Should Criminal Law Be Used To Enforce Moral Values

Throughout the years, there has been an ongoing debate on whether criminal law should be used to enforce moral values. Some are of the view that, it is not the function of the law to intervene in the private lives of citizens or to seek to enforce any particular pattern of behaviour while others believe that the law and the courts have not only the power but the duty to preserve the moral fabric of the society. In addition, in order to find out the validity of these arguments, one must evaluate the works done and cases tried on the subject of Criminal law and morality. Furthermore, criminal law can be defined as that body of the law that deals with conduct considered so harmful to society as a whole that it is prohibited by statute, prosecuted

They carried out in private acts such as whipping, caning, branding, applying stinging nettles to the genital area and inserting map pins or fish hooks into the penises of each other. There was no permanent injury to any of the men involved and no evidence that any of them needed any medical treatment. The House of Lords considered whether consent should be available as a defence in these circumstances. They held that it could not be a defence and upheld their convictions. In addition, Lord Tempelman in his judgment stated that ‘The question whether the defence of consent should be extended to the consequences of sado-masochistic encounters can only be decided by consideration of policy and public interest…Society is entitled and bound to protect itself against a cult of violence. Pleasure derived from the infliction of pain is an evil thing. Cruelty is uncivilized.’ While in the case of Wilson, a husband had used a heated butter knife to brand his initials on his wife’s buttocks, at her request. The wife’s burns had become infected and she needed medical treatment. He was convicted of assault causing bodily harm however on appeal, his conviction was quashed. Russell LJ stated ‘we are firmly of the opinion that it is not in the public interest that activities such as the appellant’s in this appeal should amount to a criminal behaviour. Consensual activity between husband and wife, in the privacy of the matrimonial home, is not our judgement, a proper matter for criminal investigation, let alone criminal