ABSTRACT

In his essay 'Forgiving the unforgivable?', Laurence Thomas discusses the case of a man called Adolph Paul-Damascus who, after taking part in Hitler's genocide of the Jews, undergoes a complete change of outlook after the war and becomes a liberal benefactor to Jewish causes. By repenting, Paul-Damascus 'has deprived all of those who opposed the evil of Hitler, Jews in particular, of the opportunity to express moral outrage, which is not to be confused with punishment'. Refraining from punishing a contrite offender like Paul-Damascus need not, of course, preclude the passing of censure on his deeds. True, if it became regular practice to pardon repentant war criminals, some who were not repentant might pretend to be so in order to evade punishment. No utilitarian denies that punishment has a social purpose or that considerations of public welfare are critical in deciding the kind and scale of penalties to be imposed on offenders.