Introduction: Le champ pénal et ses hybridations « en actes »: Continuités et ruptures

The introduction to this dossier traces the main divisions, ambivalences, and forms of hybridization that cut across and shape the criminal justice system, both in Switzerland and internationally. The text therefore invites us to question the relationship between the penal state and the welfare state, between punishment, rehabilitation, and risk management, and between prison and non-custodial sentences asking: how do these seemingly distinct areas empirically come together to constitute a “sociopenal continuum”? We discuss the theoretical relevance of the concept of hybridization for an understanding of the penal field, as well as the methodological tools useful for its analysis. Finally, we propose three forms of hybridization, in dialogue with the contributions to this dossier: the first form is apparent when two institutions pursuing distinct missions are called upon to collaborate in order to deal with the same population; the second emerges when two paradigms for intervention compete with each other within the same institutional framework, resulting in intertwining logics of action; the third can be observed in the trajectories of the population of criminal justice institutions, marked by a diverse range of measures for intervention (whether social, judicial, or therapeutic).The introduction to this dossier traces the main divisions, ambivalences, and forms of hybridization that cut across and shape the criminal justice system, both in Switzerland and internationally. The text therefore invites us to question the relationship between the penal state and the welfare state, between punishment, rehabilitation, and risk management, and between prison and non-custodial sentences asking: how do these seemingly distinct areas empirically come together to constitute a “sociopenal continuum”? We discuss the theoretical relevance of the concept of hybridization for an understanding of the penal field, as well as the methodological tools useful for its analysis. Finally, we propose three forms of hybridization, in dialogue with the contributions to this dossier: the first form is apparent when two institutions pursuing distinct missions are called upon to collaborate in order to deal with the same population; the second emerges when two paradigms for intervention compete with each other within the same institutional framework, resulting in intertwining logics of action; the third can be observed in the trajectories of the population of criminal justice institutions, marked by a diverse range of measures for intervention (whether social, judicial, or therapeutic).L’introduction de ce dossier retrace les principaux clivages, ambivalences et formes d’hybridations qui traversent et modèlent le champ pénal en Suisse et à l’échelle internationale. Le texte invite ainsi à interroger les rapports entre État pénal et État social, entre punition, réhabilitation et gestion des risques, ou encore entre prison et alternatives à l’incarcération : comment ces dimensions a priori distinctes se combinent-elles empiriquement, constituant de fait un « continuum sociopénal » ? La pertinence théorique du concept d’hybridation pour la compréhension du champ pénal, ainsi que les outils méthodologiques utiles à son exploration sont ensuite discutés. Enfin, sont détaillées trois formes d’hybridation, qui dialoguent avec les contributions composant ce dossier : la première forme se donne à voir lorsque deux institutions poursuivant des missions distinctes sont amenées à collaborer pour prendre en charge un même public ; la deuxième émerge lorsqu’au sein d’un même dispositif institutionnel deux paradigmes d’intervention se font concurrence et entremêlent leurs logiques d’action; la troisième forme d’hybridation peut s’observer lorsqu’on prend pour objet d’analyse les trajectoires des publics soumis au champ pénal, elles-mêmes marquées par la diversité des dispositifs de prise en charge (sociale, judiciaire ou encore thérapeutique)