred to public use items (e.g., pedestrian areas), as this is a non-transferable core police task”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Source cited as accessed before publication
MinorThe citation dates the article to July 6, 2019, but gives an access date of April 5, 2019-three months before publication.
“The Manila Times, July 06 2019”
“05.04.2019.”
Cites
Le monopole étatique de la violence : le Brésil face à l´héritage occidental
Adorno, S. (2005) · Cultures & conflits/Cultures et conflits · doi:10.4000/conflits.1883 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Colliot-Thélène, C. (1995) · Lignes · doi:10.3917/lignes0.025.0264
Europäische Literatur(en) im globalen Kontext. Literaturen für Europa
Ette, O. (2009) · Kultur- und Medientheorie · doi:10.14361/9783839409879-011
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- NASRAT, Q.
- Affiliations
- Istanbul University (TR)
- Corresponding author
- NASRAT, Qaisar
- ORCID
- NASRAT, Qaisar
- Venue
- Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi
- Published
- 2022-01-05
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1297-1312
- ISSN
- 1301-1308 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4206389488
- Semantic Scholar
- 074bfe5d862e0764c9d42cdfa1b320387699cca3
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi (publishedVersion)
- DergiPark (Istanbul University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Law and Policy
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Military and Defense Studies
- Keywords
- private security companies, right to punish, social contract, political legitimacy, limits of state power
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-23.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-23.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
